alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32.01

                          Section 1350 Certification
                          --------------------------

In connection with this annual report of Futures Portfolio Fund Limited
Partnership (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December
31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (this "Report") I, Kenneth E. Steben, President of the General Partner
of the Company certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1. This 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: March 31, 2006

/s/ Kenneth E. Steben
---------------------
By:
Kenneth E. Steben
President of the General Partner
(Principal Executive Officer)
## •
MOLLY F JUSTICE IS Order entered October , 2012

In The 

## Court of Sppeat5 fifth Mi5strirt of Texas; at /Balm;

No. 05-12-00663-CV IN THE INTEREST OF S.V & S.V., CHILDREN On Appeal from the 303rd District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF-04-11968-V



### ORDER The Court has before it appellant's September 28, 2012 motion to strike the court reporter's motion to reconsider. The motion to reconsider has been denied. The Court DENIES the motion to strike.
No. 10374.

#### The Board of County Commissioners *v.*Haders.

Decided May 12, 1908.

Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

*Mr. Charles W. Stage*and *Mr. John L. Cannon,*for plaintiff in error.

*Messrs. Smith, Taft & Arter,*for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Price, C. J., Shauck, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.
#### Linda Sue BROWN v. STATE of Mississippi.

Misc. No. 346.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

March 19, 1973.

*104Linda Sue Brown, pro se.

A. F. Summer, Atty. Gen. by Timmie Hancock, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.

ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF ERROR CORAM NOBIS

PATTERSON, Justice:

This cause came on for hearing on the pro se application of Linda Sue Brown, an inmate of Parchman, for an order permitting her to file a petition for writ of error coram nobis. The Attorney General responded thereto by a motion to dismiss without prejudice. He cites in support of this motion the case of Riley v. State, 254 Miss. 487, 182 So.2d 397, 183 So.2d 819 (1966), as well as Mississippi Supreme Court Rule 38. After consideration of the application and the motion in response, we are of the opinion that the latter motion should be sustained.

In *Riley,*a case such as this, where the petition that was proposed to be filed in the trial court did not accompany the motion to this Court, we stated the reasons for the adoption of Rule 38. They are:

> In order for us to expeditiously and intelligently pass upon applications for the writ of error coram nobis when presented to this Court, we have deemed it necessary and appropriate to adopt Rule 38 of this Court setting out the procedure for application for leave to file petition of writ of error coram nobis in the trial court. . . . (254 Miss. at 489, 182 So.2d at 398).

We thereupon adopted this rule, a part of which follows:

> *Procedure For Application For Leave To File Petition For Writ Of Error Coram Nobis Under Mississippi Code Annotated Section 1992.5*

> Every application for leave to file in the lower court a petition for writ of error coram nobis shall have attached the original and two executed counterparts of the petition proposed to be filed in the lower court, which shall be sworn to by petitioner. . . . (254 Miss. at 489, 182 So.2d at 398).

We concluded by dismissing without prejudice, using this language:

> For the reasons stated, the application for leave to file petition for writ of error coram nobis in the circuit court must be dismissed, but without prejudice to petitioner’s right to file a corrected application in accordance with the statute and our rule herein set out. (254 Miss. at 490, 182 So.2d at 398).

For the reasons stated in *Riley, supra,*under a present similar factual situation it is our opinion that the motion to dismiss should be sustained, but without prejudice to the applicant to file a corrected application in accord with Mississippi Code 1942 Annotated section 1992.5 (1956), and Rule 38 of this Court as set out in *Riley, supra.*

Dismissed without prejudice.

GILLESPIE, C. J., RODGERS, P. J., and INZER, SMITH, ROBERTSON and SUGG, JJ., concur.
E X H I B I T   5
















                                     


















<PAGE>


                         LAW OFFICES OF OSCAR D. FOLGER
                                521 Fifth Avenue
                            New York, New York 10175


                                          September 30, 1997
Colonial Commercial Corp.
3601 Hempstead Turnpike
Levittown, New York  11756-1315

Gentlemen:

         We have  acted as  counsel  to  Colonial  Commercial  Corp.  a New York
corporation  (the "Company") in connection with the  registration by the Company
of  1,727,500  shares of its Common  Stock,  $.01 par value,  which are issuable
under  the  Company's  1996  and  1986  Stock  Option  Plans  (collectively  the
"Shares"),  and which are the subject of a  Registration  Statement  on Form S-8
under the  Securities  Act of 1933,  as amended (the  "Act").  As counsel to the
Company we have  examined and relied upon the  original or copies,  certified of
otherwise identified to our satisfaction,  of such documents,  corporate records
and  other  instruments  as we have  deemed  necessary  in order to  render  the
following opinion.

         Based upon the  foregoing,  we are of the opinion that the Shares to be
issued by the Company pursuant to the  aforementioned  Plans are duly authorized
and, when issued and paid for in  accordance  with the Plans as described in the
Registration Statement, will be validly issued, fully paid and nonassessable.

         We are aware that we are referred to under the caption "Legal  Matters"
in the Reoffer Prospectus  included in the Registration  Statement and we hereby
consent to such  reference  to us and to the filing of this opinion as Exhibit 5
to the Registration Statement. In giving such consent, however, we do not hereby
imply or admit that we are  within the  category  of  persons  whose  consent is
required  under Section 7 of the Act or under the General Rules and  Regulations
of the Securities and Exchange Commission adopted thereunder.

                                            Very truly yours,

                                            Oscar D. Folger
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>           5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from
SEC Form 10Q for the quarterly period ended January 27, 1996, and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          NOV-02-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-29-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-27-1996
<CASH>                                       6,511,684
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               15,560,080
<ALLOWANCES>                                   414,000
<INVENTORY>                                 16,884,478
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            41,095,053
<PP&E>                                      37,903,805
<DEPRECIATION>                              14,411,378
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              74,368,289
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       11,798,882
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                       191,827
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                  59,051,592
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                74,368,289
<SALES>                                     25,433,356
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            25,433,356
<CGS>                                       17,826,834
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               17,826,834
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (27,013)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,617,694
<INCOME-TAX>                                   994,700
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,622,994
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,622,994
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .17
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 29 (Wednesday, February 12, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 6587]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-3480]


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

PHYSICIAN PAYMENT REVIEW COMMISSION


Commission Meeting

AGENCY: Physician Payment Review Commission.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Commission will hold its next public meeting on Thursday, 
February 20, 1997 and Friday, February 21, 1997, at the Washington 
Marriott, 1221 22nd Street NW, Washington, D.C., in the DuPont Salon. 
The meetings are tentatively scheduled to begin at 10:00 a.m. on 
February 20 and at 9:00 a.m. on February 21.
    In preparation for its March 31, 1997 Annual Report to Congress, 
the Commission will review the conclusions and recommendations to be 
contained in chapters on the following topics:

Context for Reform
The Medicare Risk-Contracting Program: Plan Participation and 
Enrollment
Revising the Method for Determining Medicare Capitation Payments
Implementing Risk Adjustment in the Medicare Program
Promoting Access to Care for Vulnerable Populations in Medicare Managed 
Care
Access to Care in Medicare Risk Plans
Using Quality and Performance Measures in Medicare
Health Plan Data Needs and Capabilities
Competitive Premium Contribution Models: Options for Medicare
Provider-Sponsored Organizations
Consumer Protection Initiatives for Managed Care
Constraining Spending in Medicare Fee for Service
Improving the Efficiency of Medicare Fee for Service Through Preferred 
Providers
Medicare Fee Schedule Payment Issues (Work Values, Practice Expense, 
GPCIs, Impact on Payments)
Access and Beneficiary Financial Liability Under the Medicare Fee 
Schedule
Secondary Insurance for Medicare Beneficiaries
The Changing Labor Market for Physicians
Academic Medical Centers and the Changing Health Care Marketplace
Payments from a Teaching Hospital and Graduate Medical Education Trust 
Fund
Managing Health Care for Dually Eligible Beneficiaries
Medicaid: Spending Trends and the Move to Managed Care

    Final agendas will be mailed on February 14, 1997 and will be 
available on the Commission's web site (WWW.PPRC.GOV) at that time.

ADDRESSES: 2120 L Street, N.W.; Suite 200; Washington, D.C. 20037. The 
telephone number is 202/653-7220.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Debbie Kramer, Executive Assistant, at 
202/653-7220.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: If you are not on the Commission mailing 
list and wish to receive an agenda, please call 202/653-7220 after 
February 14, 1997.
Lauren LeRoy,
Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 97-3480 Filed 2-11-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-SE-M
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7605 

To amend the Combat-Injured Veterans Tax Fairness Act of 2016 to apply 

to members of the Coast Guard when the Coast Guard is not operating 

as a service in the Department of the Navy. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 13, 2020 

Mr. VELA (for himself and Mr. MITCHELL) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period 

to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee 

concerned 

A BILL 

To amend the Combat-Injured Veterans Tax Fairness Act 

of 2016 to apply to members of the Coast Guard when 

the Coast Guard is not operating as a service in the 

Department of the Navy. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Coast Guard Combat5 Injured Tax Fairness Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7605 IH

1 SEC. 2. RESTORATION OF AMOUNTS IMPROPERLY WITH2 HELD FOR TAX PURPOSES FROM SEVERANCE 

3 PAYMENTS TO VETERANS OF THE COAST 

4 GUARD WITH COMBAT-RELATED INJURIES. 

5 (a) APPLICATION TO MEMBERS OF THE COAST

6 GUARD WHEN THE COAST GUARD IS NOT OPERATING

7 AS A SERVICE IN THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY.—The 

8 Combat-Injured Veterans Tax Fairness Act of 2016 (Pub9 lic Law 114–292; 10 U.S.C. 1212 note) is amended— 

10 (1) in section 3(a), in the matter preceding 

11 paragraph (1), by inserting ‘‘(or the Secretary of 

12 Homeland Security, with respect to the Coast Guard 

13 when it is not operating as a service in the Depart14 ment of the Navy)’’ after ‘‘the Secretary of De15 fense’’; and 

16 (2) in section 4— 

17 (A) in the heading, by inserting ‘‘AND

18 SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY’’ 

19 after ‘‘SECRETARY OF DEFENSE’’; 

20 (B) by inserting ‘‘or the Secretary of 

21 Homeland Security’’ after ‘‘The Secretary of 

22 Defense’’; and 

23 (C) by striking ‘‘made by the Secretary’’ 

24 and inserting ‘‘made by that Secretary’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 7605 IH

1 (b) DEADLINES.—The Secretary of Homeland Secu2 rity shall carry out the amendments made by subsection 

3 (a)— 

4 (1) in paragraph (1), not later than one year 

5 after the date of the enactment of this Act; and 

6 (2) in paragraph (2), on and after the date of 

7 the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 109 (Wednesday, June 6, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 26255]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12147]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[B-07-2018]


Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 49--Newark, New Jersey; Authorization of 
Production Activity; Movado Group, Inc. (Timepieces and Jewelry); 
Moonachie, New Jersey

    On January 31, 2018, Movado Group, Inc. submitted a notification of 
proposed production activity to the FTZ Board for its facility within 
Subzone 49J, in Moonachie, New Jersey.
    The notification was processed in accordance with the regulations 
of the FTZ Board (15 CFR part 400), including notice in the Federal 
Register inviting public comment (83 FR 5987, February 12, 2018). On 
May 31, 2018, the applicant was notified of the FTZ Board's decision 
that no further review of the activity is warranted at this time. The 
production activity described in the notification was authorized, 
subject to the FTZ Act and the FTZ Board's regulations, including 
Section 400.14.

    Dated: May 31, 2018.
Andrew McGilvray,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-12147 Filed 6-5-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
Order filed, May 27, 2015.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 15

- 00134

- CV

____________ AGAR CORPORATION, IN C. , Appellant

V.

ELECTRO CIRCUITS INT ERNATIONAL, LLC AND SURESH PARIKH , Appellee

On Appeal from the 11th Dist rict Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2008

- 20480A



### ORDER
The reporter’s record in this case was due March 06, 2015

. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.1. On March 31, 2015, this court ordered the court reporter to file the record within 30 days. The record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.2

We order Alexandra McMillen , the substitute court reporter, to file the record in this appeal within 30 days of the date o f this order

. No further extension will be entertained absent exceptional circumstances. The trial and appellate courts are jointly responsible for ensuring that the appellate record is timely filed.
See Tex. R. App. P. 35.3(c). If Alexandra McMillen d oes not timely file the record as ordered, we will issue an order directing the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine the reason for the failure to file the record.

PER CURIAM
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                       $  28,790
<SECURITIES>                                   255,543
<RECEIVABLES>                                  177,950
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  4,788,324
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,002,587
<PP&E>                                       2,160,742
<DEPRECIATION>                                 219,752
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              $7,418,872
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       $2,972,068
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### John Albert McMICHAEL, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 71-972.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Feb. 15, 1972.

Phillip A. Hubbart, Public Defender, and Bennett H. Brummer, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen,, and J. Robert Olian, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.

Before SWANN, C. J., and PEARSON and BARKDULL, JJ.

*27PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by a defendant who was found guilty and sentenced for (1) buying, receiving and concealing stolen property and (2) possession of burglarious tools made unlawful by F.S. § 810.06, F.S. A. Appellant’s points on appeal urge the insufficiency of the evidence to sustain each of the charges. We affirm.

The conviction for the receiving and concealing stolen property was proper under the circumstances of this case inasmuch as the appellant was found shortly after 2:00 a. m. in the possession of a recently stolen boat which was partially concealed and with which he was discovered while in the process of either attempting to further conceal the stolen property or to facilitate its transportation further from the scene of the crime. See the rule as stated in Ard v. State, Fla.1959, 108 So.2d 38.

The conviction for the possession of bur-glarious tools is based upon legally sufficient evidence under the rule set forth in Schwam v. State, Fla.App. 1969, 222 So.2d 790.

Affirmed.
O RRt~~~'R ~l~ ~ -.,~. ')1,', '~_~: I tl. -k. ~ f. ¡,f. fr,,,,, . ii Jtl i. ti ~~¡j i.' Il

/~~~~~~'~'i~L'.~~.;~;~~:~~~~

(' ~' cf~/1 061',(\, , fr:' :"1 ') ;)'-.( "j ,~ t; .,.(;h ;. !. LUut'" it

\, 6if03g / ~~ø UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES

POL YlORE INTERNATIONAL, INC.,

Respondent.

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 9327

In the Matter of

ORDER REQUIRING EXPEDITED BRIEFING

On Januar 20,2009, non-par EnerSys submitted a motion to extend time to produce

documents in response to the subpoena directed to it by Respondent. Pursuant to 16 C.F.R. §

3.22(f), EnerSys provided a certificate of conference indicating that EnerSys was unable to reach

an agreement with either Respondent or Complaint Counsel on the issues raised by the motion.

Any opposition to EnerSys' motion shall be fied by 12:00 p.m., Januar 23,2009.

ORDERED: ~~G~

D. Michael Chapp I

Administrative Law Judge

Date: Januar 22,2009
---

March 27, 2009

VIA EDGAR

United States Securities and Exchange Commission

|Re: | Great Basin Gold Ltd. (the "Company")
|--- | -------------------------------------
|    | Annual Report on Form 40-F           
|    | Consent of Expert                    

This letter is provided in connection with the Company's Form
40-F annual report for the year ended December 31, 2008 (the Annual
Report) to be filed by the Company with the United States Securities and
Exchange Commission (the SEC). The Annual Report incorporates by reference the
Annual Information Form of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2008.

I hereby consent to the use of my name in connection with
reference to my involvement in the preparation of the following technical
reports (the "Technical Reports"):

- Revised Technical Report on the Update of the June 21, 2007 Technical
  Report (Optimized Feasibility Study), inclusive of Updated Mineral Resource
  and Reserve Estimates for the Burnstone Gold Project, Mpumalanga Province of
  The Republic of South Africa, dated February 27, 2009; and
- Revised Technical Report on the Mineral Resources and Reserves at the
  Hollister Development Block Gold Project, Elko County, Nevada dated February
  27, 2009.

and to references to the Technical Reports, or portions
thereof, in the Annual Report and to the inclusion and incorporation by
reference of the information derived from the Technical Reports in the Annual
Report.

Yours truly,

/s/ Johan Oelofse, Pr. Eng., FSAIMM

|                                | 
|------------------------------- | 
|Johan Oelofse, Pr. Eng., FSAIMM | 

---