alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32.2

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

In connection with the quarterly report of PASSUR Aerospace, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended January 31, 2009, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Jeffrey P. Devaney, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to 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 Company.


                              By:  /s/ Jeffrey P. Devaney
                                   -------------------------
                                   Jeffrey P. Devaney
                                   Chief Financial Officer
                                   (Principal Financial and Accounting  Officer)

                                    March 17, 2009
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Barry SONIAT.

No. 59829.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 14, 1977.

Stephen R. Perez, Chalmette, for defendant-appellant.

William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., Leander H. Perez, Jr., Dist. Atty., Gilbert V. Andry, III, Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
Order filed Au gust 2 , 2021.

In The 

## Fourtee nth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14
- 21
- 00 157
- CV

____________ THE STATE OF TEXAS BY AND THROUGH THE TEXAS TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION , Appellant V. AHM AD SULEIMAN, INDIVIDUALLY AND COLUMBIA STOP, LLC , Appellee s On Appeal from the 239 th District Court Brazoria County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 107226
- CV

____________ NO. 14
- 21
- 00 238
- CV

____________ IN RE STATE OF TEXAS BY AND THROUGH THE TEXAS TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION , Relator2 ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

WRIT OF MANDAMUS 239th District Court Brazoria County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 107226
- CV



### ORDER On March 23 , 2021, the State of Texas by and thro ugh the Texas Tra nspo rtation Commission ( “ the State ” ) filed a notice of appeal from the trial court ’ s order s i gned March 4, 20 21, d enying t he S tate ’ s motion to dismiss for w ant of jurisdiction. Th e State ’ s appeal was assigned to this Court under our appellate number 14

- 21

- 00157

- CV

. On May 6, 2021 , the State filed a petition for writ of m andamus “[o]ut of an abun dance of caution, and strictly in the alternative, ” complaining of the trial court ’s or der signed February 8 , 2021, denyi ng the State ’s motion to abate in the same trial court cause number at issue in the State ’ s i nterlocutory appeal

. The original proceed ing has been assigned our case number 14

- 21

- 00238

- CV. Today, the C ourt, on its own motion, ORDERS CONSOLIDATIO N of the appeal and the original proceeding , No s. 14

- 21

- 00157

- CV and 14

- 21

- 00238

- CV

. We further ORDER Ahmed Sulieman, Individual ly and Col umbi a St op, LLC ’ s motion to abate mandamus proceedings DENIED

. T he petition for a writ of mand amus re mains pending.3 PER CURIAM

Pan el c onsists of Ju stices Wise, Jewell, and Spain. ( Justice Spain dissents and would dismiss for lack of a proper original

- pr oceeding record. ).
263 La. 265

#### STATE of Louisiana v. John Henry JONES.

No. 52633.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 26, 1972.

Murphy W. Bell, Baton Rouge, for defendant-appellant.

William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Harry H. Howard, Asst. Atty. Gen., Sargent Pitcher, Jr., Dist. Atty., Ralph L. Roy, Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, John Henry Jones, was charged with the murder of David Williams and indicted by the grand jury which returned a true bill. The defendant was found guilty without capital punishment by a unanimous jury and sentenced to life imprisonment. (La.R.S. 14:30) While *217three bills of exceptions were reserved during his trial, counsel perfected only one to present to this Court on appeal.

Defendant contends that the admission of his taped confession into evidence at his trial was prejudicial error requiring a reversal of his conviction and sentence by virtue of his being in an alleged state of intoxication at the time of the police interrogation.

A thorough and careful review of the record convinces us the proof is sufficient to establish the fact that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in permitting the admission of the taped confession made by the defendant. The record does not show that the accused was intoxicated at the time the confession was taken, when he voluntarily turned himself in to the police station at 8 A.M. the morning following the midnight stabbing. Although he himself stated that he had had a half pint of whiskey during the morning hours, and had drunk half of another half pint just before turning himself in, the interrogation officer specifically stated that the accused did not speak or appear to have been drinking, and no testimony was introduced at the trial to show to the contrary or that the confession was not free and voluntary.

In reviewing the record we find the defendant was advised of his rights under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). The tape starts off with a statement by the interrogating officer that the defendant was advised of his constitutional rights and that he had signed waiver of rights form to that effect. During the trial the presiding judge conducted a hearing out of the presence of the jury and determined that “the taped statement was freely and voluntarily given.” After determining the taped interrogation was free and voluntary, the trial judge permitted it to be introduced into evidence in its entirety as required by La. R.S. 15:450. Neither do we find the questioning officers employed tactics outside the scope of reasonable police interrogation, nor were their methods in contravention of La.R.S. 15:451. This bill of exceptions lacks merit. State v. Alexander, 215 La. 245, 40 So.2d 232 (1949); 2 Wharton’s Criminal Evidence, 12th Ed., Sect. 388 at 122 (1955).

For the reasons assigned, the conviction and sentence are affirmed.

BARHAM, concurs.
UNITED STATES


SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Washington, D.C. 20549





FORM 8-K





CURRENT REPORT


PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE


SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934





(Date of report)July 31, 2014(Date of earliest event reported)July 30, 2014





ONEOK PARTNERS, L.P.


(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)





Delaware1-1220293-1120873(State or other jurisdiction(Commission(IRS Employerof incorporation)File Number)Identification No.)





100 West Fifth Street; Tulsa, OK


(Address of principal executive offices)





74103


(Zip code)





(918) 588-7000


(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)





Not Applicable


(Former name or former address, if changed since last report)





Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions:





[] Written communication pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)





[] Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)





[] Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))





[] Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))







---




Item 7.01Regulation FD DisclosureOn July 30, 2014, we announced plans to invest $605 million to $785 million to construct the Demicks Lake natural gas processing facility and related infrastructure in North Dakota.  A copy of the news release is attached as Exhibit 99.1 and is incorporated herein by reference.The information disclosed in this Item 7.01, including Exhibit 99.1 hereto, is being furnished and shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act), or otherwise subject to the liabilities under that section, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act except as expressly set forth by specific reference in such filing.Item 9.01Financial Statements and Exhibits(d)ExhibitsExhibitNumberDescription99.1News release issued by ONEOK Partners, L.P. dated July 30, 2014.





2


---




SIGNATURE





Pursuant to the requirements of the Exchange Act, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, hereunto duly authorized.





ONEOK Partners, L.P.By:  ONEOK Partners GP, L.L.C.,General PartnerDate:July 31, 2014By:/s/ Derek S. ReinersDerek S. ReinersSenior Vice President,Chief Financial Officer andTreasurer


3


---




EXHIBIT INDEX








ExhibitNumberDescription99.1News release issued by ONEOK Partners, L.P. dated July 30, 2014.








4
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           5,061
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   73,305
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,195
<INVENTORY>                                     73,977
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               161,585
<PP&E>                                         508,458
<DEPRECIATION>                               (238,973)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 442,515
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           90,270
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           281
<OTHER-SE>                                     150,471
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   442,515
<SALES>                                        534,382
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               534,382
<CGS>                                          408,450
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  408,450
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    88
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   307
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,844
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 35,585
<INCOME-TAX>                                    10,939
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             24,646
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    18,120
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.67
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.67


</TABLE>
No. 10315.

#### Cook et al. *v.*The National Provision Co.

Decided April 14, 1908.

Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

*Messrs. McKisson & Minshall,*for plaintiffs in error.

*Mr. Louis I. Grossman,*for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summiers and Davis, JJ., concur.
|Exhibit 32.1
|------------



|SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION
|-------------------------



|In accordance with
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the  undersigned Chief Executive Officer
of Registrant hereby certifies to his  knowledge that this annual report of Registrant on
Form 10-K for the year ended  December 31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d)  of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and that the
information contained in  this annual report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial  condition and results of operations of Registrant.
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|Date: March 12, 2004 | /s/ Daniel Glassman
      Daniel Glassman 
      Chairman of the Board, President and
      Chief Executive Officer 
      (Principal Executive Officer)
|-------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                     |                                                                                                                                                         
|                     |
**OFFICE OF**  

## THE **ATTORNEY GENERAL**  **OF TEXAS**  **AUSTIN**

Ronorable

Albert J. Hutsoa, Sr. countyAttorney TrinityCounty c7moeton. swaa

teabent of publie inatruati&a lc aa selatant the authorityto ap14 drawn against nehool dfatrlota 01 5. Art. 2693. eposltorybank of a rchool dl8trlot ,011. a logal* drawn warrant, that ha been approved by aa ASSXS‘EUST Superintendent

of ?ublic Instruotion,an4 euoh warrant was f6r the benefit of tho sohool dlstrtot,would the sohoal dlstrlot **bs** authorlmd **to rac)ovOr**  the **aoney paid**  on suoh 

### warrant from the Uep~sito~~baatrOHonorableAlbert 5. Hutson, Jr., Page 2

"1 think the anrrwef to thle **quostlon is**  ***no*.** Gem kfoody

vs. Chosrhrr,183 LX. 23. Vour pmnpt an8wera to the above question8 will be greetlg t@preo16teU.w In vlmr of the prorlelon'of the state Constiixtlon oitedin your letter and the holdiq of the .iuprene Cw.rt in the casa or Carpenter~8. Shrppard.et al,- ,1453. :v. (26) 562, St la the opinion or this **dbparta@nC** that **your** 

## rirst :ilmtion
**should ba**  **answered** in the efflnnatlv~sad is SO answered. 

# -+ tillnk that nr **ur eeooJl&**  qusstloa **an4** third quution **me anawen4**  in our opi ona Nos. O-1507 an&O-1507-A. Therefore, we are scoloaingoopler o!' them oplnlotm in answer to thee0questions.

Ye dLS0 ~biOmt3 0Opi0~ Qr OUr ~Opik~~9 NO& 0-604-A ad C-3295pertainiryto similar **guaetfona** rwardlng **a ooubty**  ~ckoolsuperintendent under tha faots state4 In tIma@ uplnlone. Trusting that the foregoing fully ansvmra your inqulry, we rre
Exhibit 10.31

 

2014 Compensation Information for Registrant’s Executive Officers

 

The table below provides information regarding the base salary of each executive officer of GTx, Inc. (the “Company”), effective as of January 1, 2014:

 

	
Executive Officer
    	
 
    	
Title
    	
 
    	
2014 Annual
    Base Salary
    ($)
    	
 
    
	
Mitchell S.   Steiner
    	
 
    	
Chief Executive Officer and Vice-Chairman of   the Board
    	
 
    	
452,088
    	
 
    
	
Marc S. Hanover
    	
 
    	
President and Chief Operating Officer
    	
 
    	
393,317
    	
 
    
	
James T. Dalton
    	
 
    	
Vice President, Chief Scientific Officer
    	
 
    	
375,000
    	
 
    
	
Henry P. Doggrell
    	
 
    	
Vice President, Chief Legal Officer and   Secretary
    	
 
    	
363,576
    	
 
    


 

A description of the retention benefits and arrangements provided to the Company’s executive officers is included under Item 5.02 of the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 1, 2013, and is incorporated by reference herein.
#### Joseph CAMPERLENGO and Four O’Clock Lounge, Inc., Appellants, v. John Thomas DOOLITTLE, Appellee.

No. 70-912.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

May 28, 1971.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Broward County; L. Clayton Nance, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
#### Ex parte Lisa Jackson NELSON.

77-324.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

Feb. 24, 1978.

BLOOD WORTH, Justice.

WRIT DENIED.

TORBERT, C. J., and FAULKNER, AL-MON and EMBRY, JJ., concur.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                 5
<CIK>                                     0000027748
<NAME>                                    DEL GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES CORP.
       
<S>                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                             9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         AUG-01-1998
<PERIOD-START>                            AUG-03-1997
<PERIOD-END>                              MAY-02-1998
<CASH>                                       5,942,419
<SECURITIES>                                   883,103
<RECEIVABLES>                               13,274,360
<ALLOWANCES>                                   226,506
<INVENTORY>                                 27,344,733
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            52,464,366
<PP&E>                                      18,049,347
<DEPRECIATION>                               6,113,072
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              71,439,009
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       11,886,692
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       783,240
<OTHER-SE>                                  56,479,841
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                71,439,009
<SALES>                                     44,565,977
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            44,565,977
<CGS>                                       26,546,139
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               26,546,139
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            12,147,141
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (104,080)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              5,976,777
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,912,569
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          4,064,208
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 4,064,208
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .54
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .50
        

</TABLE>
-81 -80 -79 -78 -77 -76 -75

 37

 38

 39

 40

 41

★

▲

▲

▲ ▲

★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 100

18 12 06 00

08/04

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 04 Aug 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.77 N 77.11 W Meters AGL

★

■

■

■

■

★

■ ■ ■ ■

★

●

●

★

● ●

● ●
EXHIBIT 32.01

                  CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER &
                            CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Michael Pacult, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of
Ashley Capital Management, Inc. as General Partner of Atlas Futures Fund, LP,
certify that (i) the Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011 of Atlas
Futures Fund, LP fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information
contained in the Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011 fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of Atlas Futures Fund, LP.

ATLAS FUTURES FUND, LP
By:	Ashley Capital Management, Inc., General Partner

By:	/s/ Michael Pacult
Michael Pacult
Chief Executive Officer &
Chief Financial Officer

Date:	March 30, 2012

<page>
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

COMMISSIONERS: Robert Pitofsky, Chairman 

Sheila F. Anthony 

Mozelle W. Thompson 

Orson Swindle 

) 

In the Matter of 

MONIER LIFETILE LLC, 

a corporation , 

BORAL LTD., 

a corporation , and 

LAFARGE S.A. 

a corporation. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) Docket No. 9290 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

ORDER WITHDRAWING MATTER FROM ADJUDICATION 

This matter is before the Commission upon the joint motion filed by Complaint Counsel and 

Counsel for Respondents that this matter be withdrawn from adjudication - pursuant to Sections 

3.25 (b) and (c) ofthe Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure, 16 C.F.R. §§ 3.25(b),(c) (1998) 

- for the purpose of considering a proposed consent agreement executed by Complaint Counsel and 

Counsel for Respondents. 

IT IS ORDERED that the aforesaid motion to withdraw this matter from adjudication be, and it 

hereby is, granted. 

By the Commission. (j)Jl Donald S. Clark 

t~

Secretary 

ISSUED: February 19, 1999
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

CERTIFICATIONS

 

Certification requirements set forth in Section 302(a) ofthe Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

 

I, Stuart I. Greenwald, certify that:

 

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q ofFirst Hartford Corporation.

 

2.   Based on my knowledge, this quarterly reportdoes not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this quarterly report.

 

3.   Based onmy knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant asof, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

 

4.   Theregistrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) for the registrant and have:

 

(a)  Designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

(b)  Evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

(c)  Disclosed inthis report any change in the registrant's internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant's internal control over financial reporting; and 

 

5.   The registrant's other certifying officer and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee ofthe registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

     

(a)  All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial information; and

 

(b)  Any fraud, whether ornot material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

 

 

Date: March 24, 2008                   

 

By:  /s/ Stuart I. Greenwald              

        Stuart I. Greenwald

        Treasurer