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
 
 
 I, David
G. Zahka, Chief Financial Officer of Talk America Holdings, Inc. have reviewed
Talk America Holdings, Inc.’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended
September 30, 2005 (the “Report”) and, based on the inquiries I have made or
caused to be made in the fulfillment of my responsibilities as the
Chief Financial Officer of Talk America Holdings, Inc., I hereby certify
that:
 
 (i) the
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
 
 (ii) the
information contained in such Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operation of Talk America Holdings,
Inc.
 
 /s/
David G. Zahka
 David G.
Zahka
 Chief
Financial Officer
 November
9, 2005
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jose Hernandez, Appellant.

[721 NYS2d 633]

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Joseph Fisch, J.), rendered November 3, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of manslaughter in the first degree and criminal use of a firearm in the first degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 12V2 to 25 years, unanimously modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, to reduce the sentence imposed to concurrent terms of 10 to 20 years, and otherwise affirmed.

In charging the jury on the defense of justification, the court properly included the principle of duty to retreat and properly declined to include the exception to that duty applicable to a person “in his dwelling” (Penal Law § 35.15 [2] [a] [i]). The shooting occurred outside defendant’s apartment in an area that was completely accessible to the public as a practical matter. This area did not constitute a part of defendant’s “dwelling” for purposes of a justification charge *(People v Duren,*234 AD2d 560, *lv denied*89 NY2d 1034; *People v Mickens,*219 AD2d 543, 544, *lv denied*87 NY2d 904; *compare, People v McCurdy,*86 AD2d 493; *People v Torres,*162 AD2d 385, *lv denied*76 NY2d 897).

Defendant’s claim that the court should have instructed the jury on a defense of premises theory of justification pursuant to Penal Law § 35.20 (3) is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that there was no reasonable view of the evidence to support defendant’s claim that he reasonably believed that deadly physical force was necessary to prevent or terminate an attempted burglary by the decedent *(People v Cox,*92 NY2d 1002).

We find the sentence imposed to be excessive to the extent indicated. Concur — Tom, J. P., Andrias, Ellerin, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.
O:tmllJi NO. 281 

-6ACOpy 

-

DISPDSIIG \fIllH THE :rAKING OF 'rltm 

a.sus 0'1 MdUll'ACIfmlIWG IJiijlJ:STIUES 

:roR 1943 -

hr~t to the proT1slo11s of' fhrcUon 1401 of the 

Second WaX" PoweX"8 Acrt. 1942. approved, Maroh 27 t 1942, 56 Stat. 

116, 50U.S.o. 644, Md the diJ"ections _0. regulations of the 

President contained. in keClltive Ol:'der 9152. dated April 29, 

1942 (7 '1.B.. 3251>' it 18 hereby ordered thet the taking of the 

eeaml of lllalllutaotUl'1_ indu.stX"ies for 194:; be dispensed. wUh. 

Oertified to be a true 

cOP1 of tht orig1aal 

( signed) GlllRAtJ) RYAI' 

Ohief 01e1"k. 

Department of OQuerce. 

Jml1l1manrmvd 

The Natioul Archive. 

li1ed and Made Available 

'or Pub1io Inspeotion 

September 21, 11.51 a.m. t4:; 

In the Division of the 

federal Register J.D.
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 23.1
                                  ------------

         Consent of Deloitte & Touche LLP, independent auditors.
<PAGE>

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

Board of Directors and Stockholders
Bush Industries, Inc.

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.'s
33-77820, 33-77814, 33-69846, 33-69848, 33-66540, 33-66542, 33-63723, 333-02617,
333-38017, 333-50831 and 333-90233 and 333-90255 of Bush Industries, Inc. on
Form S-8 and 333-14819 and 333-09291 of Bush Industries, Inc. on Form S-3 of our
report dated February 4, 2000 (February 29, 2000 as to Note 14), appearing in
this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Bush Industries, Inc. for the year ended
January 1, 2000.

Deloitte & Touche LLP
Buffalo, New York

March 20, 2000
#### RINKER MATERIALS CORPORATION, a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. CITY OF NORTH MIAMI, a Florida municipal corporation, Appellee.

No. 72-505.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Jan. 28, 1974.

Brigham & Brigham, Miami, for appellant.

Kahn & Clein, North Miami, for appel-lee.

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

ORDER ON MANDATE

PER CURIAM.

Whereas, the judgment of this court was entered on February 14, 1973 (273 So.2d 436) affirming the judgment of the Circuit Court for Dade County, Florida, in the above styled cause; and

Whereas, on review of this court’s judgment, by certiorari, the Supreme Court of Florida by its opinion and judgment filed December 6, 1973, 286 So.2d 552 and mandate now lodged in this court, quashed this court’s judgment with directions;

Now, therefore, It is Ordered that the mandate of this court issued in this cause *537on March 13, 1973 is withdrawn, the judgment of this court filed February 14, 1973 is vacated, the said opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida is herewith made the opinion and judgment of this court, the order of the circuit court is set aside with directions that an order be entered directing that the City of North Miami forthwith issue the building permit sought by the petitioner. Costs allowed shall be taxed in the trial court (Rule 3.16, subd. b, F.A.R. 32 F.S.A.).
U.S. flag
              An official website of the United States government Skip to main content   end of header History
 You are here: Census.gov ›
  History ›
  Programs › Geography › Notable Maps Skip top of page navigation
 History Main
      Agency History
        Director Biographies
          Census Facilities
          Suitland, MD
          Notable Alumni
      Innovations
        Data Collection
          Technology
      Programs
        Agriculture
          Demographic
          Housing
          Economic
          Geography
          Governments
      Through the Decades
        Fast Facts
          Overview
          Index of Questions
          Questionnaires
          Census Instructions
      Genealogy
        Decennial Census Records
          Other Resources
      Reference
        Data@Museums
          Artifacts
          Lesson Plans
          Legislation
          Maps
          Oral Histories
          Privacy & Confidentiality
          Apportionment
          Publications
 Home Page Archive
        2024
          2023
          2022
          2021
          2020
          2019
          2018
          2017
          2016
          2015
          2014    
      FAQs
        Genealogy
          Agency History
          Demographic
          Economic
          Governments
          Agriculture
          Geography
          Innovations
          Miscellaneous
  Geography Also in this Section: How We Map

    Notable Maps

    Statistical Atlases

    Island Areas

    Urban and Rural Areas

    Regions and Divisions

    Metropolitan Areas

    Tracts and Block Numbering Areas
 Notable Maps Population Distribution in 1790View Larger The Census Office produced its first significant map in 1854: an illustration by Superintendent of the Census J.D.B. DeBow that accompanied an 1850 census report.  In the latter part of the nineteenth century, the Census Office published, under the direction of Superintendent Francis Walker and geographer Henry Gannet, a series of highly acclaimed statistical atlases. Although interest in the statistical atlases declined and were ultimately canceled for the 1930 census, the Census Bureau continued to produce a large array of maps, both to disseminate statistics and to aid in the enumeration process.  This section presents some of the more notable maps produced by the Census Bureau and its predecessors. **For more information:** "Looking Back and Ahead: A History of Cartography at the Census Bureau and What the Future Holds," [PDF 1.09MB] Kaile Bower, U.S. Census Bureau, November 2010.
 
 CONNECT WITH US

Information Quality
                    Data Linkage Infrastructure
                    Data Protection and Privacy Policy
                    Accessibility      
                    FOIA
                    Inspector General
                    No FEAR Act
                    U.S. Department of Commerce
                    USA.gov
                   Measuring America's People, Places, and Economy
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
EXHIBIT 27 FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         153,952
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,723,041
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  6,505,627
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             8,735,375
<PP&E>                                       3,552,408
<DEPRECIATION>                              (1,846,214)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,742,429
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,193,188
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         7,957
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,151,301
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,742,429
<SALES>                                      8,784,458
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             8,784,458
<CGS>                                        5,772,006
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                8,491,579
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                77,951
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (5,557,078)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (5,557,078)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (5,557,078)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.71)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.71)



</TABLE>
Arts, Recreation, and Travel 765

U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of the United States: 2012

 boating . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Mil. dol. . . .  13,731 17,226 27,065 37,31

Recreational boats in use by

 boat type 9. . . . . . . . . . . . .  Million. . . .  16.0 15.4 

 Outboard. . . . . . . . . . . . .  Million. . . .  (NA

 Inboard. . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Million. . . .  (

 Sterndrive. . . . . . . . . . . .  Million. . . .  (NA) 

 Personal Watercraft. . . . .  Million. . . .  (NA) (NA) 1.2 1.2 1

 Sailboat. . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Million. . . .  (

 Other. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Million. . . 

NA Not available. 1 Source: National Golf Foundation, Jupiter, FL. 2 Source: Tennis Industry Association, Hilton Head, SC. 

Based on a nationwide telephone survey of households, in which all household members ages 6 and up are enumerated with data 

on tennis participation collected for each person. 3 Source: National Ski Areas Association, Kottke National End of Season Survey 

Report (copyright). 4 Represents one person visiting a ski area for all or any part of a day or night, and includes full-and half-day, 

night, complimentary, adult, child, season, and other types of tickets. Data are estimated and are for the season ending in the year 

shown. 5 Source: Motion Picture Association of America, Inc., Encino, CA. 6 Source: National Marine Manufacturers Association, 

Chicago, IL. (copyright). 7 People participating is now measured as adults 18 years and older. 8 Represents estimated expenditures 

for new and used boats, motors and engines, accessories, safety equipment, fuel, insurance, docking, maintenance, launching, 

storage, repairs, and other expenses. 9 2010 data are estimated.

Source: Compiled from sources listed in footnotes.
Table B-2.  90-Percent Confidence Intervals of Standard Errors of Estimated Percentages

                    for Characteristics of Vacant Rental and Homeowner Housing Units:  2005





                                90-Percent

                                Confidence Interval (+/-)

                                of estimated percentage\1



                           1 or    2 or    5 or   10 or   15 or   20 or   25 or

                              99      98      95      90      85      80      75      50



Vacant rental units.....     0.1     0.2     0.3     0.3     0.4     0.5     0.5     0.6

Vacant homeowner units..     0.1     0.1     0.1     0.2     0.2     0.2     0.3     0.3





\1 A 90-percent confidence interval is a measure of an estimate's reliability.  The larger the confidence interval is, in

     relation to the size of the estimate, the less reliable the estimate.
RADIATION DISPOSAL SYSTEMS, INC.
1104 Nueces Street
Austin, TX 78701-2128

NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS
To Be Held on __________________

to the Shareholders of
RADIATION DISPOSAL SYSTEM, INC.

NOTICE IS HEREBY  GIVEN that the Annual  Meeting of  Shareholders  of  RADIATION
DISPOSAL  SYSTEMS,  INC.  (the  "Company")  will be held at the offices of First
Dominion  Finanical  Group,  N.A. of Frost  National  Bank Plaza,  816  Congress
Avenue, Suite 1100, Austin, Texas 78701 on ____________________,  at __________,
for the following purposes:

         1.  To elect two Directors to the  Company's Board of Directors to hold
office for a period of one year or until their  successors  are duly elected and
qualified;

         2.  To vote on the  proposal  to amend  the  Company's  Cerrificate  of
Incorporation to increase the authorized number of shres of Common Stock from 20
million to 50 million;

         3.  To  vote  on  the  proposal  to  amend the Compnay's Certificate of
Incorporation  to effect a change of the Company's name from RADIATION  DISPOSAL
SYSTEMS, INC. TO THE SAINT JAMES COMPANY;

         4.  To vote on the proposal to reverse-split the Company's  outstanding
shares of Common  Stock on a 20 for 1 basis,  20  outstanding  shares  for 1 new
share;

         5.  To vote on the  proposal  to  authorize  a change  of the Company's
domicile (state of incorporation) from North Carolina to Delaware;

         6.  To transact  such other business as may properly be brought  before
the meeting or any adjournment thereof.

         The close of  business  on October 1, 1998 has been fixed as the record
date for the  determination  of shareholders  entitled to notice of, and to vote
at, the meeting and any adjournment thereof.

         You are  cordially  invited to attend the  meeting.  Whether or not you
plan to attend, please complete, date and sign the accompanying proxy and return
it promptly in the enclosed  envelope to assure that your shares are represented
at the meeting.  If you do attend,  you may revoke any prior proxy and vote your
shares in person if you wish to do so.  Any prior  proxy will  automatically  be
revoked in you execute the accompanying  proxy or if you notify the Secretary of
the Company, in writing, prior to the annual Meeting of Shareholders,

         By order of the Board of Directors
         Wayne Gronquist, Secretary
         Dated:

WHETHER OR NOT YOU EXPECT TO ATTEND THE MEETING, PLEASE COMPLETE, DATE, AND SIGN
THE  ENCLOSED  PROXY AND MAIL IT PROMPTLY IN THE  ENCLOSED  ENVELOPE IN ORDER TO
ASSURE  REPRESENTATION  OF YOUR SHARES.  NO POSTAGE NEED BE AFFIXED IF MAILED IN
THE UNITED STATES.

RADIATION DISPOSAL SYSTEMS, INC.
1104 Nueces Street
Austin, Texas 78701-2128
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of CFO 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 on Form 10-K of SkyTerra
Communications, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Scott Macleod, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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



/s/ Scott MacleodName:

Scott MacleodTitle:

Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


February 28, 2008



1
#### Curt E. BOWERS v. D. C. GREENE and Greene’s Marine Products, Inc.

No. 62775.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 22, 1978.

In re: D. C. Greene and Greene’s Marine Products, Inc., applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit. Parish of Jefferson Davis. 360 So.2d 639.

Denied.
EXHIBIT 31.2

CERTIFICATION

I, Steven M. Caspers, certify that:

1.
        I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Minn Dak Farmers Cooperative;


2.
        Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;


3.
        Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;


4.
        The Companys other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and Rule 15d-15(e)) for the Company and have:


a)
        designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the Company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;


b)
        evaluated the effectiveness of the Companys disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation.


c)
        disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the Companys most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Companys internal control over financial reporting; and


5.
        The Companys other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Companys auditors and the audit committee of the Companys board of directors:


a)
        all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Companys ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and


b)
        any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Companys internal control over financial reporting.


Date:
        November 27, 2006
        
        
        /s/  Steven M. CaspersExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


---
#### Harold Gray ATKINSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. R-170.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Nov. 9, 1972.

Richard W. Ervin, III, Public Defender, and William C. Owen, Sp. Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Richard W. Prospect, Asst. Atty. Gen., for ap-pellee.

PER CURIAM.

The briefs and the record on appeal having been read and given full consideration, and appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the judgment of the lower court hereby appealed is affirmed.

CARROLL, DONALD K., Acting C. J., and WIGGINTON and RAWLS, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 149 (Thursday, August 2, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 37831]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-16522]


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

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, & First-
Class Package Service Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: August 2, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Reed, 202-268-3179.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
July 27, 2018, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, & First-Class 
Package Service Contract 43 to Competitive Product List. Documents are 
available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2018-198, CP2018-276.

Elizabeth Reed,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2018-16522 Filed 8-1-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 12-3274

___________________________

Elsie M. Mayard

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

Anthony Tallarico; Carlos Wong; Chad Slagter; City of St. Paul

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees

____________

 Appeal from United States District Court 

for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis

____________

 Submitted: July 17, 2013

Filed: July 19, 2013

[Unpublished]

____________

Before WOLLMAN, GRUENDER, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Elsie M. Mayard appeals following the district court’s1

 adverse entry of

judgment on a jury verdict in her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, and the court’s subsequent

1

The Honorable Arthur J. Boylan, United States Magistrate Judge for the

District of Minnesota, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent

of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
denial of her motion for a new trial under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59. Having

reviewed the arguments raised in the Rule 59 motion, to the extent possible without

a transcript of the three-day jury trial, this court finds no clear abuse of discretion in

the district court’s denial of the Rule 59 motion. See Children’s Broadcasting Corp.

v. Walt Disney Co., 357 F.3d 860, 866-67 (8th Cir. 2004); Schmid v. United Bhd. of

Carpenters and Joiners of Am., 827 F.2d 384, 385-86 (8th Cir. 1987) (per curiam).2

And having carefully reviewed the arguments for reversal raised in Mayard’s brief,

this court finds no other reversible error in these proceedings. 

This court affirms. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. 

______________________________

2

In her brief, Mayard mentions or alludes to certain other claims, but she

stipulated to the dismissal of those claims before trial, so they will not be considered. 

-2-