alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
| Certification of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 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. |
|--------|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/ Logan W. Kruger                       |   | /s/ Michael A. Bless                      |
|-------------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------|
| By:  Logan W. Kruger            |   | By:  Michael A. Bless           |
| Title:  Chief Executive Officer |   | Title:  Chief Financial Officer |
| Date:  November 9, 2009         |   | Date:  November 9, 2009         |
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1821 

To accelerate the income tax benefits for charitable cash contributions for 

the relief of victims of Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 12 (legislative day, DECEMBER 11), 2013 

Ms. HIRONO (for herself and Mr. HELLER) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To accelerate the income tax benefits for charitable cash 

contributions for the relief of victims of Typhoon Haiyan 

in the Philippines. 

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 ‘‘Philippines Charitable 

5 Giving Assistance Act’’. 

maindgalligan on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•S 1821 IS

1 SEC. 2. ACCELERATION OF INCOME TAX BENEFITS FOR 

2 CHARITABLE CASH CONTRIBUTIONS FOR RE3 LIEF OF VICTIMS OF TYPHOON HAIYAN IN 

4 THE PHILIPPINES. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of section 170 of the 

6 Internal Revenue Code of 1986, a taxpayer may treat any 

7 contribution described in subsection (b) made after Janu8 ary 1, 2014, and before March 1, 2014, as if such con9 tribution was made on December 31, 2013, and not in 

10 2014. 

11 (b) CONTRIBUTION DESCRIBED.—A contribution is 

12 described in this subsection if such contribution is a cash 

13 contribution made for the relief of victims in areas af14 fected by Typhoon Haiyan, for which a charitable con15 tribution deduction is allowable under section 170 of the 

16 Internal Revenue Code of 1986. 

17 (c) RECORDKEEPING.—In the case of a contribution 

18 described in subsection (b), a telephone bill showing the 

19 name of the donee organization, the date of the contribu20 tion, and the amount of the contribution shall be treated 

21 as meeting the recordkeeping requirements of section 

22 170(f)(17) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. 

23 (d) PAYGO.—All applicable provisions in this section 

24 are designated as an emergency for purposes of pay-as25 you-go principles. 

Æ 

maindgalligan on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
**From:** David Weiskopf [ mailto:dweiskopf@nextgenamerica.org ]

**Sent:** Wednesday, January 28, 2015 7:47 PM **To:** David Weiskopf **Subject:** New Post on NextGen America's Blog

- "The Best

- Kept Secret About the Clean Power Plan: It1s Not Actually That Complicated" Hi All, I’ve just posted a new entry on NextGen Climate Amer ica’s blog on the Clean Power Plan. This post is focused on how, despite the complexity involved for EPA in coming up with state targets and for utilities in deciding how to make pollution cuts, the Clean Power Plan actually provides air regulators with the option to choose a straightforward task. (Or at least one no more complex than implementing other air rules.) Please let me know if you have any questions or would like to discuss further. All the best, Dave

-- David W eiskopf Attorney NextGen Climate America https://nextgenamerica.org/ 111 Sutter Street San Francisco, CA 94104 Dweiskopf@nextgenamerica.org des k: (415) 802

-2406 mo bile: (415) 948

- 7064

# THE BEST **- KEPT SECRET**  **ABOUT THE CLEAN POWER**  **PLAN: IT’S NOT**  **ACTUALL**

**Y THA**  **T COMPLICA** 

**TED**
January 28, 2015 David Weiskopf 

## From the moment EPA announced its groundbreaking prop osal to limit harmful carbon pollution from power plants, virtually all discussion of the Clean Power Plan has taken as a premise that implementing the rule will be extremely complicated. But the actual regulation proposed in the Clean Power Plan is no more complex than state administrators want it to be. Of course, if states do not wish to write their own regulations, EPA will do it for them by implementing a federal plan. But everywhere else, states are in the driver’s seat, and States have the power to implement this law through very straightforward and familiar regulatory methods. **Read More. . .**
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT ANTONIO GAR C IA-R OM ER O, Pe titione r, v. ERIC H. HOLDER , Jr., Attorne y Ge ne ra l, R

e sponde nt . No. 12-73149 Age n c y No. A088-666-090 M EM O R ANDUM *

On Pe tition for Re vie w of a n Orde r of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls Subm itte d

Nove m b e r 18, 2014 ** B e fore : LEAVY, FISHER , a nd N.R . SM ITH, C irc uit Judge s. Antonio Ga

rc ia -R o m e ro, a

native an d c itiz e n of M e xic o, pe titions for re vie w of the B o ard of Im

m igration Appe a ls’ orde r dism issing his a ppe a l from an im m igration judge ’ s (“ IJ” ) orde r of re m o va l. W e dism i ss the pe t ition for re vie w. 

# F IL ED NOV 26 2014 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se eFe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).W e la c k jurisdic tion ove r the pe tition for re vie w unde r 8 U.S.C .

§ 1252(a)(2)(B )(i) be c a

use Ga rc ia -R om e ro is c h a lle nging thea ge nc y ’ s disc re tiona

ry de nia l of c anc e lla

tion of re m ova l, se e Me nde z-C astro v . Muk

ase y , 552 F.3d 975, 978 (9th C ir. 2009), a n d he ha s not se t forth a

c olora ble c onstitutiona

l c la im or que stion of la

w ove r whic h we c ould otherwise e xe rc ise jurisdic tion, se e id. (any c h a lle nge of a n IJ’ s disc re tiona

ry de te rm ination m

ust pre s e nt a c olora

b l e c onstitutiona

l c la im or que stion of la

w in orde r for this c ourt to e xe rc ise jurisdic tion). PE T IT IO N FO R RE V IE WDISM ISSE D.

1 2 - 7 3 1 4 9 2
U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSIONWASHINGTON, DC
20549

AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO
FORM 10-QSB

(Mark One)

|T | Quarterly report under Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2003
|- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  |                                                                                                                               
| ̈ | Transition report under Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange ActFor the
transition period from ______ to ____________          

Commission file number 0-27889



EYE CARE INTERNATIONAL, INC.(Exact name of registrant as
specified in its charter)




Delaware

59-3206480(State or Other Jurisdiction ofIncorporation or Organization)

(IRS EmployerIdentification No.)




1511 North Westshore Boulevard, Suite 925Tampa, Florida

33607(Address of principal executive offices)

(Zip Code)




(813) 289-5552(Issuers Telephone Number Including Area Code)


Check whether the issuer: (1) filed all reports required to be filed by Section
13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the past 12 months (or for such shorter
period that the registrant was required to such reports, and (2) registrant was
required to file such reports, and (2) has been subject to such filing
requirements for the past 90 days.

YesþNo ̈

As of April 11, 2003, the issuer had outstanding 13,357,060 shares of common
stock, $.001 par value.

Transitional Small Business Disclosure
Format:     Yes ̈NoT




EYE CARE INTERNATIONAL, INC.



On May 14, 2003, the Company's Form 10QSB for the period ended
March 31, 2003, was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission before
said document was reviewed, approved and authorized for filing by the
appropriate Company officers and counsel.  Therefore, the original filing
should not be relied upon or used for any purpose.  An amended Form 10QSB
for the period ended March 31, 2003, will be filed upon authorization by the
appropriate Company officers and counsel.



|                    | EYE CARE INTERNATIONAL, INC.                                           
|------------------- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------
|                    |                                                                        
|Date:  May 16, 2003 |                                                                        
|                    | By: /s/  James L.
Koenig       James
L. Koenig, Chief Financial Officer
No. 11320.

#### The Mansfield Telephone Co. *v.*Sheehy.

Decided November 23, 1909.

Error to Circuit Court of Richland county.

*Messrs.*
      *522
      *Brucker Sr Cummins,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. C. H. Workman,*for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Crew, C. J., Summers and Shauck, JJ., concur.
DISMISS and Opinion Filed October 5, 2021 

# S

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-21-00631-CV IDA ENGINEERING INC., Appellant

V. LIQUID CAPITAL EXCH ANGE INC., Appellee On Appeal from the 68th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-20-08863 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Schenck, Smith, and Garcia Opinion by Justice Schenck It is well-settled that a corporation may only be represented in court by a licensed attorney. See Kunstoplast of Am., Inc. v. Formosa Plastics Corp. , 937 S.W.2d 455, 456 (Tex. 1996) (per curiam). On August 11, 2021, after appellant’s counsel withdrew, we directed appellant to file, within thirty days, a notice of designation of counsel. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 6.1(c). Although we cautioned appellant that failure to comply could result in dism issal of the appeal without further notice,–2– see Kunstoplast , 937 S.W.2d at 456, no response has be en filed. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See id.

210631F.P05 /David J. Schenck / DAVID J. SCHENCK JUSTICE–3– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
IDA ENGINEERING INC., Appellant

No. 05-21-00631-CV V. LIQUID CAPITAL EXCHANGE INC., Appellee On Appeal from the 68th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-20-08863. Opinion delivered by Justice Schenck, Justices Smith and Garcia participating.

In accordance with this Court’ s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal.
We ORDER that appellee Liquid Capital Exchange Inc. recover its costs, if any, of this appeal from a ppellant IDA Engineering Inc.

Judgment entered October 5, 2021.
U.S. flag
              An official website of the United States government Skip to main content   end of header Census.gov Newsroom Releases 2010 Census
 Newsroom Archive
 Skip left menu navigation
 About the Newsroom
 				Facts for Features
 				**News Releases**
 				Press Kits
 				Tip Sheets
 Release Information CB11-CN.183 **Contact:**  Public Information Office
301-763-3030/763-3762 (fax)
 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:  THURSDAY, SEPT. 22, 2011 Media Advisory — Census Bureau to Release 2010 Census Statistics on Nation's Black and White Populations What:
 The U.S. Census Bureau will hold an audio and Web news conference to release the next two briefs from the 2010 Census. During the event, Census Bureau demographers will discuss the briefs, which provide details on the nation's black and white populations, including their size, growth and geographic distribution. The event will consist of a simultaneous audio conference and online presentation. Reporters will be able to ask questions once the presentation is complete. We suggest reporters log in and call in early.
 When:
 Thursday, Sept. 29, 2011, 1 p.m. (EDT)
 Who:
 Bradford Hepler, statistician, Racial Statistics Branch, Population Division, U.S. Census Bureau 
Lindsay Hixson, statistician, Racial Statistics Branch, Population Division, U.S. Census Bureau
Tallese Johnson, statistician, Racial Statistics Branch, Population Division, U.S. Census Bureau
Sonya Rastogi, statistician, Racial Statistics Branch, Population Division, U.S. Census Bureau
 Details:
 **Audio conference ― access information**
Toll free number: 1-800-369-2179
Participant passcode: CENSUSBUREAU
Note: Stay on the line until operator asks for the passcode. Do not key in passcode. **Online presentation ― access information
Please login early, as some setup is required.**
URL: https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join/ Conference number: PW4849593
Audience passcode: CENSUSBUREAU*Note: Please type in  "CENSUSBUREAU" with no space between Census and Bureau.* If closed captioning is required:  <http://livewrite.nccsite.com/view/cb0929>
 **Online Press Kit:** <http://2010.census.gov/news/press-kits/briefs/briefs.html>  **Follow @uscensusbureau on Twitter, Facebook, Flickr, YouTube**
  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
*This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the

case, res judicata and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and

judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of

10th Cir. R. 36.3.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

Filed 4/29/96

TENTH CIRCUIT

NELSON O. DUARTE,

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v.

UNITED STATES BUREAU OF

PRISONS; J. MICHAEL QUINLAN,

Director of FBOP; CLAIR CRIPE,

General Counsel; CALVIN EDWARDS,

Regional Director; GARY L. HENMAN,

Warden; J. HARRELL, Associate

Warden; E. R. PIERCE, SIS Lieutenant;

E. W. GEOUGE, Discipline Hearing

Officer,

Defendants-Appellees. 

No. 95-3380 

(D. Kan.)

(D.C. No. 93-CV-3369)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before ANDERSON, BARRETT and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined

unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this
- 2 -

appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. This case is therefore ordered

submitted without oral argument.

Plaintiff Nelson O. Duarte, a prison inmate, appeals the district court’s grant of

summary judgment to defendants on his civil rights action brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1331. In his complaint, Duarte alleges that his constitutional rights were violated by the

actions of the defendants during a disciplinary investigation and hearing, following which

plaintiff was found guilty of attempted escape. Construed liberally, Duarte alleged that

(1) defendants falsely charged him with attempted escape, (2) he was a victim of a

retaliatory transfer, (3) defendants refused to investigate his claim that confidential

informants had set him up, (4) defendants falsified and withheld evidence, and (5)

defendants deprived him of good time credits.

On appeal, Duarte asserts that the district court failed to consider the facts in the

light most favorable to him as the nonmoving party and that there are material issues of

fact in dispute which preclude the district court’s grant of summary judgment.

We review the district court’s grant of summary judgment de novo and apply the

same legal standard used by the district court under Rule 56(c) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure. Eaton v. Jarvis Prods. Corp., 965 F.2d 922, 925 (10th Cir. 1992). 

Summary judgment is appropriate when “there is no genuine issue as to any material fact

and . . . the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed. R. Civ. P.

56(c).
- 3 -

Upon careful consideration of the record on appeal, the pleadings, and the parties

arguments, we affirm for substantially the reasons stated in the district court’s

Memorandum and Order dated November 3, 1995.

The judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Kansas is

hereby AFFIRMED.

ENTERED FOR THE COURT

Michael R. Murphy

Circuit Judge
#### In re ESTATE of Isabelle R. DUFRESNE, Deceased. Marie BRADSHAW, Appellant, v. William J. GRAY and John D. Roberts, Sr., Appellees.

Nos. 67-230, 67-308.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Second District.

May 31, 1968.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Iridium
Operating LLC's financial statements for the nine months ended September 30,
1998 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0001051721
<NAME> IRIDIUM OPERATING LCC
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                          65,207
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               104,281
<PP&E>                                       3,887,153
<DEPRECIATION>                                 498,344
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,564,054
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,004,301
<BONDS>                                      1,714,891
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     2,074,087
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,240,394)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,564,054
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               639,325
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             173,185
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (812,510)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (812,510)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (812,510)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  [BLANK]
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  [BLANK]
        

</TABLE>
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,

J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk March 23, 2009

0316 

# Order

March 23, 2009

137813 & (58)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 137813 COA: 278588 Wayne CC: 07-004036-01 MARIO ALBERTO MARTINEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 23, 2008 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. The motion to disqualify is DENIED as moot.
25.02523
**EXHIBIT32.2**

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

In connection withthe Quarterly Report of First Investors Financial Services, Inc., (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the period ending January 31, 2007 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, BennieH. Duck, 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 of2002, that:

(1)          The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Actof 1934; and

(2)          The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date:  Mar 14, 2007
|        | By: /s/ Bennie H. Duck  |
|--------|-------------------------|
|   | Bennie H. Duck          |
|   | Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
# C_2012238EN.01000102.xml

| 8.8.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 238/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.8.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 238/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.6538 — Robert Bosch/SPX' Service Solutions Business)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2012/C 238/02

On 26 June 2012, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32012M6538. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32012M6538. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
No. 11807.

#### Schnebly, Treasurer, *v.*Kenyon College.

Decided November 9, 1909.

Error to .Circuit Court of Knox county.

*Mr. W. A. Hosack,*for plaintiff in error.

*Messrs. II. H. & R. M. .Greer,*and *Messrs. Outhwaite, Linn & Thurman,*for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Crew, *515C. J., Summers, Spear, Davis and Shauck, JJ., concur.