alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit
32





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Annual Report of Smith-Midland Corporation (the “Company”)
on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008  as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), we, Rodney
I. Smith and William A. Kenter, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, respectively, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:





(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/ Rodney I. Smith


Rodney I.
Smith


Chief
Executive Officer and President


(principal
executive officer)






/s/ William A. Kenter


William
A. Kenter


Chief
Financial Officer


(principal
financial and accounting officer)




Dated:  March
31, 2009
From: Chin, Conrad <Chin.Conrad@epa.gov>

Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 8:17 AM

To: John Rego

Cc: French, Chuck; Jeff.McKinney@erametgroup.com; Morales,Roberto; Bradley Nelson; Boyd, Rochelle

Subject: RE: ICR Enclosure 1 responses

Good Morning John

Any CBI submittal should have been submitted to EPA’s CBI office. I am going to take the CD to the CBI

office immediately.

Conrad Chin

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

From: John Rego [mailto:jrego@JonesDay.com]

Sent: Friday, March 29, 2013 3:31 PM

To: Chin, Conrad

Cc: French, Chu ck; Jeff.McKinney@erametgroup.com

Subject: Re: ICR Enclosure 1 responses

Thanks Conrad. Just to avoid confusion, the CD you received should have included two copies of the

EMI responses

-- one with CBI (Tables 2A, 2B and 2C) and one without CBI.

Ha ve a good weekend.

John

John Rego • Environmental, Health & Safety

901 LAKESIDE AVENUE • CLEVELAND, OHIO 44114

DIRECT 216.586.7542 • FAX 216.579.0212 • JREGO@JONESDAY.COM

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

From: "Chin, Conrad" <Chin.Conrad@epa.gov>

To: "jrego@JonesDay.com" <jrego@JonesDay.com>

Cc: "Jeff.McKinney@erametgroup.com" <Jeff.McKinney@erametgroup.com>, "French, Chuck"

<French.Chuck@epa.gov>

Date: 03/29/2013 03:27 PM

Subject: ICR Enclosure 1 responsesHello John

-

This is to a cknowledge that I received the non

- CBI version of the responses today. Thanks.

Conrad Chin

Sector Policies and Programs Division (D243

- 02)

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

US EPA

Tel. 919

- 541

- 1512

Fax (19

- 541

- 3207

======== ========================================================================== ==

This e

- mail (including any attachments) may contain information that is private, confidential, or

protected by attorney

- client or other privilege. If you received this e

- mail in error, please delete it from

your system without copying it and notify sender by reply e

- mail, so that our records can be corrected.

======== =========================================================================== ==
```

[Federal Register: January 20, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 12)]
[Notices]               
[Page 3210]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr20ja10-45]                         

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

 
Sunshine Act Meeting Notice

Time and Date: Wednesday, January 20, 2010, 2 p.m.-4 p.m.

Place: Hearing Room 420, Bethesda Towers, 4330 East-West Highway, 
Bethesda, Maryland.

Status: Closed to the Public.

Matter To Be Considered

    Compliance Weekly/Monthly Report--Commission Briefing.
    The staff will brief the Commission on various compliance matters.
    For a recorded message containing the latest agenda information, 
call (301) 504-7948.

Contact Person for More Information: Todd A. Stevenson, Office of the 
Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East-West 
Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814 (301) 504-7923.

    Dated: January 12, 2010.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-883 Filed 1-19-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-M
```
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4014 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4014

 To amend the Flood Control Act of 1968 to prohibit the imposition of 
   certain fees for use of developed recreation sites and facilities.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 11, 1994

Mr. Barlow introduced the following bill; which was referred jointly to 
the Committees on Public Works and Transportation and Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Flood Control Act of 1968 to prohibit the imposition of 
   certain fees for use of developed recreation sites and facilities.

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

SECTION 1. RECREATIONAL USER FEES.

    (a) Fees for Use of Developed Recreation Sites and Facilities.--
Section 210 of the Flood Control Act of 1968 (16 U.S.C. 460d-3) is 
amended--
            (1) by striking ``(a) Prohibition on Admission Fees.--'';
            (2) by inserting after the first sentence the following: 
        ``User fees at these lakes and reservoirs shall be collected by 
        officers and employees of the United States only from users of 
        highly developed facilities requiring continuous presence of 
        personnel for maintenance and supervision of the facilities, 
        and shall not be collected for access to or use of water areas, 
        undeveloped or lightly developed shoreland, picnic grounds, 
        overlook sites, scenic drives, or boat launching ramps where no 
        mechanical or hydraulic equipment is provided.''; and
            (3) by striking subsection (b).
    (b) Campsites.--Section 4(b) of the Land and Water Conservation 
Fund Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. 460l-6a(b)) is amended by inserting before 
the last sentence the following: ``At each lake or reservoir under the 
jurisdiction of the Corps of Engineers where camping is permitted, such 
agency shall provide at least 1 primitive campground, containing 
designated campsites, sanitary facilities, and vehicular access, where 
no charge is imposed.''.

                                 <all>
```
11 TH C OURT O F A PPEALS

E ASTLAND

, T EXAS

J UDGMENT

Catarino Mireles Rodriguez, Sr.

, * From the 266 th District Court

of Erath County,

Trial Court No. 10838

Vs. No. 11

- 14

- 00217

- CR * August 18, 2016

The State of Texas

, * Memorandum Opinion by Bailey

, J.

(P anel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

Willson, J. , and Bailey, J. )

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there

is no error in the order below. Therefore, in accordance with this court ’ s

opinion, the order of the trial court is in all things affirmed.
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 409

To amend title II of the Social Security Act to exclude from amounts treated

as wages in applying the earnings test remuneration for teaching in

public elementary or secondary schools.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 5, 1993

Mr. STEARNS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend title II of the Social Security Act to exclude

from amounts treated as wages in applying the earnings

test remuneration for teaching in public elementary or

secondary schools.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 409 IH

1 SECTION 1. EXCLUSION OF REMUNERATION FOR TEACH2 ING IN PUBLIC ELEMENTARY OR SECONDARY

3 SCHOOLS FROM AMOUNTS TREATED AS

4 WAGES IN DETERMINING EXCESS EARNINGS

5 FOR PURPOSES OF EARNINGS TEST.

6 Section 203(f)(5)(C) of the Social Security Act (42

7 U.S.C. 403(f)(5)(C)) is amended—

8 (1) in clause (i), by striking ‘‘or’’ at the end;

9 (2) in clause (ii), by striking ‘‘employer.’’ and

10 inserting ‘‘employer, or’’; and

11 (3) by adding after clause (ii) the following new

12 clause:

13 ‘‘(iii) any remuneration for service per14 formed for an elementary or secondary school

15 (as defined in section 202(d)(7)(C)) in the pub16 lic school system of a State (as defined in sec17 tion 205(c)(2)(C)(iv)) or political subdivision

18 (as defined in section 218(b)(2)) of a State

19 which normally consists of the provision of

20 classroom instruction for not less than 15 hours

21 per week for the school year.’’.

22 SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

23 The amendments made by section 1 shall apply with

24 respect to taxable years beginning on or after January 1,

25 1994.

Æ
----

----

I Informacija

Komisija

----

Euro kursas (1)

2005 m. sausio 5 d.

(2005/C 3/01)

1 euro= 

----

(1)

Šaltinis: valiutų perskaičiavimo kursai paskelbti ECB.

----

----

Konkurenciją ribojančios veiklos ir dominuojančių padėčių patariamojo komiteto nuomonė pateikta 2004 M. birželio 14 d. komiteto 375 susirinkimo metu dėl preliminaraus sprendimo projekto byloje COMP/A.38.549 — Ordre des architectes belges

(2005/C 3/02)

----

----

Konkurenciją ribojančių veiksmų ir dominuojančių padėčių patariamojo komiteto nuomonė pateikta 2004 m. birželio 21 d. įvykusiame 376-ajame posėdyje dėl preliminaraus sprendimo projekto dėl bylos COMP/A.38.549 — Ordre des architectes belges

(2005/C 3/03)

----

----

Bylas nagrinėjančio pareigūno galutinė ataskaita byla COMP/38.549 — Architektų asociacija

(pateikta pagal 2001 m. gegužės 23 d. Komisijos sprendimo 2001/462/EB, EAPB dėl bylas nagrinėjančių pareigūnų įgaliojimų tam tikrose konkurencijos bylose (OL L 162, 2001 6 19, p. 21) 15 straipsnį)

(2005/C 3/04)

Atsižvelgiant į teisę būti išklausytam, dėl sprendimo projekto galima pateikti toliau nurodytas pastabas.

Komisija savo iniciatyva atlikdama tyrimą 2003 m. lapkričio 3 d. nusiuntė Belgijos architektų asociacijai prieštaravimų pareiškimą. Prieštaravimų pareiškime buvo teigiama, kad minimalių nustatyto dydžio ar rekomendacinių honorarų nustatymas prieštarauja konkurencijos taisyklėms.

Su byla asociacijai buvo leista susipažinti 2003 m. gruodžio 2 d.

Buvo nustatytas 10 savaičių terminas, per kurį asociacija turėjo atsakyti į prieštaravimų pareiškimą. Ji savo pastabas pateikė laiku.

Asociacijos manymu, atliekant nagrinėjimą buvo pažeista jos teisė į gynybą, nes jai nebuvo leista susipažinti su dokumentu, kurį Konkurencijos generalinis direktoratas priskyrė prie „slaptų“ dokumentų.

Atlikus patikrinimą paaiškėjo, kad šis dokumentas būtų leidęs nustatyti Komisijai informaciją pateikusį asmenį.

Todėl, atsižvelgiant į konfidencialumo pareigą, kurią tokiais atvejais turi Komisija, slaptumo statusas šiam dokumentui buvo suteiktas pagrįstai.

Asmens, pateikusio informaciją, anonimiškumas turi būti saugomas, jei tas asmuo to prašo ir jei prieš jį gali būti imtasi atsakomųjų veiksmų (Teisingumo Teismas byloje 143/85, Adams v Commission, 34 ff. punktai).

Asociacija pasinaudojo gynybos žodžiu teise 2004 m. vasario 9 d. įvykusiame posėdyje.

Komisijos sprendimo projekte nėra jokių naujų prieštaravimų, išskyrus tuos, kurie buvo išdėstyti asociacijai pateiktame prieštaravimų pareiškime.

Todėl laikau, kad šalių teisė būti išklausytoms pažeista nebuvo.

2004 m. birželio 16 d., Briuselis

Serge DURANDE

----
Exhibit 4.3




 





Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm


We consent to the
reference made to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Part B of the Prospectus
and to the use of our report dated February 21, 2014, in this Registration Statement (Form S-6 No. 333-193242) of Smart Trust,
Rising Interest Rates Hedge Trust, Series 2.


 


/s/ Grant
Thornton LLP


Grant
Thornton LLP


Chicago, Illinois


February 21, 2014
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned officer of Preventia, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby
certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that the Company's Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2011 (the "Report")
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.

                                 /s/ Murray Friedman, DDS
                                 ----------------------
                                 Murray Friedman
                                 Chief Executive Officer
                                 Principal Financial Officer

August 15, 2011
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

KARL A. KUMMER, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D18-1587

)

THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON )

f/k/a THE BANK OF NEW YORK, AS )

SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE TO )

JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., )

AS TRUSTEE FOR THE )

CERTIFICATEHOLDERS OF BEAR )

STEARNS ALT-A TRUST 2005-1 )

MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH )

CERTIFICATES SERIES 2005-1., )

)

Appellee. )

)

Opinion filed September 11, 2019. 

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Manatee 

County; Lon Arend, Judge.

Karl A. Kummer, pro se.

Kimberly S. Mello and Vitaliy Kats of 

Greenberg Traurig, P.A., Tampa, for 

Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

NORTHCUTT, KELLY, and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur.
#### Bobby Joe HARRELSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. P-171.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 28, 1972.

Hugh T. Handley of Timmel, Handley & Campbell, Fort Walton Beach, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Wallace E. Allbritton, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

SPECTOR, Chief Judge.

Appellant was convicted of robbery and now seeks reversal of his conviction and sentence of twenty-five years to run consecutively to a sentence being served in the federal penitentiary. The primary contentions raised on appeal are that the trial court erred in failing to grant a continuance of the trial because of news stories published shortly before trial was to commence; and, secondly, appellant contends the prosecutor’s closing argument to the jury was so inflammatory as to prejudice the jury against the defendant.

We have carefully reviewed the issues raised by appellant in light of the record and after careful consideration of the briefs submitted by respective counsel, it is our view that no reversible error has been demonstrated. The law is well settled that the matter of a continuance lies within the discretion of the trial judge, and his ruling denying a continuance will not be disturbed unless it has been shown that the court abused its discretion. Robinson v. State, 256 So.2d 390 (Fla.App.1972). No abuse of discretion in this regard is reflected on this record. Appellant’s reliance on Oliver v. State, 250 So.2d 888 (Fla.1971), is misplaced. In Oliver, the text of a confession given by the defendant was published in the local newspaper. That did not occur in the instant case. In Oliver, there was virtually no evidence of guilt adduced against the defendant other than the confession which was given wide publicity in the press. In Oliver, the absence of other evidence of guilt enhanced the criti-cality of the role the confession played in obtaining the conviction. No analogous circumstances appear here.

The contention centering on the prosecutor's argument is likewise unavailing. A defendant in a criminal trial cannot be heard to complain that the prosecutor’s argument was inflammatory when the argument constitutes a fair comment on the facts which may be inferred from the *527evidence. In such cases, it is the facts — of which the defendant was the architect— that inflame the jury, not the argument. No error has been shown in this regard. Spencer v. State, 133 So.2d 729 (Fla.1961).

WIGGINTON and CARROLL, DONALD, K., JJ., concur.
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 23-1621

___________________________

United States of America,

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee,

v.

Donna Jenkins,

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant.

 ____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Southern District of Iowa - Central

 ____________

Submitted: July 19, 2023

Filed: August 2, 2023

[Unpublished] 

____________

Before COLLOTON, SHEPHERD, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Donna Jenkins appeals a sentence imposed by the district court1 after Jenkins

pleaded guilty to a drug offense. Her counsel has moved to withdraw and filed a brief

1The Honorable Stephanie M. Rose, Chief Judge, United States District Court

for the Southern District of Iowa.
under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the reasonableness of

the sentence. Upon careful review, we conclude that Jenkins’s sentence was not

unreasonable. There is no indication that the district court overlooked a relevant

factor, gave significant weight to an improper or irrelevant factor, or committed a

clear error of judgment in weighing the relevant factors. See United States v.

Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc). 

We have also independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488

U.S. 75 (1988), and have found no non-frivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we

affirm the judgment, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

______________________________

-2-
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

MIDDLE DISTRICT 

IN THE INTEREST OF: P.N. 

PETITION OF: P.N. 

:

:

:

:

:

No. 839 MAL 2015 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 1st day of June, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED. 

Justice Wecht did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.
EXHIBIT 31.2



CERTIFICATION



I, Marcia J. Miller, certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Energy Focus, Inc.; and
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------



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





| |  | /s/  Marcia J. Miller                         | 
| |  | --------------------------------------------- | 
| |  | Marcia J. Miller                              | 
| |  | Interim Chief Financial Officer and Secretary | 
| |  | Date: April 6, 2015                           |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                      10,266,000
<SECURITIES>                                 9,815,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,870,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                    50,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            26,391,000
<PP&E>                                      25,407,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              11,056,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              45,095,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        8,713,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        10,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  33,581,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                45,095,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            34,449,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               21,576,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             9,078,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                34,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             948,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,501,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (379,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          3,880,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              (909,000)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,971,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .39
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .29
        


</TABLE>
250 La. 254

#### The EMPLOYERS LIABILITY ASSURANCE CORPORATION, Ltd., et al. v. Hubert T. KELLY.

No. 48538.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 20, 1967.

In re: Hubert T. Kelly applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of St. Tammany. 192 So.2d 813.

Writ refused. Since R.S. 23:1311 provides the same remedy exerted by plaintiff herein it is immaterial that this suit is brought as a declaratory judgment action.

SANDERS, J., is of the opinion that a writ should be granted to review the propriety of the declaratory judgment action in this case, a question of importance to the jurisprudence.

SUMMERS, J., is of the opinion that a writ should be granted.
Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCWC-29314 01-AUG-2011 SCWC-29314 10:02 AM IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI ' I
STATE OF HAWAI ' I, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee,
vs. JAMES WAYNE SHAMBLIN aka STEVEN J. SOPER, Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant. (CR. NO. 06-1-0507(4))
STATE OF HAWAI ' I, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee,
vs. JAMES WAYNE SHAMBLIN aka STEVEN J. SOPER, Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant. (CR. NO. 07-1-016(4))
CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

(CR. NO. 06-1-0507(4) and CR.NO. 07-1-0161(4)) ORDER REJECTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI (By: McKenna, J., for the court 1 ) The Application for Writ of Certiorari filed on June 27, 2011 by Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant James Wayne Shamblin aka Steven J. Soper is hereby rejected. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai ' i, August 1, 2011. FOR THE COURT: Matthew S. Kohm for Petitioner on the application /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna Associate Justice

1 Considered by: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, Duffy, and McKenna JJ.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Maurice Peoples, Appellant.

Motion for writ of error coram nobis denied. Present: Denman, J. P., Boomer, Pine, Lawton and Davis, JJ.