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

AMENDED SCHEDULE “A”

Amended as of the 30th day of September, 2004.

Employee

|Salary:         | $177,840 per annum                                                                        
|--------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                |                                                                                           
|Holidays:       | Five weeks per annum                                                                      
|                |                                                                                           
|Entities:       | None                                                                                      
|                |                                                                                           
|Other Benefits: | Medical, dental, AD&D and life insurance coverage provided
      to all senior management.

DYNAMIC OIL & GAS, INC.

Per:

| | /s/ Wayne Babcock    |  |                            
| | -------------------- |  | ---------------------------
| | Authorized Signatory |  |                            
| |                      |  |                            
| | /s/ Michael Bardell  |  | /s/ Donald Umbach          
| | Authorized Signatory |  | Donald K. Umbach (Employee)

---
#### Willie Ramar POWELL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 87-400.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Jan. 28, 1988.

Rehearing Denied March 2, 1988.

Louis Ossinsky, Jr., of Ossinsky, Krol and Hess, Daytona Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, Joseph N. D’Achille, Jr., and Kellie A. Nielan, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed on the authority of *Michigan v. Long,*463 U.S. 1032, 103 S.Ct. 3469, 77 L.Ed.2d 1201 (1983). *See also United*
      *301
      *States v. Castellana,*500 F.2d 325 (5th Cir.1974).

SHARP, C.J., and ORFINGER and COWART, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 214 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 214

  Authorizing the taking of photographs in the Chamber of the United 
                             States Senate.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            November 2, 1999

    Mr. Lott (for himself and Mr. Daschle) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Authorizing the taking of photographs in the Chamber of the United 
                             States Senate.

    Resolved, That paragraph 1 of rule IV of the Rules for the 
Regulation of the Senate Wing of the United States Capitol (prohibiting 
the taking of pictures in the Senate Chamber) be temporarily suspended 
for the sole and specific purpose of permitting photographs to be taken 
between the first and second sessions of the 106th Congress in order to 
allow the Senate Commission on Art to carry out its responsibilities to 
publish a Senate document containing works of art, historical objects, 
and exhibits within the Senate Wing.
    Sec. 2. The Sergeant at Arms of the Senate is authorized and 
directed to make the necessary arrangements to carry out this 
resolution.
                                 <all>
```
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION OF PERIODICFINANCIAL REPORTPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

The undersigned officer of WIIComponents, Inc. (the “Company”) hereby certifies that the Company’squarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31,2007 to which this certification is being furnished as an exhibit (the “Report”),as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable,of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), andthat the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.This certification is provided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350and Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K (“Item 601(b)(32)”) promulgatedunder the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and theExchange Act. In accordance with clause (ii) of Item 601(b)(32), thiscertification (A) shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes ofSection 18 of the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability ofthat section, and (B) shall not be deemed to be incorporated by referenceinto any filing under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to theextent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
| **Date: May 23, 2007** |                                                      |
|------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------|
|                   | /s/  Dale B. Herbst                                       |   |
|                   | Name:  Dale B. Herbst                                     |
|                   | Title:  Chief Financial Officer,  Treasurer and Secretary |

 

1

----
106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. J. RES. 41

JOINT RESOLUTION

Providing for the appointment of Sheila E. Widnall as a

citizen regent of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That, in accordance with section 5581 of the Revised Stat4 utes of the United States (20 U.S.C. 43), the vacancy on

5 the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution, in

6 the class other than Members of Congress, occurring by

7 reason of the expiration of the term of Frank A. Shrontz

8 of Washington on May 4, 2000, is filled by the appoint9 ment of Sheila E. Widnall of Massachusetts. The appoint10 ment is for a term of 6 years and shall take effect on

11 May 5, 2000.

Passed the Senate April 12, 2000.

Attest:

Secretary.
106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. J. RES. 41

JOINT RESOLUTION

Providing for the appointment of Sheila E. Widnall

as a citizen regent of the Board of Regents ofthe Smithsonian Institution.
#### UNITED STATES of America ex rel. Domenico BARILLA, Relator-Appellant, v. Byron H. UHL, District Director of Immigration, at the Port of New York, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 156.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Jan. 2, 1940.

Sidney R. Snitkin, of New York City (Samuel J. Mandel, of New York City, of counsel), for relator-appellant.

John T. Cahill, U. S. Atty., of New York City (Noel Hemmendinger, Asst. U. S. Atty., of New York City, of counsel), for appellee.

Before SWAN,,AUGUSTUS N. HAND, and PATTERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Order affirmed on the opinion below, D. C., 27 F.Supp. 746.
|   | (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. |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|     March      24, 2009 |           /s/ Jeffrey Jacobson                                        |
|---------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                        | Jeffrey      JacobsonChairman,      President and Chief Executive Officer(Principal      Executive Officer)   |
#### James R. STEVENS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 87-1188.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

March 10, 1988.

Albert C. Simmons, Cedar Key, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Ellen D. Phillips, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed on the authority of *Heuring v. State,*513 So.2d 122 (Fla.1987) and *Beasley v. State,*518 So.2d 917 (Fla.1988).

COWART and DANIEL, JJ., concur.

COBB, J., concurring specially with opinion.

COBB, Judge,

concurring specially:

In *Heuring v. State,*513 So.2d 122 (Fla.1987), the Florida Supreme Court, for the first time, interpreted section 90.404(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1985),1 to include the issue of credibility of a child victim of sexual battery as a material fact in issue that may render *Williams*
      *2*
      **rule evidence admissible; m addition, the court relaxed the strict standard of similarity required for admissibility under *Williams*when the offenses were committed within a familial context. In other words, the latter context supplies the uniqueness or “fingerprint” characteristic necessary for sufficient, similarity under the *Williams*rule. In child molestation cases wherein there is no familial or custodial situation, prior instances of sexual abuse of children would still be inadmissible absent a unique similarity between the crimes. *See Heuring*513 So.2d at 125.

The Florida Supreme Court accepted jurisdiction in *Beasley v. State,*503 So.2d 1347 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987), *decision approved by*518 So.2d 917 (Fla.1988), on the basis of conflict with prior opinions of that court, which establishes that it was necessary for the court to enlarge on the prior bases for the admissibility of *Williams*rule evidence set forth in section 90.404(2)(a) in order to affirm Beasley’s conviction. The dissent in the district court opinion in *Beasley*had concluded that such statutory expansion was a legislative concern.

The instant case involves offenses committed within a familial context; therefore, based on *Heuring,*I concur in the affirmance.

. Section 90.404(2)(a) provides:

> Similar fact evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is admissible when relevant to prove a material fact in issue, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident, but it is inadmissible when the evidence is relevant solely to prove bad character or propensity.

. *Williams v. State,*110 So.2d 654 (Fla.), *cert. denied,*361 U.S. 847, 80 S.Ct. 102, 4 L.Ed.2d 86 (1959).
**Exhibit      32**

**CERTIFICATIONS      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

| (1)   | The                Report fully complies, in all material respects, 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 result of operations of the                Company                for the period certified. |
|-----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |                                                          |              |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------|
|        | By:                                                 | /s/ Ramesh Akella |
|   | Ramesh              Akella                                    |
|   | President,                Chief Strategy Officer and Director |

----
#### Sheryl Diane Seiler COLLIER v. Wayne Ashton COLLIER.

No. 88-C-0125.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 12, 1988.

In re Collier, Wayne Ashton; applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. CA-7801; Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court, Div. “F”, No. 77-10015.

Prior report: La.App., 516 So.2d 1157.

Denied. Result correct.
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 5 (Monday, January 9, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 1039]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-72]

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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 64

[WC Docket No. 10-191; Report No. 2939]

Internet-Based Telecommunications Relay Service Numbering

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule; petition for reconsideration.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, a Petition for Reconsideration (Petition) 
has been filed in the Commission's Rulemaking proceeding concerning 
rules that govern access to toll-free numbers by users of Internet-
based Telecommunications Relay Services (iTRS).

DATES: Oppositions to the Petition must be filed by January 24, 2012. 
Replies to an opposition must be filed February 3, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Heather Hendrickson, Wireline 
Competition Bureau, (202) 418-1580.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's 
document, Report No. 2939, released December 23, 2011. The full text of 
this document is available for viewing and copying in Room CY-B402, 445 
12th Street, SW., Washington, DC or may be purchased from the 
Commission's copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc. (BCPI) (1-
(800) 378-3160). The Commission will not send a copy of this Notice 
pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), 
because this Notice does not have an impact on any rules of particular 
applicability.
    Subject: Internet-Based Telecommunications Relay Service Numbering, 
published at 76 FR 59551, September 27, 2011, in WC Docket No. 10-191, 
and published pursuant to 47 CFR 1.429(e). See 1.4(b)(1) of the 
Commission's rules (47 CFR 1.4(b)(1)).
    Number of Petitions Filed: 1.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Office of the Managing Director.
[FR Doc. 2012-72 Filed 1-6-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
```
T/'

P.O. BOX 12308, CAPITOL STATION

AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711

PENALTY

STATE

0FF8C

FOR

1)\XYW^

Tl

BUS1NB

RE: WR-48,100-03

REGINALD WAYNE GOUDEAU

STRINGFELLOW UNIT - TDC #865774

_1200..FMi655

ROSHARON, TX 77583

/^% ^ LUU

HTNEV BOWE

0 2 1M * _ - - 

0004279596 MAR 1 9 2

MAILED FROM ZIP CODE 78

REF
NO. 07-08 -002 5-CV IN THE CO UR T OF APPEA LS FO R THE S EVEN TH D ISTRI CT O F TEXAS

AT AM AR ILLO PAN EL C MA RC H 13, 2 008

_________

_________

_________

___ PEGG Y G. PENNEY, APPE LLA NT

V. DE BORAH M AN GU M, APP ELLEE

_________

_________

_________

______ FRO M T HE 17 T H DI ST RI CT COU RT OF T AR RA NT COU NT Y; NO . 017 -2 20803- 06; H ON ORABLE FR ED W . D AVIS , J UD GE

_________

_________

_________

____ Bef ore QUINN, C.J., and HANCOCK and PIRT LE, JJ. ON A BA TEMENT A ND R EMA ND Appel lan t, Peg gy

G. Penne y , app eal s fr om a j udg ment g ra nti ng appel lee an easemental ong appel lan t’ s rea l e st a te . The appel lat e r ecord w as due i n thi s c ase by Janua ry 25, 2008. The cl er k’ s re cord w as filed on Janua ry 28. The cour t re por ter did not file a r epor

ter ’s r ecord pr ior

to Janua ry

25 a nd has not req uest ed an extens ion to file the re por ter ’s r ecord. This co urt s ent t he c our t repor ter a l e tt er date d F ebr uar

y 8, 2008 requesting informa tion a s to the statu s of the rep orter’s rec o rd a nd inf ormin g the court repo rter of

t he a v ailability of

forms f or requesting an extension if ne ede d. T he co urt2

repo rter w as to inform this court of t he statu s o n or b efore Februa ry 1 9, 200 8. As of

this dat e, th is court has no t had any comm unica tion f rom th e cou rt reporter. Acc or din g ly , w e abate this appeal and remand t he c ause to t he tr ial co urt for further pr oceed ing s. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 35. 3(c). Upon rem and , the t rial cou rt shall imm edia tely caus e not ic e of a hear ing to be g iv en and, thereafter, co nducta he ar ing to deter mine the fo llo wing: 1. w hether

the re por

ter ’s re cord can re asona bly be fil ed i n a mann er that does not fur

ther del ay the pr osec uti on of this appeal or hav e the pr act ic al eff ectof depr iv ing Penne y of her r ig ht t o appea l, and 2. w hether

an a lt er nate or

su bst it ute repor

ter sh oul d or

ca n be appoi nted to com plete the reco rd in a time ly man ner. T he trial court shall cause the he aring to be tran scribed. In add ition, th e trial court shall (1) e x ecut e f indings of fact an d con clusions o f law add ressing the foregoing issues, (2 ) caus e a s uppl emental cl er k’ s record to be dev elo ped contai nin g its findi ng s o f f actand conc lus ion s o f law

and all orders it may

iss ue as a resul t of i ts hear ing i n thi s mat ter , and (3 ) caus e a re por

ter ’s r ecord to be dev elo ped t ra nsc ri bin g the ev ide nce and arg uments pr esent ed at the aforementi oned hear ing , if any . The tr ial cour t shal l th e n f ile the suppl emental c le rk’s record and any r epor ter ’s r ecord transc ri bin g the hear ing w it h the cl er k o f this co urt on or before Apr il 25, 2008. Shoul d further ti me be needed by the t ri al cour t t o per form thes e tas ks , t he s ame mustbe req uest ed befor e Apr il 25, 2008. It is so order ed. Per C ur iam
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-6814

JIMMIE JOHNSON,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

EARL BESHEARS, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE

STATE OF MARYLAND,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge.

(CA-94-39-JFM)

Submitted: January 23, 1996 Decided: February 9, 1996

Before WIDENER, HALL, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jimmie Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr.,

Attorney General, Mary Jennifer Landis, Assistant Attorney General,

Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying

relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1988) petition. We have reviewed

the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. Johnson v. Beshears, No. CA-94-39-JFM (D. Md. Apr. 14,

1995). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### Charles Edward BOATMAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. BH-424.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 1, 1986.

Michael E. Allen, Public Defender, and P. Douglas Brinkmeyer, Asst. Public Defender, Tallahassee, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Kurt L. Barch, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the lower court’s ordering appellant to pay restitution in conjunction with a prison sentence but remand to the trial court to amend the judgment to reflect the amount of restitution to be paid,

:BOOTH, C.J., and SHIVERS and WIG-GINTON, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1


                    PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATION

In connection with the annual report on Form 10-K of Presstek, Inc. (the
"Company") for the year ending January 3, 2004 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Edward
J. Marino, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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 the Company.


                                                  /s/ Edward J. Marino
                                          --------------------------------------
                                                    Edward J. Marino
                                          President and Chief Executive Officer
                                               (Principal Executive Officer)

Date: March 18, 2004
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                       1,983,958
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  221,676
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,205,634
<PP&E>                                       3,406,411
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,649,475
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,389,226
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          159,454
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   9,229,772
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,389,226
<SALES>                                        992,807
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,844,586
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,414,924
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                429,662
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            429,662
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   429,662
<EPS-BASIC>                                      14.42
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    14.42


</TABLE>