alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In re AMENDMENT TO FLORIDA RULES OF JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION-RULE 2.125(b)(1).

No. 74234.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June 1, 1989.

PER CURIAM.

It appearing desirable to have legislative representation upon the Judicial Council of Florida, rule 2.125(b)(1) of the Florida Rules of Judicial Administration is hereby amended to add subsections (I) and (J) as follows:

> (I) the President of the Florida Senate or a senator designated by the President;

> (J) the Speaker of the Florida House of Representatives or a representative designated by the Speaker.

This amendment shall be effective immediately. Any person wishing to file a comment concerning this amendment shall have thirty days from the date hereof within which to do so.

EHRLICH, C.J., and OVERTON, McDonald, shaw, barkett, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur.
##### 



1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of AMH Holdings, Inc.;
 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 registrant as of, and for, the periods
presented in this report;
 4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure
that material information relating to the registrant, 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 registrant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; andc)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal
quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report)
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrants internal control over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants
auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):
 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 registrants ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting.
 Date:  May 15, 2007
    By:
    /s/ D. Keith LaVanwayD. Keith LaVanwayVice President  Finance,
Chief Financial Officer,
Treasurer and Secretary
(Principal Financial Officer and
Principal Accounting Officer)
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 342 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 342

   Designating the week beginning September 17, 2000, as ``National 
          Historically Black Colleges and Universities Week''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 25, 2000

Mr. Thurmond submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
                     the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   Designating the week beginning September 17, 2000, as ``National 
          Historically Black Colleges and Universities Week''.

Whereas there are 105 historically black colleges and universities in the United 
        States;
Whereas black colleges and universities provide the quality education so 
        essential to full participation in a complex, highly technological 
        society;
Whereas black colleges and universities have a rich heritage and have played a 
        prominent role in American history;
Whereas black colleges and universities have allowed many underprivileged 
        students to attain their full potential through higher education; and
Whereas the achievements and goals of historically black colleges and 
        universities are deserving of national recognition: Now, therefore, be 
        it
    Resolved, That the Senate--
            (1) designates the week beginning September 17, 2000, as 
        ``National Historically Black Colleges and Universities Week''; 
        and
            (2) requests that the President issue a proclamation 
        calling on the people of the United States and interested 
        groups to observe the week with appropriate ceremonies, 
        activities, and programs to demonstrate support for 
        historically black colleges and universities.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32.1  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES - OXLEY ACT OF 2002   In connection with the quarterly report of World Trophy Outfitters, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008, Mathew Evans hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes - Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of his knowledge:  1. The quarterly report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  2. The information contained in the quarterly report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.   October 20, 2008 /s/ Mathew Evans (Date) Mathew Evans Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Executive and Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
From: Hofmeister, Art

Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013 4:44 PM

To: 'Baldyga, Lyndsey'

Cc: Forney, Katy; Ceron, Heather

Subject: Additional Info

Hi, Lyndsey:

Can you give us an idea of when we can expect to receive the following information?

1) The proposed apportioning methodology for the STG; and

2) Whether the proposed GHG BACT limits for the CTs/HRSGs are acceptable (for including periods 

of startup/shutdown)?

Ideally, we would like to have it by Sept. 9th so that we can keep to our current schedule to go to public 

notice by Sept. 13th.

Thanks.

Art Hofmeister

Environmental Engineer

Air Permits Section

EPA Region 4

(404) 562-9115
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

JESUS ALBERTO RODRIGUEZALVARADO, a.k.a. Jesus Albe

Rodriguez-Alvarado,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 14-10536

D.C. No. 2:14-cr-00634-GMS

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

G. Murray Snow, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted July 21, 2015** 

Before: CANBY, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges. 

 Jesus Alberto Rodriguez-Alvarado appeals from the district court’s

judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 37-month sentence for

reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Pursuant to Anders v.

FILED

JUL 28 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Rodriguez-Alvarado’s counsel has filed a brief

stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as

counsel of record. We have provided Rodriguez-Alvarado the opportunity to file a

pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has

been filed.

Rodriguez-Alvarado waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence. 

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80

(1988), discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the waiver. See United

States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009). We accordingly dismiss

the appeal. See id. at 988. 

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

DISMISSED.

 

2 14-10536
#### Raymond Charles JAQUES, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Harold BRAY, Sheriff, County of Jefferson, State of Colorado, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 81SA29.

Supreme Court of Colorado.

May 10, 1982.

Ronald W. Servis, Denver, for petitioner-appellant.

J. D. MacFarlane, Atty. Gen., Richard F. Hennessey, Deputy Atty. Gen., Mary J. Mullarkey, Sol. Gen., Clement P. Engle, Nathan B. Coats, Asst. Attys. Gen., Denver, for respondent-appellee.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from the trial court’s denial of a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to the Uniform Criminal Extradition Act. Section 16-19-101 *et seq.,*C.R.S.1973 (1978 Repl.Vol. 8). The only issue before us is whether the Colorado governor’s warrant is invalid because it was not signed by him, but by the lieutenant governor.

Section 16-19-108, C.R.S.1973 (1978 Repl. Vol. 8) provides that the governor’s warrant must be signed by the “governor.” The term governor, as defined by section 16-19-102(2), includes “any person performing the functions of Governor by authority of the law of this state.” The authority of the lieutenant governor to act on behalf of the governor is established by Article IV, Section 13(5) of the. Colorado Constitution.

It was the appellant’s burden of proof to overcome the presumption that the lieutenant governor was acting pursuant to her authority and was properly exercising the incidents of her office when she signed the governor’s warrant. *Tenorio v. Cronin,*193 Colo. 295, 565 P.2d 932 (1977). *See also Brown v. Sharkey,*106 R.I. 714, 263 A.2d 104 (1970); *Ex parte Grooms,*468 S.W.2d 817 (Tex.Ct.App.1971). The appellant offered no evidence to overcome this presumption. We, therefore, find that the appellant’s claim that the warrant was invalid to be without merit.

The judgment is affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 308 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 308

    Congratulating International House on the occasion of its 75th 
                              anniversary.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 18, 2000

 Mr. Gorton (for himself, Mr. Moynihan, and Mr. Rockefeller) submitted 
 the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the 
                               Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
    Congratulating International House on the occasion of its 75th 
                              anniversary.

Whereas International House at 500 Riverside Drive, New York City, was founded 
        in 1924 as a residence and program center for graduate students and 
        trainees from all nations;
Whereas International House was created to allow diverse peoples from around the 
        world the opportunity to live together in a shared cultural and 
        intellectual environment, and enable its residents and members to 
        understand and better appreciate people of divergent backgrounds; and
Whereas in the last 75 years International House has grown from this fundamental 
        concept to become an internationally recognized institution, serving as 
        a vital resource for the global academic, business, professional, and 
        artistic communities: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate commends International House for its 
distinguished service to the people of the United States and all 
citizens of the world in the promotion of global understanding and 
world peace and extends congratulations to International House on the 
occasion of its 75th anniversary.
                                 <all>
```
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-31474 Summary Calendar

WILLIE MARTIN,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

BURL CAIN, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary Respondent-Appellee.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

(99-CV-3233)

-------------------- June 18, 2001

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, AND BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Petitioner Willie Martin, Louisiana prisoner # 111528, appeals

the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for a writ of habeas

corpus. He argues that he was deprived of his right to a fair

trial by being compelled to appear at his jury trial wearing

identifiable prison clothing, and that his trial attorney was

ineffective for failing to make a timely objection to such attire.

Martin first argues that both the state habeas court and the

district court denied relief under an improper application of

Estelle v. Williams

, 425 U.S. 501 (1976), because they failed to2

consider testimony presented at an evidentiary hearing before the

trial court in 1997. We reject this argument. An evidentiary

hearing was or dered by the Louisiana Supreme Court to determine

issues pertaining to Martin’s ineffective assistanc e of counsel

claim. S ee State ex rel. Martin v. State

, 679 So. 2d 414, 414 (La.

1996). The evidence adduced at the hearing had no bearing on

Martin’s other claims for post-conviction relief. The state habeas

court proceedings did not involve an unreasonable app lication of

clearly established federal law and did not result in a decision

based on an unreasonable determination of the facts. 28 U.S.C. §

2254(d). Moreover, considering the overwhelming evidence in the

record that supports the jury verdict, error at the trial level

would have been harmless. S ee Brecht v. Abrahamson

, 507 U.S. 619,

637-38 (1993). The district court did not clearly err in not

considering testimony from the evidentiary hearin g on the fair

trial issue. See Beazley v. Johnson , 242 F.3d 248, 255 (5th Cir.

2001).

We next address Martin’s argument that he received ineffective

assistance of counsel when his trial attorney failed to make a

timely objection to Martin’s prison garb. Again, when considered

in the lig ht of the overwhelming evidence supporting the jury

verdict, Martin cannot show prejudice even if we assume a rguendo

that he received ineffective assistance of counsel on this claim.

See Strickland v. Washington , 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984).

AFFIRMED.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 83 Referred in House (RFH)]

  2d Session
S. CON. RES. 83

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 29, 2000

          Referred to the Committee on International Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
 Commending the people of Iran for their commitment to the democratic 
    process and positive political reform on the occasion of Iran's 
                        parliamentary elections.

Whereas the Islamic Republic of Iran held parliamentary elections on February 
        18, 2000;
Whereas more than 75 percent of the approximately 39,000,000 eligible voters 
        cast ballots in the elections;
Whereas preliminary results indicate that reformers have won a parliamentary 
        majority, freeing Iran's parliament, the Majlis, of hard-line domination 
        for the first time since the 1979 Iranian revolution;
Whereas reformers won elections despite concerted efforts by hard-line Iranian 
        clergy to ban reformist forces from the ballot; and
Whereas the elections show a clear preference by a majority of Iranian voters 
        for democracy, rule of law, and improved relations with Western nations: 
        Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That Congress--
            (1) commends the people of Iran for their commitment to the 
        democratic process;
            (2) congratulates reformist parliamentarians on their 
        recent electoral victory;
            (3) reaffirms the desire of the United States to see free, 
        democratic political development, the restoration of the rule 
        of law, and full civil and political rights for all Iranians; 
        and
            (4) calls on the Government of Iran to rejoin the community 
        of nations and renounce terrorism, opposition to the Middle 
        East peace process, and the development and acquisition of 
        weapons of mass destruction.

            Passed the Senate February 24, 2000.

            Attest:

                                                    GARY SISCO,

                                                             Secretary.
```
EXHIBIT 32.1



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


            In connection with the Quarterly Report of SmartPros Ltd. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Allen S. Greene, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant tO ss. 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.

            A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the
Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its
staff upon request.



/S/  ALLEN S. GREENE
------------------------
     Allen S. Greene
Chief Executive Officer

November 15, 2004
exv10w1



 






	 	 	 	 	 



Exhibit 10.1




Remote Knowledge, Inc.

Summary of Director Compensation





At the present time, all of our outside, non-employee, directors are granted 40,000 options per
year of the three-year terms for which they are elected. At each annual meeting, the newly elected
Class A, B, or C directors will receive the new grant upon their election with an exercise price
based on the market price for our common shares on the date of election. The chairman of our audit
committee receives an additional 20,000 options per year as additional compensation for the
services in that position. All of the options vest at the rate of 10,000 options per quarter
served (in arrears). Should a director resign during his term of office, all unvested options
expire. The chairman of our audit committee’s additional options also vest at the rate of 5,000
per quarter in arrears, also commencing on the date of his election.
EXHIBIT 32.1

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

In
connection with the Quarterly Report of SmartPros Ltd. (the Company) on Form
10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), we, the undersigned,
Allen S. Greene, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Stanley P.
Wirtheim, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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, as amended; and

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

A
signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon
request.

Date: November 10, 2009

| |                               | 
| | ----------------------------- | 
| | /s/ ALLEN S. GREENE           | 
| |                               | 
| | Allen S. Greene              
| | Chief Executive Officer      
| | (Principal Executive Officer)
| |                              
| | /s/STANLEY P. WIRTHEIM       
| |                               | 
| | Stanley P. Wirtheim          
| | Chief Financial Officer      
| | (Principal Financial Officer)

---