alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

No. 13

- 8071

RACHEL EASTMAN, an individual; ACADEMIC SOFTWARE, a New Jersey

Corporation;

AIA ENTERPRISES INC, DBA Chesterfield Inn, a New Jersey Corporation;

BUDGET WINDOWS, a New Jersey Corporation; J OHN PIERSON, an individual,

on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated;

Petitioners

v.

FIRST DATA CORP, a Delaware Corporation;

FIRST DATA MERCHANT SERVICES CORP, a Florida Corporation

ORDER AMENDING OPINION

The opinion issued on Dece mber 4, 2013 is hereby amended to delete the listing of

Nathan M. Edelstein, Esq. as counsel for Plaintiffs

– Petitioners. Mark A. Fisher, Esq.,

Arnold C. Lakind, Esq., and Stephen Skillman represented Plaintiffs

– Petitioners in the

matter before the Cou rt.

For the Court,

Marcia M. Waldron, Clerk

Date: December 12, 2013

Cnd/cc: Nathan M. Edelstein, Esq.

Mark A. Fisher, Esq.

Arnold C. Lakind, Esq.

Stephen Skillman, Esq.

Thomas A. Cunniff, Esq.
III

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. RES. 161

To authorize the printing of ‘‘Memorial Tributes to John Fitzgerald Kennedy,

Jr.’’.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 22, 1999

Mr. DASCHLE (for himself and Mr. LOTT) submitted the following resolution;

which was considered and agreed to

RESOLUTION

To authorize the printing of ‘‘Memorial Tributes to John

Fitzgerald Kennedy, Jr.’’.

Whereas John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Jr. was a notable and influential public figure who was born into and lived his life

in the public sphere;

Whereas John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Jr. comported himself

with modesty and dignity, consistently displaying an admirable grace under pressure and a genuine concern for

the well-being of other persons, in the grand tradition of

his family;

Whereas John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Jr. was a significant figure who ably represented a family dedicated to public

service, and who personally won a place in the heart of

the American people;
2

•SRES 161 ATS

Whereas the nation mourns the tragic loss of John Fitzgerald

Kennedy, Jr., his wife, Carolyn Bessette Kennedy, and

her sister, Lauren Bessette; and

Whereas on July 19, 1999, the Senate expressed its condolences to the Kennedy and Bessette families: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved,

2 SECTION 1. PRINTING OF THE ‘‘MEMORIAL TRIBUTES TO

3 JOHN FITZGERALD KENNEDY, JR.’’.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—There shall be printed as a Senate

5 Document, the book entitled ‘‘Memorial Tributes to John

6 Fitzgerald Kennedy, Jr.’’, prepared under the supervision

7 of the Secretary of the Senate.

8 (b) SPECIFICATIONS.—The document described in

9 subsection (a) shall include illustrations and shall be in

10 such style, form, manner, and binding as is directed by

11 the Joint Committee on Printing after consultation with

12 the Secretary of the Senate.

Æ
Exhibit 99.4







Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm



We hereby consent to the inclusion in this
Amendment No.1 to the Annual Report on Form 40-F (40-F/A) for the year ended December 31, 2021 of AcuityAds Holdings Inc. of our
report dated March 10, 2022 relating to the consolidated financial statements, which appears in Exhibit 99.2 to this Annual Report
on Form 40-F/A.



We also consent to the reference to us under the heading “Interests
of Experts” in the Annual Information Form, which appears in Exhibit 99.1 to this Annual Report on Form 40-F/A.



We also consent to the incorporation
by reference in the Registration Statements on Form F-10 (No. 333-256909) and Form S-8 (No. 333-258901) of AcuityAds Holdings Inc. of
our report dated March 10, 2022 referred to above.



/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP



Chartered Professional Accountants, Licensed Public Accountants
Toronto, Canada
March 10, 2022



PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

PwC Tower, 18 York Street, Suite 2600, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5J
0B2

T: +1 416 863 1133, F: +1 416 365 8215, www.pwc.com/ca



“PwC” refers to PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an Ontario
limited liability partnership.
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14(B) OR RULE 15D-14(B)

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



In connection with the Quarterly Report of El Pollo Loco,
Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 28, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Steven E. Carley, President and Chief Executive
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; and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                           
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                           
|/s/    STEPHEN E. CARLEY                                                   
|Stephen E. Carley President and Chief Executive Officer El Pollo Loco, Inc.



November 10, 2005



This certification is made solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and not for
any other purpose. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to El Pollo Loco, Inc. and will be retained by El Pollo Loco, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16

- 10501 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
JUAN ANTHONY REYES, JR. , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 5:05

- CR

- 83

- 2

Before JONES, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Juan Anthony Reyes, Jr., federal prisoner # 31910

- 177 , seeks our authorization to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) in his appeal of the district court’s denial of his motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) to reduce his sentence for dist ribution of methamphetamine and aiding and abett ing

. See 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B); 18 U.S.C. § 2 . He challenges the district court’s denial of
IFP status and the district court’s certification that his appeal is not taken in

* 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. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED December 21, 2016 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 16-10501 Document: 00513808234 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/21/2016No. 16

- 10501

2 good faith. See Baugh v. Taylor , 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997). An appeal is frivolous if it “lacks an arguable basis in law or fact.” Taylor v. Johnson , 257 F.3d 470, 472 (5th Cir. 2001). Contrary to Reyes’s argument, a district court is not required to reduce a sentence under § 3582(c)(2). See United States v. E vans , 587 F.3d 667, 672

- 73 (5th Cir. 2009). Also, contrary to what Reyes contends, this court may assume that the district court duly considered the § 3553(a) factors, as the court “ was presented with argument concerning the § 3553(a) facto rs.” Id. at 673. And because the record demonstrates that the district court duly considered Reyes’s motion as a whole and explicitly or implicitly considered the § 3553(a) factors, “the district court did not abuse its discretion.” United States
v. Whitebird , 5 5 F.3d 1007, 1010 (5th Cir. 1995). Reyes fails to present a nonfrivolous argument for overturning the district court’s certification decision, which is intertwined with the merits of
the case. See Baugh , 117 F.3d at 302. Accordingly, his IFP motion is DENIED,
and we sua sponte DISMISS his appeal as frivolous. See Taylor , 257 F.3d at 472; Baugh , 117 F.3d at 202; 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2; F ED

. R. A PP

. P. 24(a)(3). Case: 16-10501 Document: 00513808234 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/21/2016
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 Aearo Company I (the 'Company'), on
Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the 'Report'), I,
Michael A. McLain, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:

(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.


                                                 /s/ Michael A. McLain
                                                 Michael A. McLain
                                                 Chairman, President
                                                 and Chief Executive Officer
February 14, 2005


A signed written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Aearo
Company I and will be retained by Aearo Company I and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission and its staff upon request.
BEFORE THE 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

WASHINGTON, DOC. 

Agreements Adopted by the Traffic _ ^ 

Conferences of the International Docket OST- ^^// - ^ ^ ^ ^ 

Air Transport Association 

APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF AGREEMENTS 

BY THE 

INTERNATIONAL AIR TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION 

lATA AGREEMENT APPROVED & IMMUNIZED 

DOCKET OST- Z^t^ • CO ^ f.. ACTION DATE Jl-e^ ^ n " ^ ' ^ 

This approval and grant of antitrust immunity is subject, where apph'cable, 

to conditions previously imposed. 

This action is effective alter 7 days unless a petition is filed under 

14 CFR 385.30 or a review is undertaken on the Department's own motion. 

In view of thsjgreement's noncontrovcrsial nature and the- availability of 

the abov&{lfodbditre, the^-^ y i^^e^nAA^FR 3U3.42 is waived. 

20 April 2011 

Communications with respect to 

this document should be sent to: 

I 

Douglas Lavin |: 

Regional Vice President - North America | 

International Air Transport Association 

1776 K St. N.W. #12* Floor 

Washington, D.C. 20006 

(202)293-9292
IV

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 265

Expressing appreciation to Turkey for offering to provide special forces in

support of Operation Enduring Freedom.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

NOVEMBER 7, 2001

Mr. WYNN submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred

to the Committee on International Relations

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing appreciation to Turkey for offering to provide

special forces in support of Operation Enduring Freedom.

Whereas Turkey has offered to provide special forces in support of Operation Enduring Freedom;

Whereas as the member nation of the North Atlantic Treaty

Organization located closest to Afghanistan, Turkey is

the first Muslim country to offer direct military participation in Operation Enduring Freedom; and

Whereas through this offer Turkey has demonstrated itself to

be a staunch ally and friend of the United States: Now,

therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That Congress expresses its appreciation to
2

•HCON 265 IH

1 Turkey for offering to provide special forces in support

2 of Operation Enduring Freedom.

Æ
#### DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS REGULATION, DIVISION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND TOBACCO, Appellant, v. COST PLUS IMPORTS OF TAMPA BAY, INC., d/b/a Marquis Limousines, Appellee.

No. 86-3232.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Oct. 7, 1987.

*764Louisa E. Hargrett, Dept, of Business Regulation, Tallahassee, for appellant.

David P. Rankin of Freeman & Lopez, P.A., Tampa, for appellee.

SCHEB, Acting Chief Judge.

The state challenges a final order granting appellee’s motion for judgment on the pleadings. We reverse.

This appeal presents the question of whether a transaction in which alcoholic beverages are given without additional charge to persons renting a limousine constitutes a sale of alcoholic beverages pursuant to section 561.01(9), Florida Statutes (1985). The trial court held that it was not a sale within the meaning of section 561.-01(9). We disagree.

Section 561.01(9) defines the term “sale” as follows:

> “Sale” and “sell” mean any transfer of an alcoholic beverage for a consideration, any gift of an alcoholic beverage in connection with, or as a part of, a transfer of property other than an alcoholic beverage for a consideration, or the serving of an alcoholic beverage by a club licensed under the Beverage Law.

The state contends that payment of the rental price of appellee’s limousine also constituted a consideration for the alcoholic beverages. The state argues that in providing alcoholic beverages to customers, appellee was selling alcoholic beverages without a license in violation of section 562.12, Florida Statutes (1985), which makes it unlawful to sell alcoholic beverages without being licensed under chapter 562, Florida Statutes.

While the state acknowledges that appellate courts in Florida have not directly addressed this issue, it urges that the statutory definition of “sale” is sufficiently broad to include appellee’s activities. The decisional law from other jurisdictions supports this construction. *See, e.g., New York State Liquor Authority v. Fuffy’s Pancake House, Ltd,.,*65 A.D.2d 556, 409 N.Y.S.2d 20 (1978); *New York State Liquor Authority v. Sutton Social Club, Inc.,*93 Misc.2d 1024, 403 N.Y.S.2d 443 (1978); *Commonwealth v. Backa,*225 Pa. Super. 224, 310 A.2d 355 (1973); *Winter v. Pratt,*258 S.C. 397, 189 S.E.2d 7 (1972). Appellee has not filed a brief in this matter but has informed the court that the state’s arguments are meritorious.

We agree with the state that the furnishing of alcoholic beverages in connection with the rental of a limousine constitutes a sale within the meaning of section 561.-01(9).

Accordingly, we vacate the trial court’s judgment on the pleadings and remand for further proceedings consistent herewith.

RYDER and THREADGILL, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.1

                      CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                         PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of RAMTRON INTERNATIONAL
CORPORATION for the year ended December 31, 2007, I, William W. Staunton,
III, Chief Executive Officer of RAMTRON INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, hereby
certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

    (1)  such Annual Report on Form 10-K of RAMTRON INTERNATIONAL
         CORPORATION for the year ended December 31, 2007, 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 such Annual Report on Form 10-K of
         RAMTRON INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION for the year ended December 31,
         2007, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
         condition and results of operations of RAMTRON INTERNATIONAL
         CORPORATION as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the
         report.


By:  /s/ William W. Staunton, III
   -------------------------------
   WILLIAM W. STAUNTON, III
   Chief Executive Officer

February 27, 2008

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Ramtron International Corporation and will be retained by Ramtron
International Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

                                    Page-1
<PAGE>
Exhibit 10.1


 


FIRST AMENDMENT


TO THE KEY EMPLOYEE


AWARD PROGRAM


 


First Amendment


 


The Compensation
Committee of the Board of Directors of Reliant Energy, Inc., having
previously established the Key Employee Award Program (the “Program”) under the
Reliant Energy, Inc. 2002 Long Term Incentive Plan does hereby amend the
Program as follows:


 


1.                                       The
following sentence in Section 5 of the Program is deleted:


 


“Key Employees designated to participate in this
Program shall not be eligible to participate in future grants under the Plan
until after this Program expires at the end of the 2006 fiscal year.”


 


2.                                       The
following new sentence shall be added to Section 9:


 


“The Grant Date for awards made pursuant to this First
Amendment shall be August 10, 2005.”


 


3.                                       The
following new sections are added to the Program:


 


“10.  Special
Awards. Pursuant to this First Amendment, additional awards may be made to
the Senior Vice President Generation Operations and the Senior Vice President,
Customer Operations and Information Technology.”


 


“11.  Freeze
and Termination Provisions.  From and
after August 11, 2005, no additional employees shall be permitted to
participate in the Program, no additional Awards of any type shall be granted
under the Program to current participants, and forfeited awards (if any) shall
revert to the Plan.  The Program shall
terminate effective December 31, 2006.”


 


1





















 


This First
Amendment is executed on August 15, 2005, and is effective as of August 10,
2005.


 


 


	
   

  	
  RELIANT ENERGY, INC.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
  /s/ Karen D. Taylor

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
    Karen D.
  Taylor

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
    Senior Vice
  President

  	
   

  



 


2
1 In The 

### Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________ N O . 09
- 21
- 00209
- CR

__________________ DAVID SCOTT ROSE, Appellant
V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the 411th District Court Polk County, Texas Trial Cause No. 27535 (4 Counts)

__________________________________________________________________ ORDER In a single issue on ap peal, Appellant contends that the trial court erred in failing to suppress the video statement of his oral statement to law enforcement where he challenged the voluntariness of the statement, and in failing to give a jury instruction under Articles 38.22 and 38.23

. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. arts. 38.22, 3 8.23.
In Appellant’s motion to suppress in the trial court , he argued that “[a]ny statement defendant might have made was involuntary, and in violatio n of the 5th2 and 14th Amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America, of article I § 10 of the Texas Constitution, and of articles 38.22 and 38.23 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.” After a hearing, the trial court denied the motion

. The record does not reflect that either party requested written findings, and none were made. Section 6 of Article 38.22 requires written findings when the voluntariness of a confession is litigated and the trial court finds the confession to be voluntary and admissible. See Sandoval v. State , No. AP

- 77,081, 2022 Tex. Crim. App. LE X IS 844, at * 33 ( Tex. Crim. App. Dec. 7, 2022) . The statute requires written findings

even if they were not requested by the parties because “ ‘ written findings are require d in all cases concerning voluntariness ’ ” and “ ‘ [t]he statute has no exceptions. ’ ” See id. (quoting Va squez v. State , 411 S.W.3d 918, 920 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013)). On appeal, Appellant does not challenge the failure of the trial court to mak e written findings . That said, we note the wording of the statute requires such findings. Therefore , we abate the appeal and remand this case for the trial court to make written findings in compliance with Article 38.22. See Sandoval v. State , No. AP

77, 081, 2022 Tex. Crim. App. Unpub. LEXIS 114, at *3 (Tex. Crim. App. Mar. 2, 2022); see also Sandoval , 2022 Tex. C rim. App. LEXIS 844, at **33

- 34 . The trial court shall forward its findings within 30 days from the date of this order. The appeal will be reinstated upon our receipt of the trial court’s findings

. ORDER ENTERED December 15, 2022

. PER CURIAM Befo re Golemon, C.J., Kreger and Johnson, J.J.
IV

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 239

Expressing the sense of Congress that schools in the United States should

set aside a sufficient period of time to allow children to pray for,

or quietly reflect on behalf of, the Nation during this time of struggle

against the forces of international terrorism.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 2, 2001

Mr. JONES of North Carolina submitted the following concurrent resolution;

which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of Congress that schools in the United

States should set aside a sufficient period of time to

allow children to pray for, or quietly reflect on behalf

of, the Nation during this time of struggle against the

forces of international terrorism.

Whereas section 4 of title 4, United States Code, establishes

the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag and describes such

Pledge as including the phrase ‘‘one Nation under God,

indivisible, with liberty and justice for all’’;

Whereas in 1954 President Dwight D. Eisenhower, referring

to the reference to God in the Pledge of Allegiance to the

Flag, said that the Nation had reaffirmed ‘‘the transcendence of religious faith in America’s heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those
2

•HCON 239 IH

spiritual weapons which forever will be our country’s

most powerful resource in peace and war’’; and

Whereas President George W. Bush has asked the people of

the United States to pray for those who suffered as a result of the atrocities committed against the United States

on September 11, 2001: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that schools

3 in the United States should set aside a sufficient period

4 of time to allow children to pray for, or quietly reflect on

5 behalf of, the Nation during this time of struggle against

6 the forces of international terrorism.

Æ