alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CERTIFICATIONS UNDER SECTION 906

Pursuant  to  section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and
(b)  of  section  1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of the
undersigned officers of Telecommunication Products, Inc., a Colorado corporation
(the  "Company"),  does  hereby  certify,  to  such  officer's  knowledge, that:

The  Annual  Report for the year ended March 31, 2004 (the "Form 10-KSB") of the
Company  fully  complies  with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities  Exchange  Act  of  1934,  and  the information contained in the Form
10-KSB  fairly  presents,  in all material respects, the financial condition and
results  of  operations  of  the  Company.

Dated:  July  19,  2004

                    /s/  Robert  C.  Russell
                    ------------------------
                    Robert  C.  Russell,  Chief  Executive  Officer

Dated:  July  19,  2004

                    /s/   Marcia  A.  Pearlstein
                    ----------------------------
                    Marcia  A.  Pearlstein,  Interim  Chief  Financial  Officer
II

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 587

To amend the National Trails System Act to designate the Old Spanish

Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish Trail for potential

inclusion into the National Trails System, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 22 (legislative day, MARCH 16), 1995

Mr. CAMPBELL (for himself, Mr. BROWN, Mr. BENNETT, Mr. REID, Mr.

BRYAN, Mr. BINGAMAN, Mr. DOMENICI, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, and Mr.

HATCH) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

A BILL

To amend the National Trails System Act to designate the

Old Spanish Trail and the Northern Branch of the Old

Spanish Trail for potential inclusion into the National

Trails System, and for other purposes.

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

4 Section 5(c) of the National Trails System Act (16

5 U.S.C. 1244(c)) is amended by adding at the end the fol6 lowing new paragraph:
2

S 587 IS

1 ‘‘(36) The Old Spanish Trail, beginning in

2 Santa Fe, New Mexico, proceeding through Colorado

3 and Utah, and ending in Los Angeles, California,

4 and the Northern Branch of the Old Spanish Trail,

5 beginning near Espanola, New Mexico, proceeding

6 through Colorado, and ending near Crescent Junc7 tion, Utah.’’

Æ
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4650-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2024-0001]

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Washington (FEMA-4650-DR), dated March 29, 2022, and related determinations.

# DATES:

This change occurred on January 19, 2024.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Lance E. Davis, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

This action terminates the appointment of Toney L. Raines as Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Deanne Criswell,

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. 2024-02363 Filed 2-5-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 17-2070

___________________________

Brad Stephen Francis; Christine Carol Francis

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiffs - Appellants

v.

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City

____________

 Submitted: December 28, 2017

Filed: January 3, 2018

[Unpublished]

____________

Before BENTON, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.
Brad and Christine Francis appeal from the order of the District Court

1

dismissing their civil suit challenging their liability for federal taxes and penalties

under the Internal Revenue Code.

After careful review, we conclude that dismissal was proper for the reasons

explained by the district court. See LeMay v. U.S. Postal Serv., 450 F.3d 797, 799

(8th Cir. 2006) (standard of review). The judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

1The Honorable Greg Kays, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the

Western District of Missouri.

-2-
Exhibit



Exhibit 10.2



MARKIT GROUP LIMITED
SECOND AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT
PURSUANT TO THE EMPLOYMENT RIGHTS ACT 1996


Amendment dated as of January 24, 2017 (this “Amendment”) to the Contract of Employment dated as of July 1, 2014 (the “Current Agreement”) between Markit Group Limited (the “Company”) and Lance Uggla (“Executive”), as amended as of March 19, 2016.


W I T N E S S E T H


WHEREAS, the Company and Executive have agreed to amend the terms and conditions of the continued employment of Executive by the Company.


NOW THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby by acknowledged by each of the parties, the Company and Executive hereby agree as follows:


		
	1.
	AMENDMENTS 



(a)    Clause 2.3 and clause 9.1.3 of the Current Agreement are hereby deleted in their entirety.


(b)    Clause 2.4 of the Current Agreement is hereby renumbered as clause 2.3, and all other references to clause 2.4 in the Current Agreement will be read to refer to clause 2.3.




		
	2.
	EFFECTIVENESS OF AMENDMENT




This Amendment will become effective as of December 1, 2016.


***********


[Remainder of Page Left Intentionally Blank]
















In witness whereof this amendment has been signed as a deed and delivered on the date written below. 




Signed as a deed by:




/s/ Lance Uggla                01/24/2017
____________________________        __________________________
Lance Uggla    Date




In the presence of:




/s/ Christopher McLoughlin            01/24/2017
_________________________        ________________________
Name / Signature                Date




Signed on behalf of Markit Group Limited by: 




/s/ Christopher McLoughlin            01/24/2017
_________________________        ________________________
Name / Signature                Date




2
EX-10.4(C)



 Exhibit 10.4(c) 

June 1, 2016 
 Aventis Asset Management, LLC 

2150 E. Lake Cook Road, Suite 720 
 Buffalo Grove, IL 60089 

Attention: Mr. Steve Hwang 
 Re: Management Agreement
Renewals 
 Dear Mr. Hwang: 
 We are
writing with respect to your management agreements concerning the commodity pools to which reference is made below (the “Management Agreements”). We are extending the term of the Management Agreements through June 30, 2017 and all
other provisions of the Management Agreements will remain unchanged. 
  

	 	•	 	 Commodity Advisors Fund LP. 



 

	 	•	 	 MB Master Fund L.P. 



 

	 	•	 	 Institutional Futures Portfolio L.P. 



 

	 	•	 	 MSSB Spectrum Strategic L.P. 



 

	 	•	 	 Managed Futures Premier Aventis II L.P. 



 

	 	•	 	 MSMF Custom Solutions Fund L.P. 



Please acknowledge receipt of this modification by signing one copy of this letter and returning it to the attention of
Mr. Patrick T. Egan at 522 Fifth Avenue – 7th Floor, New York, NY 10036 or fax to 866-428-9026. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 212-296-6808 or contact Jack Yuen at
212-296-1320. 
  

			
	Very truly yours,
	
	CERES MANAGED FUTURES LLC
		
	By:	 	/s/ Patrick T. Egan
		 	Patrick T. Egan
		 	President and Director

  

			
	AVENTIS ASSET MANAGEMENT, LLC
		
	By:	 	/s/ Steve Hwang


			
	Print Name:	 	  Steve Hwang, COO
	PE/kg
#### Aaron GAINES, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 27493.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 4, 1955.

Firman H. Smith, County Atty., Brown-wood, and Leon Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

J. W. Reid and Theo. Ash, Abilene, for appellant.

MORRISON, Presiding Judge.

Appellant contends that he was forced to proceed to trial without the benefit of counsel.

From the statements of fact of the trial on the merits and the hearing on the motion for new trial, the following facts are apparent. The appellant was convicted in June of 1954 in the County Court of Brown County and assessed a fine and jail sentence. Appellant appeared before the judge of said court in order to enter into an appeal bond from such conviction and at the same time plead guilty to another offense, and his punishment was assessed at a fine. At this time a conversation took place between the appellant, his counsel, the county attorney and the judge, in which the instant case was discussed. The appellant’s counsel told the county attorney that the search warrant in the instant case was no good and told the appellant that if the county attorney found out that the search warrant was bad he would not try the case. Appellant testified that he relied upon this statement of his attorney and made no effort to employ counsel or follow the progress of his case.

Two notices were published in a Brown-wood newspaper stating that on September 15, 1954, there would be a call of the docket of the County Court of Brown County. The appellant did not appear on September 15, and his case was set for October 8, 1954. Appellant did not appear on said date, and the court sent the officers for him. When the appellant arrived in court he was given “five or ten minutes” to secure the services of an attorney, but, though he telephoned two attorneys, he was unable to secure their assistance, and the case then proceeded to trial.

Appellant’s counsel would have us hold that his statement to appellant “that if the *95county attorney found out the search warrant was bad he wouldn’t try the case” relieved the appellant of all responsibility to employ counsel in his own behalf. We are not prepared to so hold. Appellant’s attorney told his client, in effect, “I don’t think the State can convict you and if the county attorney comes to the same conclusion he will not try your case,” and nothing more. This did not relieve the appellant of the responsibility of employing counsel and making an effort to determine when his case would be tried.

In connection with appellant’s first contention concerning the legality of the presence of the officers upon his premises and the admissibility of what they saw there before entering appellant’s home, attention is directed to the holdings of this Court in Crowell v. State, 147 Tex.Cr.R. 299, 180 S.W.2d 343, and Eversole v. State, 106 Tex.Cr.R. 567, 294 S.W. 210.

Remaining convinced that we properly disposed of this cause originally, appellant’s motion for rehearing is overruled.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

KAREEM FARRELL,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D18-1564 

[August 16, 2018]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.800 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County; Gary L. Sweet, Judge; 

L.T. Case No. 2010CF002086 A.

Kareem Farrell, Wewahitchka, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee. 

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

WARNER, MAY and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
-84 -82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72

 34

 36

 38

 40

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★ ▲ ▲ ▲

▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 100

18 12 06 00

06/18

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 18 Jun 06

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.86 N 77.06 W Meters AGL
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 20
- 0608 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. KAYLA DAWN PENNINGTON,

Defendant and Appellant .

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including August 11 , 2021 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 6 2021

07/06/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0608
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           2,080
<SECURITIES>                                    53,626
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,024
<ALLOWANCES>                                       225
<INVENTORY>                                      1,108
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                60,226
<PP&E>                                           1,546
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  64,297
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,902
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    64,297
<SALES>                                          3,959
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 3,959
<CGS>                                            2,866
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,866
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                12,179
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (33)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (8,800)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (8,800)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.18)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.18)


</TABLE>
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO . A

- 3576

- 15T3

STATE OF NEW JERSEY,

Plaintiff

- Respondent,

v.

VINCENT D. BANKS, a/k/a RYHIM JOHNSON,

Defendant

- Appellant.

___________________________________

Submitted November 15, 2017

– Decided

Before Judges Fuentes, Koblitz and Manahan.

On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Bergen County, Indictment No.

13

- 10

- 1416.

Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, attorney for appellant (Rebecca Gindi, Assistant Deputy Public Defender, of counsel and on the

b rief s ).

Christopher S. Porrino, Attorney General, attorney for respondent (Sarah E. Ross, Deputy Attorney General, of counsel and on the brief).

PER CURIAM NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court

. "

A lthough it is posted on the internet
, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited

. R. 1:36

- 3.

November 29, 20172 A

- 3576

- 15T3

We have been advised prior to argument that this matter has

been amicably adjusted and the parti es have stipulated to the

dismissal of this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed

with prejudice and without costs.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-13-00538-CR

NO. 02-13-00539-CR

FREDDIE RODRIQUEZ APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

----------

FROM THE 297TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

TRIAL COURT NOS. 1292777D, 1339641D

----------

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

----------

The trial court convicted Appellant Freddie Rodriguez of failure to register 

as a sex offender and bail jumping, found both habitual offender notices true, and 

sentenced him to forty-five years’ confinement for each offense.

Rodriguez’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to 

withdraw and a brief in support of that motion. Counsel avers that in his

 

1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2

professional opinion, these appeals are frivolous. Counsel’s brief and motion 

meet the requirements of Anders v. California by presenting a professional 

evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for 

relief. See 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967). This court informed Rodriguez

that he may file a pro se response to the Anders brief, and he did so. The State 

did not submit a brief.

Once an appellant’s court-appointed attorney files a motion to withdraw on 

the ground that the appeal is frivolous and fulfills the requirements of Anders, this 

court is obligated to undertake an independent examination of the record. See 

Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Mays v. State, 

904 S.W.2d 920, 922–23 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1995, no pet.). Only then may 

we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82–

83, 109 S. Ct. 346, 351 (1988).

We have carefully reviewed the record, counsel’s brief, and the pro se 

response. We agree with counsel that these appeals are wholly frivolous and 

without merit; we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the 

appeals. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); 

see also Meza v. State, 206 S.W.3d 684, 685 n.6 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). 

Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s 

judgments.

/s/ Bill Meier

BILL MEIER

JUSTICE
3

PANEL: GARDNER, WALKER, and MEIER, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: May 28, 2015
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter63of Title 18 of the United States Code

 

I,Edileen Salicrup, the Chief Financial Officer of ClearComm, L.P., certify that (i) theDecember 31, 2004 10-K Report fully complies with the requirementsof Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934and (ii) the information contained in the December 31, 2004 10-KReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of ClearComm, L.P.

 
|   |   | /s/ Edileen  Salicrup    |   |
|--------|--------|--------------------------|--------|
|   |   | Edileen Salicrup         |
|   |   | Chief Financial  Officer |
|   |   | March 29,  2005     |

 

----
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 uWink, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-QSB for the quarter ending March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Nolan K. Bushnell,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby 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; and

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


May 15, 2006                                         By: /s/ NOLAN K. BUSHNELL
                                                         -----------------------
                                                         Nolan K. Bushnell
                                                         Chief Executive Officer