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

                                                                  Exhibit 99.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

        To my knowledge, this Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
September 30, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in
this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of Genuity Inc.


                                      GENUITY INC.

                                      By:  /s/ Paul R. Gudonis
                                          ------------------------------------
                                          Paul R. Gudonis
                                          CHAIRMAN AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                                          (DULY AUTHORIZED OFFICER)


                                      By: /s/ Daniel P. O'Brien
                                          ------------------------------------
                                          Daniel P. O'Brien
                                          EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF
                                          FINANCIAL OFFICER
                                          (DULY AUTHORIZED OFFICER)

Dated:  November 14, 2002
#### GUARANTEE RESERVE LIFE INS. CO. OF HAMMOND, INDIANA, Appellant, v. Barbara (Sally) FARLEY, by Her Father and Next Friend, Leon Farley, Appellee.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

May 31, 1957.

Baird & Hays, Pikeville, for appellant.

V. R. Bentley, Pikeville, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Motion for an appeal from a judgment allowing plaintiff to recover $536 in an action on a group insurance policy.

We concur in the opinion of the trial judge that the plaintiff, at the time of her injury, was within the coverage provided by the policy.

Motion for appeal is, therefore, overruled and the judgment is affirmed.
#### DIXIE TRANSPORT COMPANY, Inc., Appellant, v. James MADDOX, Appellee.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Oct. 7, 1955.

James F. Clay, Danville, Stoll, Keenon & Park, Lexington, for , appellant.

Yancey, Martin & Ockerman, Lexington, Jackson D. Guerrant, Danville, for appel-lee.

PER CURIAM.

Motion for an appeal from a judgment of the Boyle Circuit Court, K. S. Alcorn, Judge, which was entered upon a verdict awarding appellee the sum of $1,000 for damages sustained as a result of a collision involving the motor vehicles owned by the parties to this action. The facts, questions raised, authorities cited, and applicable law have been carefully considered by the court, and we find no prejudicial error.

The motion for an appeal is overruled and the judgment stands affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                    1
<CURRENCY>                                      U.S. DOLLARS



<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                  JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                    JUN-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                           1
<CASH>                                               73,318
<SECURITIES>                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                             0
<ALLOWANCES>                                              0
<INVENTORY>                                               0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    133,363
<PP&E>                                                    0
<DEPRECIATION>                                            0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      140,515
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               205,200
<BONDS>                                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                          15,000
<COMMON>                                             83,387
<OTHER-SE>                                         (163,702)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      140,515
<SALES>                                                   0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                          0
<CGS>                                                     0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                             0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    396,795
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                        0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    (396,795)
<INCOME-TAX>                                              0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                (396,795)
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                       (396,795)
<EPS-BASIC>                                            (.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          (.04)



</TABLE>
EXHIBIT NO. 32.1
Form 10-QSB
KIK Technology International, Inc.
File No. 000-30071


          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 KIK Technology  International,  Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending July 31, 2005 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
William M. Knooihuizen, 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:  (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.


Date: September 13, 2005                      By: /s/ William M. Knooihuizen
      ------------------                         -------------------------------
                                                          William M. Knooihuizen
                                                         Chief Executive Officer


In connection with the Quarterly  Report of KIK Technology  International,  Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending July 31, 2005 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Kuldip C. Baid, Chief Financial  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:  (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.


Date: September 13, 2005                      By: /s/ Kuldip C. Baid
      ------------------                         -------------------------------
                                                                  Kuldip C. Baid
                                                         Chief Financial Officer

A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided  to KIK  Technology  International,  Inc.  and will be  retained by KIK
Technology  International,  Inc. and  furnished to the  Securities  and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> BD
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted
from the Morgan Keegan, Inc. 1996 Annual Report and is qualified
in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1996
<CASH>                                          17,156
<RECEIVABLES>                                  328,178
<SECURITIES-RESALE>                            294,478
<SECURITIES-BORROWED>                           10,891
<INSTRUMENTS-OWNED>                            229,278
<PP&E>                                          38,400
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 946,648
<SHORT-TERM>                                    31,400
<PAYABLES>                                     505,056
<REPOS-SOLD>                                    54,826
<SECURITIES-LOANED>                              3,148
<INSTRUMENTS-SOLD>                              62,972
<LONG-TERM>                                     19,965
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        12,773
<OTHER-SE>                                     156,235
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   946,648
<TRADING-REVENUE>                              115,203
<INTEREST-DIVIDENDS>                            49,923
<COMMISSIONS>                                   67,870
<INVESTMENT-BANKING-REVENUES>                   50,301
<FEE-REVENUE>                                   18,109
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              32,930
<COMPENSATION>                                 158,352
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 55,167
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      55,167
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    33,867
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.65
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.65
        

</TABLE>
* Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions

that have no precedential value and merely decide particular cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ No. 95-30635 Conference Calendar

__________________ MILTON L. SHUBBIE, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus LOUISIANA BOARD OF PARDONS & PAROLE, Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. CA-95-0321

- - - - - - - - - - (October 17, 1995) Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and REAVLEY and SMITH, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Milton L. Shubbie filed a federal petition for writ of habeas corpus, 28 U.S.C. § 2254, which the district court dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because he was no longer in custody. To the extent that Shubbie alleged a civil rights violation, the district court dismissed the complaint as barred by the applicable statute of limitations.No. 95-30635 -2- Shubbie has failed to raise or brief the statute of limitations issue and, therefore, it is considered abandoned. Evans v. City of Marlin, Tex. , 986 F.2d 104, 106 n.1 (5th Cir. 1993). The appeal of his civil rights complaint is without arguable merit and thus frivolous. Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Because the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. 5th Cir. R. 42.2. Generally, a state petitioner must obtain a certificate of probable cause (CPC) to appeal the dismissal of a § 2254 petition. Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). In Louisiana v. Merriman, No. 92-4222 (5th Cir. July 23, 1995), this court ordered that "the Clerk is to accept no more appeals for or on behalf of [Milton L. Shubbie] that challenge the length or basis of [his] state custody. This is a sanction for appellant[]'s abuse of this court's procedures." Therefore, to the extent that Shubbie is challenging the basis of his state custody, he may not appeal the district court's dismissal of the petition. The motion for CPC is DENIED. We bar Shubbie from filing any civil appeal in this court, or any initial pleading in any court which is subject to this court's jurisdiction, without the advance written permission of a judge of the forum court or of this court. The clerk of this court and the clerks of all federal district courts in this circuit are ordered to return, unfiled, any attempted submission inconsistent with this bar.
EXHIBIT 12-1

<TABLE>
                                    PECO ENERGY COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES
                                  COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                                                     SEC METHOD
                                                       ($000)


<CAPTION>
                                                                                                  9 MONTHS
                                                                                                    ENDED
                                                                                                  09/30/98
                                                                                                  --------

<S>                                                                                               <C>     
NET INCOME                                                                                        $538,784

ADD BACK:

- INCOME TAXES:
     OPERATING INCOME                                                                              356,829
     NON-OPERATING INCOME                                                                         (19,115)
                                                                                                   -------
  NET TAXES                                                                                        337,714

- FIXED CHARGES:
     INTEREST APPLICABLE TO DEBT                                                                   248,994
     ANNUAL RENTALS                                                                                  6,869
                                                                                                   -------
     TOTAL FIXED CHARGES                                                                           255,863
                                                                                                   -------

ADJUSTED EARNINGS INCLUDING AFUDC                                                               $1,132,361
                                                                                                ==========

RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES                                                                    4.43
                                                                                                      ====

</TABLE>
p.1 

OAR Box 1147 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

125) IV-E-115 

Docket Number: 

A-87-11 

Printed 4/23/2008 7:21:47AM Sheet 125 of 242 
P.2 

A-<n-< ( 

r/- £ - 'Is' 

January 24, 1994 

Memorandum to the Docket 

From: Dick Wilson, Orfice of Mobile Sources 

Subject: Administrator's Discussions with Outside Parties Regarding Final Rule on OnBoard Refueling Controls for Motor Vehicles under the Clean Air Act 

On Thursday, January 20 and Friday, January 21, the Administrator participated in four 

telephone conversations with representative ofthe domestic automobile manufacturers to discuss 

various subjects related to the final rule on On-Board Refueling Controls for Motor Vehicles 

under the Clean Air Act. 

EPA participants included (not all persons were present for all telephone calls): 

Carol Browner, Administrator 

Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation (OAR) 

Dana Minerva, Office of the Administrator (OA) 

Nancy Sutley, OA 

Dick Wilson, OAR 

Reid Wilson, Office of Communications, Education and Public Affairs (OCEPA) 

Dave Cohen, OCEPA 

Automobile manufacturer representatives included (not all persons were present for all telephone 

calls): 

Bill Hoagland, GM 

Dennis Minano, GM 

Helen Petrauskas, Ford Motor 

Ron Boltz, Chrysler 

The primary subject of discussion was the potential applicability of the final rule to light-duty 

trucks. The participants discussed the technical and engineering constraints associated with 

requiring on-board controls in light-duty trucks of various weight categories. They also 

discussed truck sales by weight category and the percentage of refueling emissions associated 

with each weight category. Finally, the participants discussed the feasibility and phasing in of 

compliance dates by model year and within weight categories. No new data or information was 

presented during those conversation beyond information already in the record. 

Two documents prepared by representatives of the automobile manufacturers are attached. 
P.3 

JflN-iW-yi THU 1 y: k'b E&t STAFF FAX NO, 131355675 77 P. 02 

98 MY 

40% PC 

40% PC 

99 MY 

80% PC 

oofyv^ 

100% PC 

80% PC J100% PC 

40% LDT1 

01 MY 

40% 

LDT1 & 2 

80% LDT1 

02 MY 

80% 

LDT1 & 2 

t 100°//LDT1 

03 MY 

100% 

LDT1 

&2 

Proposal inclurf<5s: 

No future(ORVR(regulation of Trucks 

Excludes all Incompletes 
PROPOSAL 

l-rUt 

' t 

'•* I 

CO 

•*J . 

•Pl 

98 MY 

40% PC 

99 MY 

80% PC 100% 

PC 

00 MY ] 01 MY 

« 40% 

LDT1,2 

02 MY 

80% 

LDT1,2 

03 MY 

100% 

LDT1,2 

Manufacturers need flexibility lo include LDT3s sooner If necessary for evaluation, any early 

implementation of LDT3s should count toward LDT1,2 requirements. 

No future ORVR regulations on additional Trucks. 

All incompletes excluded. 

t o 

m 

m 

to 

O 

LDT1: any Hght light-duty truck up through 3750# loaded vehicle weight and leas than 6000* GVWR. 

LDT2: any light light-duty truck greater than 3750* loaded vehicle weight and less than 6000* GVWR. 

LDT3: any heavy light-duty truck up through 57S0# adjusted loaded vehicle weight and between 6000ft and 8500* GVWR. 

CO 

cn 

cn 

CD 

cn 

C7Z>
### -80 -79 -78 -77 -76 -75

38 39 40


## ★

▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



## ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 

### 500 1000 1500 100 18 12 06 00 07/16 

## NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

# Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 16 Jul 07

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 38.81 N 76.74 WMeters AGL 

## ★ ■ ■ ■ ■



## ★ ■ ■ ■ ■ 

## ★ ● ● ●



## ★ ● ● ● ●
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________

No. 96-40227 Summary Calendar

_______________

MICHAEL ARTHUR MAGOON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

WAYNE SCOTT, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice,

Institutional Division, et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

*****************************************************************

MICHAEL ARTHUR MAGOON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

WAYNE SCOTT, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice,

Institutional Division, et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas

(6:95-CV-240)

_________________________
June 21, 1996

Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.Pursuant to 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5, the court has d etermined that this opinion

should not be published except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.

2 PER CURIAM: *

Michael Magoon appeals the dismissal of h is suit under

28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). Magoon contends that medical personnel should

have performed an x-ray on his back and should have concluded that

his prior back injuries precluded him from working. His complaints

are, at best, either allegations of negligent treatment or disputes

regarding the type of treatment he received and, thus, do not

evidence constitutionally inadequate trea tment. S ee Johnson v.

Treen , 759 F.2d 1236, 1238 (5th Cir. 1985).

Magoon avers that he has been denied access to the court.

Although the magistrate judge should have addressed Magoon’s courtaccess claim, Magoon has not identified any reversible error. S ee

Walker v. Navarro Coun ty Jail , 4 F.3d 410, 413 (5th Cir. 1993).

Accordingly, the judgment is AFFIRMED.
Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Memorandum Opinion filed July 29 , 2014.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 14

- 00267

- CV

IN RE TURNER W. BRAN CH AND THE BRANCH LA W FIRM L.L.P. , Relator s

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS 164th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2012

- 34395



### MEMORANDUM OPINION

On April 7, 2014, relator s Turner W. Branch and the Branch Law Firm,
L.L.P. filed a petition for writ of m andamus in this c ourt. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 ; see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this c ourt to compel the Honorable Alexandra Smoots

- Hogan, presiding judge of the 164th
District Court of Harris County
, to vacate her (1) February 18, 2014 order denying2 their motion quash subpoena and motion for protective order; and (2) April 2, 2014 order denying their motion for reconsideration

. Relators have not shown that they are entitled to mandamus r elief. Accordingly, we deny relators’ petition for writ of mandamus. We also lift our stay entered on April 8, 2014.

PER CURIAM

Panel c onsists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Donovan and Brown.
Final: 12/12/03 INITIAL REVIEW EXPOSURE REPORT

Case Number: P040141 Assessor: Lee ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES Scenario#: 1 Number of Release Sites: Release Activity: Release Description: WATER LANDFILL INCINER LAND/INCIN FUGITIVE Total Releases: (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) Release Days/yr: Per Site Release: (kg/day) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/day) Remarks:

Consumer use expected?INITIAL REVIEW EXPOSURE REPORT CASE NUMBER:P040141INITIAL REVIEW EXPOSURE REPORT

Case Number: P040141 Assessor: Lee ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES Scenario#: 2 Number of Release Sites: Release Activity: Release Description: WATER LANDFILL INCINER LAND/INCIN FUGITIVE Total Releases: (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) Release Days/yr: Per Site Release: (kg/day) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/day) Remarks:INITIAL REVIEW EXPOSURE REPORT CASE NUMBER:P040141INITIAL REVIEW EXPOSURE REPORT

Case Number: P040141 Assessor: Lee ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES Scenario#: 3 Number of Release Sites: Release Activity: Release Description: WATER LANDFILL INCINER LAND/INCIN FUGITIVE Total Releases: (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) Release Days/yr: Per Site Release: (kg/day) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/day) Remarks:INITIAL REVIEW EXPOSURE REPORT CASE NUMBER:P040141
Exhibit
32.2
 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 Bel Fuse Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2008 filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the "Report"), I, Colin Dunn, Vice President of Finance 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) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934;and
 
 (2) The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the consolidated financial condition of the Company as of the dates presented
and consolidated result of operations of the Company for the periods
presented.
 
 Dated:
March 13, 2009
 By:
                /s/ Colin
      DunnColin
      DunnVice
      President - Finance and Secretary
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 21-0618

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

AUSTIN TYLER JOHNSON,

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 15, 2022, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 11 2022

07/11/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0618