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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-7111

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

DAVID AMEZQUITA-FRANCO,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District 

Judge. (3:12-cr-00052-HEH-DJN-1; 3:16-cv-00526-HEH)

Submitted: January 31, 2017 Decided: February 2, 2017

Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

David Amezquita-Franco, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen David 

Schiller, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, 

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

David Amezquita-Franco seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order dismissing as successive his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) 

motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or 

judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not 

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the 

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional 

claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 

484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 

(2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural 

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive 

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a 

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 

529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Amezquita-Franco has not made the requisite showing. 

Accordingly, we deny as moot Amezquita-Franco’s motion to 

expedite, deny a certificate of appealability, and dismiss the 

appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and 

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 
3

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

DISMISSED
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-17-00322-CR

Roderick Payton, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE 147TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY 

NO. D-1-DC-16-301681, THE HONORABLE CLIFFORD A. BROWN, JUDGE PRESIDING

O R D E R

PER CURIAM

The State’s brief was originally due February 5, 2018. On counsel’s motions, the 

time for filing was extended to May 7, 2018. The State’s counsel has now filed a fourth motion, 

requesting that the Court extend the time for filing the State’s brief. We grant the motion for 

extension of time and order the State to file a brief no later than June 6, 2018. No further extension 

of time will be granted and failure to comply with this order will result in the case being submitted 

to this Court on the appellant’s brief alone.

It is ordered on May 11, 2018.

Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Goodwin and Field

Do Not Publish
Exhibit 32.1



Certification of the Chief 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 BidGive International, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB/A for the nine months ended September 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), James P. Walker, Jr., the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 13a-14(b) or 15d-14(b) and 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 results of operations of the Company.







/s/ James P. Walker, Jr.

Chief Executive Officer

Date:  August 29, 2006
|                                                                                   
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                   
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                     
|View History: Annual                                                               
|View History: Annual                                                               
|View History:                                                                      
|                                                                                   
|Colorado Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Revision Decreases (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                   
|                                                                                   
|Colorado Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Revision Decreases (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                   

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 27    
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 34     | 56     | 117    | 112    | 162    | 262    | 430    | 139    | 225    | 290   
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 619    | 357    |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2257 

To waive the requirement that existing traffic signs meet minimum 

retroreflectivity standards on or before the compliance dates established 

by the Federal Highway Administration. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 21, 2011 

Mr. FLEISCHMANN (for himself and Mr. DESJARLAIS) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and 

Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To waive the requirement that existing traffic signs meet 

minimum retroreflectivity standards on or before the 

compliance dates established by the Federal Highway 

Administration. 

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

3 SECTION 1. MINIMUM RETROREFLECTIVITY STANDARDS 

4 FOR TRAFFIC SIGNS. 

5 (a) WAIVER.—Notwithstanding any other provision 

6 of law, existing traffic control devices shall not be required 

7 to comply with the minimum retroreflectivity level stand8 ards set forth in section 2A.08 of the Manual on Uniform 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2257 IH

1 Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways, 2009 

2 Edition (incorporated by reference in part 655 of title 23, 

3 Code of Federal Regulations), on or before the compliance 

4 dates set forth in table I–2 of such Manual. 

5 (b) EXCEPTION.—Any traffic control device installed 

6 on or after the date of the enactment of this Act shall 

7 meet the standards referred to in subsection (a). 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
**Exhibit 31.1**I, John R. Folkerth, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Shopsmith, Inc. (the “registrant”);2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for the periods presented in thisreport;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report isbeing prepared;b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; andc) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunction):a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;andb) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting.   Date: August 15, 2005   By: /s/ John R. Folkerth
Exhibit 99.5  CERTIFICATION  I, Ian Kidson, certify that:  1.I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 40-F of Progressive Waste Solutions Ltd.;  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 issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4.The issuer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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the issuer 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 issuer, 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.Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;  c.Evaluated the effectiveness of the issuer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; and  d.Disclosed in this report any change in the issuers internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the issuers internal control over financial reporting; and  5.The issuers other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the issuers auditors and the


audit committee of the issuer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 issuers ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b.Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the issuers internal control over financial reporting.  Dated: April 2, 2013   Ian KidsonName:
Ian   KidsonTitle:
Chief   Financial Officer
(Principal   Financial Officer)  2
EXHIBIT 13.2





Section 1350 Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002








In connection with the annual report on Form 20-F of Intercept Energy Services Inc.(the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2012, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I hereby 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 annual 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 annual report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








Date:   May 15, 2014





/s/ Greg Pendura”


Greg Pendura


Chief Financial Officer
BEFORE THE

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Joint Application of

DELTA AIR LINES, INC. and

 SOCIÉTÉ AIR FRANCE, et al.

for statements of authorization pursuant to 

14 C.F.R. 212

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket OST-2000-6939

NOTICE OF ADDITIONAL CODESHARING

Communications with respect to this document should be addressed to:

Laurent Timsit, Vice President –

 European and Industry Affairs

SOCIÉTÉ AIR FRANCE

45, rue de Paris

F-95747, Roissy CDG Cedex

Paris, France

Alexander Van der Bellen

Managing Director – Government Affairs

 & Associate General Counsel

Christopher Walker

Regional Director – Government Affairs

DELTA AIR LINES, INC. 

1212 New York Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20005

(202) 842-4184

sascha.vanderbellen@delta.com

April 26, 2013
BEFORE THE

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Joint Application of

DELTA AIR LINES, INC. and

 SOCIÉTÉ AIR FRANCE, et al.

for statements of authorization pursuant to

14 C.F.R. 212

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket OST-2000-6939

NOTICE OF ADDITIONAL CODESHARING

Pursuant to the blanket statements of authorization granted to Delta Air Lines, 

Inc. (“Delta”), Société Air France (“Air France”), and their respective affiliates, the 

carriers hereby notify the Department that, on or after 30 days from today, Delta’s “DL* “ 

designator code on the following Air France operated routes between Paris (CDG) and 

the following points in Africa:

Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo (FIH);

Djibouti City, Djibouti (JIB); and

Malabo, Equatorial Guinea (SSG).

Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Laurent Timsit

______________________

Laurent Timsit, Vice President –

 European and Industry Affairs

SOCIÉTÉ AIR FRANCE

Alexander Van der Bellen 

Managing Director, Government Affairs & 

Associate General Counsel 

DELTA AIR LINES, INC.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

A copy of the foregoing Notice has been served this 26th day of April, 2013, upon 

the following persons via email: 

robert.cohn@hoganlovells.com; Francis.Heil@aa.com; Robert.Wirick@aa.com; 

dan.weiss@united.com; thomas.bolling@united.com; howard.kass@usairways.com;

benjamin.slocum@usairways.com; esta.rosenberg@dot.gov; brian.hedberg@dot.gov; 

info@airlineinfo.com
*Senior Judge Hugh H. Bownes participated in the original

hearing and disposition of the this case but retired on September

1, 2003, prior to the filing of the petition for rehearing, and

passed away on November 5, 2003. The remaining members of the

panel comprise a quorum for the issuance of this order. See 28

U.S.C. § 46(d).

United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit

Nos. 02-1139, 02-1340, 02-1465 

LUIS A. ACEVEDO-GARCIA, et al.,

Plaintiffs, Appellees/Cross-Appellants,

v.

ROBERTO VERA MONROIG, Individually and as Mayor of Adjuntas;

MUNICIPALITY OF ADJUNTAS; IRMA M. GONZALEZ DELGADO, Individually

and as Personnel Director of Adjuntas,

Defendants, Appellants/Cross-Appellees.

APPEALS FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO 

[Hon. Jaime Pieras, Jr., U.S. Senior District Judge]

Before

 Boudin, Chief Judge,

Bownes,* Senior Circuit Judge,

and Lipez, Circuit Judge.

ORDER OF COURT

December 5, 2003
-2-

On September 9, 2003 the defendant-appellants filed a Petition

for Rehearing in their individual capacity and a Petition for

Rehearing and/or Suggestion for Rehearing En Banc in their official

capacity. As is explained herein, we grant the petition for a

panel rehearing, which moots the suggestion for rehearing en banc.

In our opinion of August 21, we stated that our review of the

legal issues in the case was handicapped by the defendants' failure

to produce transcripts of the defense portion of the trial.

Specifically, we were unable to review fully the challenged

evidentiary rulings, claims of inappropriate participation of the

trial court, and the sufficiency of the evidence challenge. 

In their petition for rehearing, defendants explained that

they ordered the transcripts from the court reporter, paid for the

transcripts, and later received a full set of transcripts.

Furthermore, both parties referred to the full set of transcripts

in their briefs. Upon further investigation, we determined that

the transcripts were never properly filed with us through a

combination of miscues by the defendants, the court reporter, and

the circuit court clerk's office. Without assigning responsibility

to any one party for the absence of the transcripts, we decided

that we would review the now available transcripts in deciding the

issues to which they relate.

Having done so, we find nothing in the full record that

requires us to alter the ruling in our opinion filed on August 21.
-3-

By this order, we grant the petition for rehearing, withdraw our

opinion filed August 21, and file a revised opinion.

By the Court,

______________________________

Richard Cushing Donovan, Clerk

[Certified Copies to Hon. Jamie Pieras and Ms. Frances De Moran,

Clerk, U.S. District Court for Puerto Rico. Copies to: Mr. Mahony,

Ms. Templeton, Ms. Martinez-Fortier, Mr. Garay, Mr. Falto-Cruz,

Mr. Ortiz-Alvarez, Mr. Martinez-Luciano, Ms. Zabala-Galarza, 

Mr. Rivera-Alvarez, Mr. Svonkin, Mr. Guzman, Mr. VillaresSarmiento, Mr. Roldan-Gonzalez, Mr. Pagan-Rivera, and Mr.

Emmanuelli-Huertas.]
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NOS. WR-90,448-01 & WR-90,448-02

EX PARTE GEORGE MICHAEL BARGAS JR., Applicant

ON APPLICATIONS FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NOS. 1045924-A & 1045925-A IN THE 177TH DISTRICT COURT

FROM HARRIS COUNTY

Per curiam.

O P I N I O N

Applicant was convicted oftwo offenses of aggravated sexual assault of a child and sentenced

to imprisonment. The Fourteenth Court of Appeals affirmed his convictions. Bargas v. State, 252

S.W.3d 876 (Tex. App—Houston [14thDist.] 2008). Applicant filed these applications for writs of

habeas corpus in the county of conviction, and the district clerk forwarded them to this Court. See

TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07.

Applicant contends, inter alia, that appellate counsel failed to timely inform him that his

convictions had been affirmed by the appellate court and that he had a right to seek discretionary

review in this Court. Based on the record, the trial court has determined that appellate counsel’s

performance was deficient and that Applicant would have timely filed a petition for discretionary
2

review but for counsel’s deficient performance. Relief is granted. Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25

(Tex. Crim. App. 1997); Ex parte Crow, 180 S.W.3d 135 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

Applicant may file out-of-time petitions for discretionary review of the judgments of the

Fourteenth Court of Appeals in cause numbers 14-06-00795-CR and 14-06-00797-CR. Should

Applicant decide to file petitions for discretionary review, he must file them with this Court within

thirty days from the date of this Court’s mandate. Any other claims are dismissed. Ex parte Torres,

943 S.W.2d 469, 474 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997).

Copies ofthis opinion shall be sent to the Texas Department ofCriminalJustice–Correctional

Institutions Division and the Board of Pardons and Paroles.

Delivered: October 21, 2020

Do not publish
CERTIFICATIONS OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICERS PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

# Exhibit 32

# CERTIFICATIONS
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

In
connection with the Quarterly Report of American Energy Production, Inc., a Texas
corporation (the Company), on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2004,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), Charles
Bitters, Principal Executive
and Principal Financial Officer of the Company, does hereby certify, pursuant to §
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350), that to their 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 result of operations of the Company.

/s/ _____________________ Charles BittersPrincipal
Executive Officer

May 28, 2004

/s/ _____________________ Charles BittersPrincipal Financial
Officer

May 28, 2004

[A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to American Energy Production, Inc.
and will be retained by American Energy Production, Inc. and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.]
OMB Control Number 2070-0044; EPA ICR Number 0278.10

ICR ATTACHMENT H

Display Related to OMB Control #2070-0044

Listings of Related Regulations in 40 CFR 9.1

As of May 10, 1993, the OMB approval numbers for EPA regulations in Chapter I of 

Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) appear in a listing in 40 CFR 9.1 (58 FR 

27472). This listing fulfills the display requirements in section 3507(f) of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act (PRA) for EPA regulations. The listing at 40 CFR 9.1 displays this OMB Control 

number for the following regulations:

Program Title 40 CFR citation

Pesticide Registration and Classification Procedures...........................................................152.132