alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|                                                                                                            
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                            
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                              
|View History: Annual                                                                                        
|View History: Annual                                                                                        
|View History:                                                                                               
|                                                                                                            
|U.S. Federal Offshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                                            
|                                                                                                            
|U.S. Federal Offshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields (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                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 73    
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 145    | 2      | 34     | 152    | 7      | 19     | --     | --     | --     | --    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | --     | --     |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = 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
**Exhibit 31.01****CERTIFICATION FOR FORM 10-K**I, Michael Mendes, President and Chief Executive Officer of Diamond Foods, Inc., certify asfollows: 1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Diamond Foods, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances 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 informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) 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 have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared; (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.By: /s/ Michael Mendes Name:Michael Mendes Title:President and Chief Executive Officer Date:October 27, 2005
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
  (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 represents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of the Company.
 /s/ J. Eric PikeJ. Eric PikeChairman, Chief Executive Officer and PresidentSeptember 5, 2008/s/ Anthony K. SlaterAnthony K. SlaterChief Financial OfficerSeptember 5, 2008
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Jose Fransisco Mendoza

- Navarro v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01

- 18

- 00706

- CR

Trial court case number: 1542074

Trial court: 176th District Court of Harris County

In September 2019, appointed counsel David L. Garza filed a motion to withdraw and the accompanying brief required by Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The State filed a waiver of response on November 26, 201 9. After receiving a request to access the record, the Court issued an order directing the trial court clerk to provide appellant with access to the record. Purporting to act as appellant’s retained counsel, Peyton Z. Peeples III, tendered on January 24,

2 020, “Appellant’s Response to Anders Brief.” Because two attorneys had made appearances claiming to represent appellant, this Court issued an order requiring Peeples either to file a motion to substitute or to present the Court with authority permitting a retained attorney to file a response

to an Anders brief. Peeples filed a motion to substitute on February 3, 2020; however, the motion states that Peeples wishes to be substituted only to respond to the Anders brief.

T he provision for filing an Anders response is to permit the indigent appellant to point out “any reason why he thinks there are non

- frivolous issues to be raised on his behalf, notwithstanding his appointed counsel’s evaluation of the record

. ” Kelly v. State , 436 S.W.3d 313, 315 (Te x. Crim. App. 2014). The Anders procedure does not contemplate retained counsel filing the response to appointed counsel’s brief. Accordingly, this Court issued an order abating the appeal and remanding to the trial court to determine whether to grant Garz a’s motion to withdraw and appoint new counsel on appeal, or permit retained counsel Peeples to be substituted as appellant’s counsel. If Peeples were permitted to act as appellant’s counsel, he would represent appellant not only in

response to an Anders b rief because

, if Garza withdrew

, the Anders brief he filed would no longer

be considered.

A supplemental clerk’s record was filed on March 5, 2020, indicated that the trial court granted Garza’s motion to withdraw, and permitted Peeples to serve as retain ed substitute counsel on appeal.

Accordingly, the appeal is reinstated on the active docket. David L. Garza’s motion to

withdraw has been granted and the Anders brief filed by Garza is stricken . Peyton Z. Peeples IIIwill serve as retained counsel on appe al. Appellant’s brief is due to be filed within 30 days from

the date of this order

.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature:

___

/s/ Peter Kelly

______  Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date:

__ April 9, 2020

___
Exhibit 32.2
                                                                    ------------



              CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL 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 Paragon Technologies, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Ronald
J. Semanick, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

         (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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/ Ronald J. Semanick
                            ---------------------------------------------------
                            Ronald J. Semanick
                            Chief Financial Officer and Vice President - Finance
                              and Treasurer
                            May 13, 2004
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 17

- 50261 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

− Appellee

versus
JULIO CESAR RAMIREZ , Defendant

− Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas No. 7:16

- CR

- 126

- 1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
Julio Ramirez pleaded guilty of conspiring to possess with intent to

* 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 se t forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED March 14, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 17-50261 Document: 00514386859 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/14/2018No. 17

- 50261

2 distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine. The district court sen

tenced Ramirez within the advisory guideline range to 235 months of im

prisonment and five years of supervised rele ase. Ramirez appeals the sen
tence, claiming that the court relied on unreliable co

- conspirator statements to determine the amount of methamphetamine attributable to him through rele

vant conduct

. Ramirez has not shown that the court clearly erred in adopting the finding in the presentence report ( “ PSR ” ) that he was responsible for a drug

quan tity that resulted in a base offense level of 36 under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(a)(5)

. See United States v. Betancourt , 422 F.3d 240, 246 (5th Cir. 2005). The PSR sta ted that the drug quantity attributable to Ramirez was based on co

- conspirator statements and on drugs that were confiscated by law enforcement. The PSR had sufficient indicia of reliability to be considered as evidence , because it was based on informatio n that a case agent obtained from other members of the drug conspiracy

. See United States v. Gomez

- Alvarez , 781 F.3d 787, 79 6 (5th Cir. 2015). Ramirez failed to prove that the information in the PSR concerning the multi

- pound quantities of methamphetamin e was “materially untrue, inaccurate or unreliable.” United States v. Harris , 702 F.3d 226, 230 (5th Cir. 2012)

. AFFIRMED. Case: 17-50261 Document: 00514386859 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/14/2018
----

----

**Exhibit      13.1**

**CERTIFICATION      OF ACTING CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER & **

**ACTING      CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

| 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 Registrant. |
|----------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                                                                                                                                                        |   |   |   |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|
| /s/ Randy              Hayward                                                                                                                                         |   |   |   |
| Name: Randy HaywardTitle:                  President, Acting                  Chief Executive Officer, and                  Acting                  Chief Financial Officer |   |   |        |

*This      written statement is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission      as an exhibit to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 20-F. A signed original of      this statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the      Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff      upon request. *

*This      certification accompanies this Annual Report on Form 20-F pursuant to Section      906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent      required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section      18      of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"). Such      certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing      under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to      the      extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by      reference.*
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Melvin Hodge, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Frank Diaz, J., at trial, plea and sentence), rendered April 5, 1989, convicting defendant, after jury trial, of manslaughter in the first degree and, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and which sentenced him, as a second violent felony offender, to concurrent indeterminate terms of 12 *Vi*to 25 years’ and 3 *Vi*to 7 years’ imprisonment respectively, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant was arrested and charged with murder in the second degree and manslaughter in the first degree arising from the shooting death of Schvoan Topping on December 8, 1987. After jury trial, defendant was found guilty of manslaughter in the first degree, pleaded guilty to criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree and was sentenced as noted above.

On appeal, defendant contends that the trial court erred in refusing defendant’s request for a jury charge of manslaughter in the second degree as a lesser included offense of both murder in the second degree and manslaughter in the first degree, on the basis that a reasonable view of the evidence presented at trial would support the inclusion of such lesser included charge.

At trial, four eyewitnesses, and defendant himself, testified that they and the victim were part of a group talking on a street corner; that defendant left the scene after a verbal argument with the victim and returned approximately 10 minutes later with a gun; that defendant first struck the victim with the gun and then shot twice at the victim, within close range, the second shot hitting the victim behind the right ear and killing him. Defendant himself testified that at no time was the victim armed, nor did he attempt at any time to strike the defendant. Defendant also testified that his intent in shooting at the victim the second time was to injure him. By no reasonable view of the evidence presented at trial could the jury have concluded that defendant was guilty of the lesser and not the greater offense, and therefore the trial court properly refused defendant’s request for a jury charge of the lesser included offense of manslaughter in the second degree. (CPL 300.50 [1]; see *also, People v Glover,*57 NY2d 61, 63-64; *People v Green,*56 NY2d 427, 434.)

We perceive no abuse of discretion by the trial court in the imposition of sentence and in the circumstances do not find that sentence to be excessive. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Kupferman, Milonas, Rosenberger and Ellerin, JJ.
|                                                                                              
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                              
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                
|View History: Annual                                                                          
|View History: Annual                                                                          
|View History:                                                                                 
|                                                                                              
|Alabama Crude Oil + Lease Condensate New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                              
|                                                                                              
|Alabama Crude Oil + Lease Condensate New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields (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                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 4      | 0      | --     | --     | --     | --    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | --     | --     |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = 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
COMPLETENESS CHECKLIST FOR SIP REVISION Early Progress Plans Demonstrating Progress Toward Attaining the 8-hour National Air Quality Standard for Ozone Planning Areas: Ventura County, Antelope Valley an d Western Mojave Desert, Coachella Valley, Eastern Kern County and Imperial County Title 40 CFR, Part 51, Appendix V – Criteria for Determining the Completeness of Plan Submissions Enclosed Notes

ADMINISTRATIVE MATERIALS 2.1(a) Submittal Letter from Governor's Designee X See ARB Resolution 08-10 2.1(b) Evidence of Adoption X See ARB Resolution 08-10 2.1(c) Legal Authority Citation X See ARB Resolution 08-10 2.1(d) Copy of : a. Early Progress Plans X See Early Progress Plans 2.1(e) Evidence of Compliance with State's Procedural Requirements X See ARB Resolution 08-10 2.1(f) Evidence of Public Notice Consistent with 40 CFR part 51.102 X See copy of publication notice 2.1(g) Certification of Public Hearing in Accordance with Notice X See ARB Resolution 08-10 2.1(h) Compilation of Public Comments and Responses X See attachment to transmittal letter

2.2(a) Identification of Regulated Pollutant X See Early Progress Plans. 2.2(b) Identification of Attainment Area/Status X See ARB Resolution 08-10 2.2(c) Estimate of Plan's Impact on Emissions NA Not Applicable 2.2(d) Demonstration that Plan Approval/Implementation Protects NAAQS X See Early Progress Plans 2.2(e) Modeling Support NA Not Applicable 2.2(f)- Compliance/Enforcement and 2.2(i) Justification NA Not ApplicableX:\2007-2008 SIPs\Early Progress Plans\EPP Completeness Checklist.doc