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UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-7219

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus CRAIG DOCKERY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (7:01-cr-00046-F; 7:04-cv-00092-F) Submitted: October 31, 2006 Decided: November 7, 2006 Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Craig Dockery, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* In addition to the reasons stated by the district court, Dockery’s claim filed pursuant to Blakely v. Washington , 542 U.S. 296 (2004), is not cognizable, as such a claim does not apply retroactively to cases on collateral review. SeeUnited States v. Morris , 429 F.3d 65, 72 (4th Cir. 2005). Moreover, his ineffective assistance of counsel claims based on counsel’s failure to object pursuant to Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000), and United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220 (2005), and failure to bring him a tape recorder so Dockery personally could hear the taped evidence against him prior to pleading guilty are without merit as Dockery failed to establish error and prejudice, as required by Strickland v. Washington , 466 U.S. 668, 687-88, 694 (1984). - 2 - PER CURIAM: Craig Dockery seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). 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) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Dockery has not made the requisite showing. *Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and di smiss the appeal. We dispense with oral- 3 - argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 198 (Thursday, October 12, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 60657]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-26126]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP00-343-000]


Kinder-Morgan Interstate Gas Transmission Co.; Notice of 
Technical Conference

October 5, 2000.
    On June 15, 2000, Kinder-Morgan Interstate Gas Transmission Company 
(Kinder Morgan) submitted a filing to comply with Order No. 637. 
Several parties have protested various aspects of Kinder-Morgan's 
filing. On August 18, 2000, Kinder Morgan submitted certain substitute 
pro forma tariff sheets to reflect the Commission's action in an order 
issued July 26, 2000, in Docket No. RP00-316-000. In that order, the 
Commission accepted in part and rejected in part certain tariff changes 
proposed by Kinder-Morgan.
    Take notice that a technical conference to discuss the various 
issues raised by Kinder-Morgan's filing will be held on Wednesday, 
November 1, 2000, at 10 a.m., in a room to be designated at the offices 
of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, 
Washington, DC 20426. Parties protesting aspects of Kinder-Morgan's 
filing should be prepared to discuss alternatives.
    All interested persons and Staff are permitted to attend.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-26126 Filed 10-11-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

§

§

§

§

 vs. § Case No.____________________

§

§

§

§

NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

The undersigned attorney files this Notice of Change of Address and requests that the 

Court’s docket in the above-styled cause be updated accordingly. 

My new address is as follows:

Firm _________________________________________________________

Street _________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________

City, State, Zip _________________________________________________________

Telephone/Fax _________________________________________________________

State Bar # _________________________________________________________

Respectfully submitted,

_______________________________________

The Change of Address Form should be completed and electronically filed in active case(s) 

only. For questions, please contact the help desk at: txwd_ecf_help@txwd.uscourts.gov

6:20-CV-00507-ADA

Steckler, Wayne, Cochran, Cherry, PLLC.

100 N. Ritchie Rd., Suite 200

Waco, TX 76712

(254) 776-3336; (254) 776-6823 (fax)

24012419

/s/Craig D. Cherry

Waco

NEONODE SMARTPHONE, LLC

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS et al.

Case 6:20-cv-00507-ADA Document 37 Filed 02/02/21 Page 1 of 1
From: Rahul Pendse <RPendse@trinityconsultants.com>

Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 9:01 PM

To: Land, Eva

Cc: Carlson, Sara Subject: Anadarko BlackHornet EGOM PSD/Title V Permit application

- Revised

Sections
Attachments: Revised BlackHawk BACT Appendix E

- Stimulation Pump Costs Revision 1.pdf; Revised BlackHawk Application Report Page 129.pdf; Revised BlackHornet BACT Appendix E

- Stimulation Pump Costs Revision 1.pdf;
Revised

- BlackHornet PSD and Title V Permit Applicat ion Revision 1.pdf; Revised BlackHornet Appendix B Revision 1.pdf; Revised BlackHornet Appendix D Pages Revision 1.pdf

Hello Eva,

Per our phone discussion, attached are revised sections for BlackHornet EGOM PSD/Title V permit application received by EPA on September 5, 2013. I have highlighted the key revisions. The key
revisions include:

1. Drillship main engines long term NOx PTE (note no impact short term PTE [i.e., lbs/hr and lbs/day])

2. Support vessel fuel based emission factor

3. Added more clarification to fuel based emission factor derivation (see pages 187 to 192 in Revised Appendix B)

To ensure consistency, I have made a few other administrative changes in the attached documents. Please note that none of these revisions have impact on submitted air di spersion modeling analysis. Please let me know if you have any questions or need clarification.

Moreover, in response to yesterday’s email regarding BlackHawk permit application, I received a response from the server that one of the attachments was not d elivered. Hence I am attaching it herewith. Please disregard it if you had received it. I am also attaching revised Page 129 in the BlackHawk permit application. Kindly confirm the receipt of six PDF documents.

Thanks for your help!

............................................................ .................................................... Rahul Pendse Managing Consultant

Trinity Consultants

– Baton Rouge 301 Main Street, Suite 900 | Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70825

Office: 225

- 346

- 4003 | Mobile: 714

- 454

- 0518
Email: rpendse@trinityconsultants.com

_________________________________________________________________________The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to

which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged

materi al. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you Received this in error, please contact the sender an d delete the material from any computer.

_________________________________________________________________________
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**




**CERTIFICATION
      OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICERS**


**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)**




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 Oramed Pharmaceuticals Inc., a Nevada corporation (the
      “Company”), does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that the Annual
      Report for the fiscal year ended August 31, 2008 (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:
                November 26, 2008
            /s/
                Nadav KidronNadav
                Kidron, President and Chief Executive OfficerDated:
                November 26, 2008
            /s/
                Chaime OrlevChaime
                Orlev, Chief Financial Officer




A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      by
      the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
      and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
### Page 1 of 3 **Disposition Comments Docket No:**  

### FAA - 20 08 - 0 619 These comments are in **Directorate ID:** 

### 20 07 -NM - 356 - AD response to an SNPRM Originating Office Tracking No.: **Next Step:** FRAN SNPRM 

### N o C omments/Only

Supportive Comments Received

– If this box is checked, no signatures are required. 

### Has the reference d service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? I f ye s, lis t latest revision and attach a cop y. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance. Instructions: Summarize all comments **by issue** (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of each issue. **All comments relating to the sam e issue should be discussed together.**  Do not list all of the issues from one commenter togeth er. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA - IR- M - 8040.1C Chapter 9. **ISSUE 1:** Select one o

f the following : If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because **ISSUE 2**  **:** Select one of the following :

If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree w ith because We disagree with because Make the following changes to the AD:

### Page 2 of 3

If **NO** , we don’t agree because **For additional issues, do uble**  **- click**  **here**

### Page 3 of 3 **S ignature Section**  Signature indicates concurrence with this action. Originating Office Tracking No.: **ASE** Printed Name **: Date** 

**Branch Man ager**  **Date**
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION
EXTRACTED FROM THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-K DATED
DECEMBER 29, 1995 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>

<CIK> 0000094673
<NAME> STORAGE TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

       
<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                               YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                        DEC-29-1995
<PERIOD-END>                             DEC-29-1995
<CASH>                                       264,502
<SECURITIES>                                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                432,043
<ALLOWANCES>                                  14,665
<INVENTORY>                                  214,553
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             974,988
<PP&E>                                       860,868
<DEPRECIATION>                               527,847
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             1,888,629
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        549,637
<BONDS>                                      363,963
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                                        0
<COMMON>                                      10,670
<OTHER-SE>                                   952,163
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               1,888,629
<SALES>                                    1,345,260
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           1,929,485
<CGS>                                        841,583
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              1,217,622
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             399,482 <F1>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            34,347
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (124,530)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  17,800
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (142,330)
<DISCONTINUED>                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                (142,330)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (1.46)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (1.46)

<FN>
  <F1> Includes restructuring charges of $167,175,000,
       litigation settlement of $30,680,000 and
       merger expense of $14,352,000.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
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 Annual Report of Martin Midstream Partners L.P., a Delaware limited partnership (the “Partnership”), on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2016, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Ruben S. Martin, Chief Executive Officer of Martin Midstream GP LLC, the general partner of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), 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 Partnership.





/s/ Ruben S. MartinRuben S. Martin,Chief Executive Officer of Martin Midstream GP LLC,General Partner of Martin Midstream Partners L.P.March 31, 2017





*A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Partnership and will be retained by the Partnership and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
j1LFR( CtV19 t/jZc?T 2ooN- CO3t 54- 

& A'v1 0) 7' 2 7 0 

OP 

IND1GN1 

COUNTY JAt 

iI 

r 

C4sA2 C/i4v1 i3L-i 

ttTE MAL :,1, J7,JiT9,Tk 7g2c6 tC ii IIi1 lilliii P iI 

8420C40665 06 

MJ-HJB 

Case 5:20-cv-00665-OLG Document 1-2 Filed 06/03/20 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Thomas Rende, certify that:

1.    I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Frederick’s of Hollywood Group Inc. (formerly Movie Star, Inc.);

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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.    the registrant’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)) for the registrant 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 registrant, 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)    [intentionally omitted];

(c)    evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’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 registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.    the registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’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 registrant’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 registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: February 14, 2008





/s/ Thomas RendeThomas Rende
Chief Financial Officer and
Principal Accounting Officer


---
Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 48 Filed 05/17/21 Page 1 of 2
Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 48 Filed 05/17/21 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 99.1


               CERTIFICATE OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, James E. Laurent, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Sunair Electronics,
Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in the report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:

     (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
     material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
     subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
     particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being
     prepared;

     (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
     procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
     quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

     (c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
     effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
     evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

     (a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
     controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
     process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
     registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

     (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
     employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
     controls; and

6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

DATE: May 13, 2003

/s/ James E. Laurent
-------------------------------------
James E. Laurent
President and Chief Executive Officer