alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



Each of the undersigned
hereby certifies, in his or her capacity as an officer of SPACEHAB, Incorporated (the Company), for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his or her
knowledge:



(1) The annual report of the Company on Form 10-K for the year
ended June 30, 2004 (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 conditions and results of operations of the Company.



Date: July 18, 2005



By:

/s/ Michael E. KearneyMichael E. KearneyPresident and Chief Executive Officer and DirectorBy:

/s/ Brian K. HarringtonBrian K. HarringtonVice President and Chief FinancialOfficer
Report of Independent Accountants



To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of
Central Newspapers, Inc.

We have reviewed the accompanying consolidated statement of financial position 
of Central Newspapers, Inc. and its subsidiaries as of June 28, 1998, and the 
consolidated statements of income, shareholders' equity and of cash flows for
the three-month and six-month periods ended June 28, 1998 and June 29, 1997.  
These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management.

We conducted our review in accordance with standards established by the 
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.  A review of interim
financial information consists principally of applying analytical procedures
to financial data and making inquiries of persons responsible for financial and
accounting matters.  It is substantially less in scope than an audit conducted
in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, the objective of which
is the expression of an opinion regarding the financial statements taken as a
whole.  Accordingly, we do not express such an option.

Based on our review, we are not aware of any material modifications that should 
be made to the consolidated financial statements referred to above for them to
be in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles.

We previously audited in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, 
the consolidated statements of financial position as of December 28, 1997, and
the related consolidated statements of income, shareholders' equity and of cash
flows for the year then ended (not presented herein), and in our report dated
February 2,1998 we expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated
financial statements of financial position as of December 28, 1997, is fairly
stated in all material respects in relation to the consolidated statement of
financial position from which it has been derived.

August 3, 1998
Phoenix, Arizona

/s/PriceWaterhouseCoopers LLP
-----------------------------
PriceWaterhouseCoopers LLP
*

 Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be

published and is not precedent except underthe limited circumstancessetforth inLocalRule

47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-30498

Summary Calendar

TERRENCE SHALOW,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

MARVIN T. RUNYON, JR., Postmaster

General, U.S. Postal Service,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Western District of Louisiana

(95-CV-912)

October 1, 1996

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, HIGGINBOTHAM and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

This matter is before the court on appeal by Terrence Shalow of an adverse

summary judgment in his Title VII employment discrimination claims. Finding
1Today’s ruling moots the appellee’s motion to strike appellant’s brief and record

excerpts.

2

neither error of fact nor law and for essentially the reasons stated and authorities

cited by the district court in its Memorandum Ruling signed on February 5, 1996

and filed February 6, 1996, the judgment appealed is AFFIRMED.1
DISMISS and Opinion Filed March 1, 2024 

# S

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-23-00614-CV TAMI SHERMAN-FREE, INDIVIDUALL Y AND AS EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF STEVEN MARTIN FREE, DECEASED, Appellant V. JILL ANN FREE, Appellee
On Appeal from the 469th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 469-53219-2010

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Garcia, Breedlove, and Kennedy Opinion by Justice Garcia Before the Court is appellant’s unopposed motion to dismiss this appeal. See

T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1(a). Appellant informs the Cour t that the parties have settled the
dispute of the issues ra ised in the appeal.
We grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See id.

230614F.P05 /Dennise Garcia/ DENNISE GARCIA JUSTICE–2– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT

TAMI SHERMAN-FREE, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF STEVEN MARTIN FREE, DECEASED, Appellant

No. 05-23-00614-CV V.

JILL ANN FREE, Appellee On Appeal from the 469th Judicial District Court, Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 469-53219- 2010. Opinion delivered by Justice Garcia, Justices Breedlove and Kennedy participating.

In accordance with this Court’ s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal.
As agreed by the parties, we ORDER that each party bear its own costs of this appeal.

Judgment entered March 1, 2024.
ex10-32.htm


Exhibit 10.32


 



Code: JH-HJ-071004


Location: Jinhui Company


Date: 01/01/2008


 


Coal Tar sales contracts


Seller: Xiaoyi Jinhui Coal&Coking Co., Ltd


 


Purchaser: Taiyuan Hongxing Carbon Co., Ltd







The Seller and Purchaser reach the following agreement through friendly negotiation.







1. Product name: Coal Tar







2. Quantity: 800 Ton/Month







3. Price: RMB2300 / Ton (including tax). It shall inform the purchaser in a timely manner if there is a change in price.


(Due to the fluctuation of the price, the price shall be adjusted through a Price Adjustment Letter)







4. Quality Standard: Water Content<=4%, Density 1.15g/cm3--1.20g/cm3, CPS<=4%, Ad <=0.13%, TOL Insoluble Substance 3.5%-7.0%.


The quality is subject to seller’s laboratory test report, purchaser may check it. It shall be settled through negotiation if dispute arise.







5. Settlement amount and reasonable loss: It shall be based on the weights calculated from seller, purchaser supervise the weight process. It shall be settled through negotiation if the weight difference is significant.







6. Settlement: It shall be settled in a timely manner if there is a weight difference.







7. Delivery place: at seller factory







8. Transportation: By trucks







9. Default responsibility and solutions: The default party takes the full responsibility, and it shall be settled through negotiation if there is a contract dispute.







10. Valid period: From January 1, 2008 to December 31, 2008







11. The contract is in duplicate, seller and purchaser each hold a contract, the contract come into force once it is signed and sealed by both parties.


 



	
Seller: Xiaoyi Jinhui Coal&Coking Co., Ltd

	
Purchaser: Taiyuan Hongxing Carbon Co. Ltd


	
Signature (Seal)


 

	
Signature (Seal)
EXHIBIT 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement Forms S-8 (No. 33-99216 and 333-62207) and Forms S-3 (Nos. 33-88670,
33-93812, 333-42543 and 333-46684) of Chelsea Property Group, Inc. and Form S-3
(Nos. 333-36487 and 333-39324) of Chelsea Property Group, Inc. and CPG Partners,
L.P. and in the related Prospectus of our reports dated February 27, 2001, with
respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Chelsea
Property Group, Inc. and CPG Partners, L.P. included in the Annual Reports (Form 10-K) for the year
ended December 31, 2000.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

New York, New York
March 23, 2001
Home Deadliest Most Expensive Blowouts Collapse Sunk Rigs Hurricanes Rig List Guestbook Links

Ensco 51

1. Ensco 51 blowout: before 

ignition

2. Ensco 51: fire and 

collapsed derrick

3. Ensco 51: fire and 

collapsed derrick

4. Ensco 51: Rig and platform 

damage

Rig: Ensco 51 Jack-Up

Date: 01 March 2001

Location: Platform A, Eugene Island Block 273, Gulf of Mexico

Operator: Forest Oil Corporation

Summary

Working offshore Louisiana, the crew of the Ensco 51 had just set casing when the well 

experienced an uncontrolled flow, causing a blowout and fire.

The 14-3/4" hole had been TD'd at 1700 ft and 10-3/4" casing run and circulated with no 

gas observed. The casing was then cemented and left to cure. In the early hours of 01 

March, the casing was cut to length at surface and the slip-on wellhead positioned over the 

casing. Welding operations on the wellhead began, during which time a small blue flame 

was observed and extinguished. The source was thought to be grease. No gas was 

detected. Welding then continued and a second flame was observed, slightly larger than 

the previous flame. The area was again checked for gas resulting in the gas detector 

showing its maximum level. At 0130 hours, the driller observed flow from 10+ valve on the 

conductor below the platform.

Attempts were made to stem the increasing flow of gas and fluids from 10+ valve using sea 

water and weighted drilling mud but sufficient volume could not be added to slow the flow. 

The flow continued to increase and the decision was made to abandon both the rig and 

platform at 0300 hours. The 10+ valve was opened to divert the flow of gas away from the 

rig and platform, and all 43 personnel were then safely evacuated via two lifeboats to 

Platform B.

Specialist personnel from Wild Well Control were called in to help with capping and killing 

operations but the gas flow ignited in the early hours of 02 March, due to an unknown 

ignition source. The well partially bridged on 03 March, causing the fire to go out, and the 

well was subsequently killed. Production on the platform had been shut-in during drilling 

ops, which probably prevented a greater fire.

During the fire, the Ensco 51's derrick and substructure were completely destroyed, with the 

derrick collapsing onto the platform. The platform and its production equipment were also 

extensively damaged. In the 2nd quarter of 2002, Keppel FELS won the contract to upgrade 

and repair the Ensco 51 in Singapore for re-deployment in the Asia-Pacific region by 

November 2002.

Sources:

Minerals Management Service: MMS 2001-084 Investigation

Photos 

1. MMS 2001-084 Investigation

2. Source not known 

3. Canadian Wellsite

4. MMS 2001-084 Investigation

[ Home | Deadliest | Most Expensive | Blowouts | Collapse | Sunk Rigs | Hurricanes | Rig List | Links ] 

Ensco 51 Blowout - Oil Rig Disasters - Offshore Drilling Accidents Page 1 of 1

http://home.versatel.nl/the_sims/rig/ensco51.htm 11/30/2011
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
The  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information   extracted  from  the
consolidated  balance  sheets  and  consolidated  statements  of  income  and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

       
<S>                                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                3-MOS     
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                            DEC-31-1998  
<PERIOD-END>                                 MAR-31-1998 
<CASH>                                           308,900
<SECURITIES>                                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  7,559,905 
<ALLOWANCES>                                           0
<INVENTORY>                                      776,656
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                       0 
<PP&E>                                           605,006
<DEPRECIATION>                                         0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 9,660,880
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                  0
<BONDS>                                                0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                            0
<COMMON>                                               0
<OTHER-SE>                                     7,575,885 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   9,660,880 
<SALES>                                          392,662
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 616,688
<CGS>                                                  0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    256,714
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  32,353
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  50,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                12,667
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  359,974
<INCOME-TAX>                                           0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              359,974 
<DISCONTINUED>                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                        0
<CHANGES>                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                     359,974
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       1.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       1.01

        


</TABLE>
Transport Transports 

Canada Canada

 TP 7245E

 

AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE

The following airworthiness directive (AD) may be applicable to an aircraft which our records indicate is registered in your name. ADs are issued pursuant to Canadian 

Aviation Regulation (CAR) 521 Division X. Pursuant to CAR 605.84 and the further details of CAR Standard 625, Appendix H, the continuing airworthiness of a Canadian registered aircraft is contingent upon compliance with all applicable ADs. Failure to comply with the requirements of an AD may invalidate the flight authorization of the aircraft. 

Alternative means of compliance shall be applied for in accordance with CAR 605.84 and the above-referenced Standard. 

This AD has been issued by the Continuing Airworthiness Division (AARDG), National Aircraft Certification Branch, Transport Canada, Ottawa, telephone 613 952-4357.

Pursuant to CAR 202.51 the registered owner of a Canadian aircraft shall, within seven days, notify the Minister in writing of any change of his or her name or address. 

To request a change of address, contact the Civil Aviation Communications Centre (AARC) at Place de Ville, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N8, or 1-800-305-2059, or www.tc.gc.ca/civilaviation/communications/centre/ address.asp 

24-0022 (01-2005)

1/1 No.

CF-2013-40

Issue Date 

 9 December 2013 

Number: CF-2013-40 

Subject: Incorrect Installation of the Main Landing Gear Emergency Release Clevis 

Effective: 23 December 2013 

Applicability: Bombardier Inc. model DHC-8-400, -401 and -402 aeroplanes, serial numbers 4001 

through 4109. 

Compliance: Within 2000 hours air time or 12 months, whichever occurs first, from the effective 

date of this AD. 

Background: A discrepancy has been found in the Main Landing Gear (MLG) emergency release 

clevis installation. During production, an incorrect clevis was used, resulting in improper 

installation onto the MLG alternate release cable. Failure of the clevis could cause the 

loss of the alternate release system, preventing the MLG from extending in the case of a 

failure of the normal MLG extension/retraction system. 

This AD mandates the inspection for proper MLG emergency release clevis installation, 

and the rectification as required. 

Corrective 

Actions: 

Perform a detailed visual inspection of the MLG emergency release clevis installation, 

and rectify as required, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-32-67, Initial Issue, dated 8 July 2009, or later revisions 

approved by the Chief, Continuing Airworthiness, Transport Canada. 

Authorization: For the Minister of Transport, 

ORIGINAL SIGNED BY 

Robin Lau 

Acting Chief, Continuing Airworthiness 

Contact: Anthony Wan, Continuing Airworthiness, Ottawa, telephone 613-952-4357, facsimile 

613-996-9178 or e-mail AD-CN@tc.gc.ca or any Transport Canada Centre.
**Exhibit21.1**

 

SUBSIDIARIES OFTHE REGISTRANT

 
| Chemical Design  Holdings plc             |   | (United Kingdom) |
|-------------------------------------------|--------|------------------|
| Chemical Design SARL                      |   | (France)         |
| Accelrys GmbH                             |   | (Germany)        |
| Accelrys Software  Incorporated           |   | (Delaware)       |
| Accelrys Limited                          |   | (United Kingdom) |
| Accelrys SARL                             |   | (France)         |
| Accelrys kk                               |   | (Japan)          |
| Accelrys Software  Solutions Pvt., Ltd.   |   | (India)          |
| Oxford Molecular  Limited                 |   | (United Kingdom) |
| Oxford Molecular SA                       |   | (France)         |
| SciTegic, Inc.                            |   | (United States)  |
| Synopsys Scientific  Systems Limited      |   | (United Kingdom) |
| Synopsys Scientific Systems  Incorporated |   | (New Jersey)     |
| Synomics Limited                          |   | (United Kingdom) |

 

----
* 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 set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED June 25, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-50018 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus RAUL TERRAZAS-LUCERO, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. EP-02-CR-1270-1

-------------------- Before DeMOSS, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Raul Terrazas-Lucero appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United States after deportation/removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Terrazas complains that his sentence was improperly enhanced pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) based on a prior conviction. He argues that the sentencing provision is unconstitutional. Terrazas thus contends that his sentence should not exceed theNo. 03-50018 -2- maximum terms of imprisonment and supervised release prescribed in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).
In Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. Terrazas acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres , but asserts that the decision has been cast into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). He seeks to preserve his argument for further review. Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres
. See Apprendi , 530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres “unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule it.” Dabeit , 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED. The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
#### Jayne McDaniel FUNDERBURK, Petitioner-Respondent, v. Carlton L. FUNDERBURK, Appellant.

(326 S. E. (2d) 649)

Supreme Court

Aug. 22, 1984.

ORDER

Petitioner-Respondent requests the Court to issue a *writ of certiorari*to review the decision of the Court of Appeals in *Funderburk v. Funderburk,*281 S. C. 246, 315 S. E. (2d) 126 (App. 1984). We grant the *writ of certiorari.*

The Appendix shall be docketed as the Transcript of Record as of the date of this order. Appellant-Petitioner shall file eight additional copies of the Appendix by the deadline for filing the petitioner’s brief. The materials in the Appendix are not required to be certified copies. The parties are directed to file briefs in accordance with Rule 8 of the Rules of Practice of the Supreme Court, except only one original brief and nine copies shall be required. This matter shall proceed in conformity with the Court’s rules.
A#c#jim f 

MUNCIE POWKR 

PKODUCTS. INC 

Corporoie Headquorlers 

201 East lacbonS: • Suilp 500 

Post Oflice Box 548 

MunciR].Td)3na47.10fiDr>48 

/j/jonp 765 2B4 7721 

/i).Y765 751 950C 

emnj/ info@munciepawer.com 

•••••:- "^;:TuT;Oi-' 

September 2. 2010 

Ms. Aloha Ley 

Associate Dfrector 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Dear Ms. Ley: 

It has come to our attention that the Delaware County Airport 

Authority has submitted a proposal to the U. S. Department of 

Transportation for consideration to participate in the Small 

Community Air Service Development Program. This program, as 

you know, was created to assist communities like ours in the 

development of its commercial passenger service program and 

allow Muncie the opportunity to pursue its hopes of attracting 

commercial passenger service to the Muncie area. 

Muncie Power Products is in its 75'^ anniversary and has long been 

a supporter of the growth and welfare of the Muncie-Delaware 

County community. We appreciate your time and consideration to 

this proposal. 

Sincerely, 

MUNCIE POWER PRODUCTS. INC. 

Terry L. Walker 

Chairman & CEO 

/eal 

Ray L. Chambers 

President & COO