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

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4612 

To amend title 39, United States Code, to provide that the procedures 

governing the closure or consolidation of postal branches and stations 

shall be the same as those applicable in the case of post offices. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 4, 2010 

Mr. SESTAK introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

A BILL 

To amend title 39, United States Code, to provide that 

the procedures governing the closure or consolidation 

of postal branches and stations shall be the same as 

those applicable in the case of post offices. 

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

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF PROCEDURES RELATING TO 

4 POSTAL CLOSINGS AND CONSOLIDATIONS. 

5 Section 404 of title 39, United States Code, is 

6 amended by adding at the end the following: 

7 ‘‘(f) For purposes of subsections (a)(3) and (d)— 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4612 IH

1 ‘‘(1) the term ‘post office’ includes a branch, 

2 station, or other facility which— 

3 ‘‘(A) is operated by the Postal Service; and 

4 ‘‘(B) provides services to persons described 

5 in paragraph (2); and 

6 ‘‘(2) any reference in subsection (d) to the per7 sons served by a post office shall include any postal 

8 patrons receiving mail delivery services from such 

9 post office, residents within any ZIP code served by 

10 such post office, postal patrons having post office 

11 boxes at such post office, and the relevant local gov12 ernment officials (as defined under regulations of 

13 the Postal Service).’’. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 31.2



CERTIFICATION



I, Martin A. Simonetti, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Dendreon Corporation;



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. N/A



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 the 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: August 5, 2004



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ Martin A. Simonetti              
|Martin A. Simonetti                  
|Senior Vice President, Finance       
|Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-01-2000
<CASH>                                       3,993,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               60,273,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                (2,575,000)
<INVENTORY>                                  1,109,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            76,136,000
<PP&E>                                      17,691,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              (4,895,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             181,723,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      118,078,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        65,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  43,240,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               181,723,000
<SALES>                                    471,152,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           471,152,000
<CGS>                                      378,856,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              378,856,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           115,609,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           5,329,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (28,212,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (28,212,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (2,895,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (2.27)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (2.27)



</TABLE>
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONSPURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 302 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

**Chief Executive Officer Certification**

 

I, R. Jack DeCrane,certify that:

 

1.                        I have reviewed this Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q of DeCrane Aircraft Holdings, Inc.;

 

2.        Based on my knowledge, this report does not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3.        Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, andother financial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.        The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand have:

 

(a)     Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;

 

(b)     (Paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos.33-8238 and 34-47986)

 

(c)     Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

 

(d)     Disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and

 

5.        The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and Ihave disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofthe registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

 

(a)     All significant deficiencies and material weaknessesin the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting whichare 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 involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.

 
| Date: August 16, 2004 |
|-----------------------|
|                  |   |
|                  |   |
|                  | /s/  R. JACK  DECRANE |   |
|                  | R. Jack DeCrane |
|                  | Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

United States of America

v. 2:18-cr-57

Judge Marbley

Juan T. Rodriguez-Rodriguez 

ORDER

There being no objections, the court hereby adopts the Report

and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 25) that the

defendant’s guilty plea be accepted. The Court accepts the

defendant’s plea of guilty to Count 1 of the Information, and he is

hereby adjudged guilty on this count. The Court will defer the

decision of whether to accept the plea agreement until the

sentencing hearing.

Date: June 4, 2018 s\Algenon L. Marbley 

 Algenon L. Marbley

 United States District Judge
----

Exhibit 32.1

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO****13 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 WiFiMed Holdings Company, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Gregory D. Vacca, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 13 U.S.C. § 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: May 19, 2008

| /s/ Gregory D. Vacca                              |
|---------------------------------------------------|
|                                                   |
| Gregory D. Vacca          Chief Executive Officer |
Exhibit 23

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Form S-3 (File Nos. 333-34488, 333-67371, 333-76724, 333-79385, 333-96919 and
333-100322) and on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-39674, 333-39676 and 333-39678) of
Headwaters Incorporated of our report dated November 15, 2002 with respect to
the consolidated financial statements of Headwaters Incorporated included in
this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended September 30, 2002.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Salt Lake City, Utah
December 18, 2002
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-20779

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JOSE LUIS RODRIGUEZ MARTINEZ, also known as Jose Luis Rodriguez, also

known as Jose Luis Rodriguez-Martinez,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:09-CR-339-1

Before SMITH, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

*

Jose Luis Rodriguez Martinez (Rodriguez) appeals the sentence imposed

following his conviction for illegal reentry after deportation under 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326. Rodriguez contends that the district court erred by imposing a 16-level

crime of violence enhancement based on his prior Texas conviction for sexual

assault of a child, which is a violation of Texas Penal Code § 22.011(a)(2). He

argues that this conviction does not constitute the enumerated offense of sexual

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

October 26, 2010

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

Case: 09-20779 Document: 00511274433 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/26/2010
No. 09-20779

abuse of a minor or statutory rape under the Guidelines because an offense

under § 22.011 can be committed against a victim who is only 16 years of age.

Rodriguez concedes that his argument is foreclosed and moves for summary

affirmance to preserve the issue for appeal.

As Rodriguez concedes, his argument is foreclosed by United States v.

Castro-Guevarra, 575 F.3d 550 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 130 S. Ct. 649 (2009).

Accordingly, his motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED and the judgment

of the district court is AFFIRMED.

2

Case: 09-20779 Document: 00511274433 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/26/2010
---

CERTIFICATIONS

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 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 24 Hour Auction
  (the "Company") on Form 10QSB for the period ended February 29, 2004 as filed
  with the Securities and Exchange Commission on this date, the undersigned, being
  the 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 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 17, 2004 | Signed: | /s/ Robin Lee                                          
|------------------------ | ------- | -------------------------------------------------------
|                         | Name:   | Robin Lee                                              
|                         | Title:  | Chief Executive Officer and principal financial officer

---
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the  incorporation by reference in the  registration  statement of
Covol  Technologies,  Inc. on Form S-3 (File No.  333-67371) of our report dated
December 22, 1998,  on our audits of the  consolidated  financial  statements of
Covol  Technologies,  Inc. as of September 30, 1998 and 1997,  and for the years
ended  September  30,  1998,  1997,  and 1996,  which report is included in this
Annual Report on Form 10-K.

/PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP/

Salt Lake City, Utah
December 22, 1998
#### Marvin HENDERSON v. STATE of Arkansas

CR 85-193

705 S.W.2d 14

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Opinion delivered March 10, 1986

*332
      *Darrell F. Brown & Associates, P.A.,*for appellant.

*Steve Clark,*Att’y Gen., by: *Theodore Holder,*Asst. Att’y Gen., for appellee.

Steele Hays, Justice.

Marvin Henderson appeals from a conviction of aggravated robbery and theft of property upon the single ground that the evidence against him is insufficient as a matter of law. We affirm the judgment.

Three employees of Bojangles’ restaurant in Little Rock testified that on the morning of July 15, 1984 an armed man wearing a ski mask approached them as they opened the restaurant for business. They said he guided them to the safe, knew the exact location of money bags, and gave other indications that he was familiar with the restaurant and its operation.

All three employees identified appellant as the robber. They were able to recognize him by an oblong shaped head under a tight fitting ski mask and by his voice, described as “very crisp and clear.” They said the man was relaxed and sure of himself. One of the employees testified that as the robber was collecting the money he realized from his voice and the peculiar shape of his head the robber was a fellow student at Philander Smith College. The witness identified appellant as the same man. The state proved as well that appellant had been a manager trainee at Bojangles in 1983.

Appellant argues that the verdict must be supported by substantial evidence as defined in *Heard*v. *State,*284 Ark. 457, 683 S.W.2d 232 (1985) and *Boone*v. *State,*282 Ark. 274, 688 S.W.2d 17 (1984). He maintains that identification by voice and the shape of one’s head fails to constitute substantial evidence as a matter of law. We considered a similar argument in *Wilson*v. *State,*282 Ark. 551, 669 S.W.2d 889 (1984), and held the proof *333was sufficient to submit the case to the jury.

The proof in this case was that the appellant had a distinctive voice and that he spoke frequently to the employees as he shepherded them around the restaurant, first to the safe, then to the walk-in. That identifying feature was reinforced by testimony that the man who robbed the restaurant had a peculiarly shaped head, described as oblong and visible under a close fitting ski mask. There was also testimony that the robber knew the location of the safe and contents which, coupled with the fact that appellant had been employed by Bojangles some months earlier, renders the proof of identification of appellant as more than sufficient to submit the issue to the jury. *Yandell*v. *State,*262 Ark. 195, 555 S.W.2d 561 (1977).

Affirmed.

Purtle, J., not participating.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

WESTERN DIVISION 

KIMBERLY FREEMAN, Civil Action No. 17-cv-867 

Plaintiff, Barrett, J. 

 Bowman, M.J 

vs. 

RITE AID, et al., 

 Defendants. 

 

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

 On January 2, 2018, the Court issued a Deficiency Order stating that Plaintiff 

must pay the full filing fee of $400.00 or submit a fully completed application and 

affidavit to proceed in forma pauperis within 30 days of the date of this Order. The Order 

further stated that Plaintiff’s failure to pay the filing fee or to submit an application to 

proceed in forma pauperis within this time limit would result in dismissal. (Doc. 2). 

Plaintiff has not paid the filling fee nor has she submitted an application to proceed in 

forma pauperis. 

Plaintiff's failure to prosecute this matter and to obey an Order of the Court 

warrants dismissal of this case pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b). See Jourdan v. Jabe, 

951 F.2d 108, 109–10 (6th Cir.1991). District courts have the power to sua sponte 

dismiss civil actions for want of prosecution to “manage their own affairs so as to 

achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases.” Link v. Wabash R.R., 370 

U.S. 626, 630–31, 82 S.Ct. 1386, 8 L.Ed.2d 734 (1962). See also Jourdan, 951 F.2d at 

109. Though plaintiff is proceeding pro se, as stated by the Supreme Court, “we have 

Case: 1:17-cv-00867-MRB-SKB Doc #: 3 Filed: 04/18/18 Page: 1 of 3 PAGEID #: 9
2 

never suggested that procedural rules in ordinary civil litigation should be interpreted so 

as to excuse mistakes by those who proceed without counsel.” McNeil v. United States, 

508 U.S. 106, 113 (1993). 

Accordingly, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that Plaintiff's complaint be 

DISMISSED for want of prosecution and for failure to obey a Court Order. As no 

additional claims remain pending, the undersigned further RECOMMENDS that this 

case be CLOSED.

 s/ Stephanie K. Bowman 

 Stephanie K. Bowman 

 United States Magistrate Judge 

Case: 1:17-cv-00867-MRB-SKB Doc #: 3 Filed: 04/18/18 Page: 2 of 3 PAGEID #: 10
3 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

WESTERN DIVISION 

KIMBERLY FREEMAN, Civil Action No. 1:17-cv-867 

Plaintiff, Barrett, J. 

 Bowman, M.J 

vs. 

DIRECTOR MOHR, et al., 

 Defendants. 

 

NOTICE 

 Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), any party may serve and file specific, written 

objections to this Report & Recommendation (“R&R”) within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS

after being served with a copy thereof. That period may be extended further by the 

Court on timely motion by either side for an extension of time. All objections shall 

specify the portion(s) of the R&R objected to, and shall be accompanied by a 

memorandum of law in support of the objections. A party shall respond to an 

opponent’s objections within FOURTEEN DAYS after being served with a copy of those 

objections. Failure to make objections in accordance with this procedure may forfeit 

rights on appeal. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); United States v. Walters, 

638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981). 

Case: 1:17-cv-00867-MRB-SKB Doc #: 3 Filed: 04/18/18 Page: 3 of 3 PAGEID #: 11
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 10 (Friday, January 14, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 2466]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-00678]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

POSTAL SERVICE


International Product Change--Inbound International Tracked 
Delivery Service

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add Inbound International Tracked 
Delivery Service to the list of International Ancillary Services in the 
Competitive Product List in the Mail Classification Schedule, and to 
add Inbound International Tracked Delivery Service to the list of 
Optional Features for Inbound Letter Post Small Packets and Bulky 
Letters in the Mail Classification Schedule.

DATES: Date of notice: January 14, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher C. Meyerson, (202) 268-
7820.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642, on January 7, 
2022, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a Request of USPS 
to Add Inbound International Tracked Delivery Service to the 
Competitive Product List, [and] Notice of Establishment of 
Classifications and Rates Not of General Applicability. In the request, 
the United States Postal Service[supreg] seeks to add Inbound 
International Tracked Delivery Service to the competitive product list 
and to classify it as an international ancillary service of the Inbound 
Letter Post Small Packets and Bulky Letters product. Documents are 
available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2022-37 and CP2022-44.

Joshua Hofer,
Attorney, Ethics and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2022-00678 Filed 1-13-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P