alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FOCUS (12/11/2003) INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT Page #1 CBI: No

ID Number: P04-0132

ENGINEER: Macek \ JB

PV (kg/yr):

SUBMITTER:

USE:

OTHER USES:

MSDS: Label:

Gen Eqpt: Respirator:

Health Effects:

TLV/PEL:

CRSS (12/01/2003):

Chemical Name:

Consumer Use:

SAT (12/02/2003):

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE RATING:FOCUS (12/11/2003) INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT Page #2 CBI: No

ID Number: P04-0132

NOTES & KEY ASSUMPTIONS:

POLLUTION PREVENTION CONSIDERATIONS:

EXPOSURE-BASED REVIEW:FOCUS (12/11/2003) INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT Page #3

ID Number: P04-0132

Number of Sites: Days/yr:

Basis:

Process Description:

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES ESTIMATE SUMMARY

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURES ESTIMATE SUMMARY

Tot. # of workers:

Inhalation:

Dermal:
EXHIBIT 32.2



STATEMENT OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

OF PTEK HOLDINGS, INC.

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

§ 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly
Report of PTEK Holdings, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned Michael E. Havener, Executive
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifies, pursuant to 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/ Michael E. HavenerMichael E. HavenerChief Financial OfficerPTEK Holdings, Inc.August 9, 2004
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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of American Superconductor Corporation (the
Company) for the period ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Gregory J. Yurek, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby
certifies, 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 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.



|                 |  |  |  |  |  |                         |  |                        
|---------------- |  |  |  |  |  | ----------------------- |  | -----------------------
|                 |  |  | 
|February 7, 2008 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/    GREGORY J.
YUREK
|                 |  |  |  |  |  |                         |  | Gregory J. Yurek       
|                 |  |  |  |  |  |                         |  | Chief Executive Officer
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-86,477-01

EX P ARTE JUAN MA RTIN LOPEZ , Appli cant

ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. CR-04- 0780-A IN THE 22ND DISTRICT COURT

F ROM HAYS COUNTY

Per curiam . O R D E R Pursuant to the provisi o n s o f Ar t icle 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedur e, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y o u n g , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). A jury convicted Applicant of sever al child-sex offense s ag ainst four victims. There was no dire ct appe al. Applicant argues that he is actua lly innocent. He states that two of the four victims provided

rec antations, and the State argues why the rec antations are not cre dible. These rec antations wer e not made part of the habea s rec ord to this Court, and the trial court did not hold an evidentiar y hear ing. We b el i ev e t hat, in rec antation case s such as this one, befor e we make the important decision of whether Applicant is entitled to relief , the record should be more fully dev el o ped. The trial court-2-

shall there fore conduct a live evidentiar y h ea ri n g on the matter. The trial court shall weig h the evidenc e of Applicant’s guilt, including all of the testimony at trial, ag ainst the new evidenc e of innocenc e. See Ex parte Tuley , 109 S.W .3d 388, 393 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002). The trial court shall enter finding s of fact as t o t he cre dibilit y of eac h witness and as to whether Applicant is actua lly innocent of the offe nses. The tr i al co urt shall also supplement the rec ord to this Court with the

rec antations Applicant provide d. I t does not appea

r that Applicant is repr esente d by habea s counsel. I f not, t h e trial court, within 30 day s of the date of this order , shall deter mine whether Applicant is indige nt. I f Applicant is ind i gen t an d wi s h es to be repr esente d by counsel, the trial court shall appoint an attorney to repr esent Applica

nt at the evidentiar

y hear ing. T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 26.04. This application will be held in abeyance until the trial court has resolved the fac t issues. The issues shall be resolved within 90 day s of this order

. A supplemental transcr i p t co n t ai n ing all aff idavits and int err og atories or the t ransc ription of t he court repor ter’s notes from any hearing or deposition, alongwith the trial court’ s supplemental finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of law, shall be for war ded to this Court withi n 120 day s of the date of t his order. Any extensions of ti me must be re quested by

the trial cour

t and shall be obtaine d from this Court.

Deliver ed: April 12, 2017 Do not publish
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-11-00593- CV

Isela More no and Latief Bow ser, A ppellan ts

v. Texas Depart m ent of Fam ily and P rote ctive Service s, Appellee

F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F TRAVIS CO UNTY, 53RD J UDICIAL DI STRICT NO. D-1 -F M- 11- 0007 31, H ONO RAB LE DARLENE BY RNE, JUDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
I sela Moreno and L atief Bow ser filed this acc eler ated appea l from the district court’s decr ee terminating her pare ntal rig hts to their minor children, N.M., J .B., and G.B ., and appointing the Texas Depa

rtment of Family and Prote ct i v e Service s as the children’ s perma nent manag ing
conser vator. The trial c ourt appointed a n attorney for e ach a

ppellant. 1 Eac h appellant has a court-a ppointed attorney who filed a brief concluding t hat his client’s appea l is frivolous and without merit. The briefs meet the requi re m ents of Anders

v. Calif ornia , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by prese nting a p ro fe s sional evalua tion of the rec ord and demonstrating why there are no arguable g rounds to be adva nced on a ppeal. See 386 U.S. at 744;

see also Taylor v. Texa s De p ’t of Prot. & Regulatory Servs. , 160 S.W .3d 641, 646–47

T h e o rder also terminated the pare ntal rela tionship betwee n I sela Moreno’ s husband, 1 Thomas Moreno, and t h e children based on his Affidavit of Relinquishment of Parenta l Rights. Thomas Moreno did not appe al the dec ree terminating his rights.(Tex. App.—Austin 2005, pet. denied) (apply ing Anders procedur e in appea l from termination of pare ntal rig hts). The attorney s eac h cer tified to this Court that they provided their clients with a copy of the Anders brief and notice of their rig ht to examine the appellate rec ord and file a pro se brief. 2 Neither appellant f

iled a pro se brief. We have revie wed th e re co rd and counsels’ briefs and ag ree that the appellants’ appea ls are frivolous and without merit. Finding nothing in the rec ord that might arguably support an appe al, we g rant both counse ls’ motions t o withdraw a nd aff irm the order

of termination.

J eff Rose, J ustice Be fore Chief J ustice Jones, J ustices Rose and Goodw in Affir med Filed: F ebrua

ry 28, 2013

The attorney for I sela Moreno filed his brief on May 8, 2012. A few day s later, he filed a 2 sug g estion of death indicating that More no died on May 7, 2012. We never

theless have revie wed the merits of he r appe al as pre sented in her counsel’s br ief a

nd the re cord. 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO FILE UNDER SEAL

On the Plaintiffs’ Motion and for good cause shown, it is hereby ORDERED: 

1. The Plaintiffs’ deposition transcripts will be filed under seal and redacted versions will

be filed on the public docket. Plaintiffs will redact confidential identifying information 

and sensitive medical or bodily information only.

2. To the extent that the parties’ summary judgment briefing cites to redacted portions of

the deposition transcripts, that briefing will also be filed under seal and redacted

versions will be filed on the public docket.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

___________________ 

United States District Judge

Dated: January ____, 2020

STACIE RAY,

et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

AMY ACTON, 

et al., 

Defendants.

Case No. 2:18-cv-00272 

Judge: Michael Watson

Magistrate Judge: Chelsey Vascura

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case: 2:18-cv-00272-MHW-CMV Doc #: 54-1 Filed: 01/09/20 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: 339
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1517
BARRY GREEN, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BOMBARDIER CAPITAL, INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (CA-03-4070-3-22BD) Submitted: September 29, 2004 Decided: October 8, 2004 Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Barry Green, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Jonathan M. Milling, MCNAIR LAW FIRM, PA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Barry Green, Jr., appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and granting Defendant’s motion to dismiss this civil action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Green v. Bombardier Capital , No. CA-03-4070-3-22BD (D.S.C. filed Apr. 15, 2004; entered April 16, 2004). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-7416
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus WILLIAM COLUMBUS SMITH, a/k/a Smitty, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge. (CR-92-46-N, CA-97-225-2) Submitted: January 30, 1998 Decided: April 7, 1998 Before WILKINS and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William Columbus Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Kevin Michael Comstock, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion andfind no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Smith , Nos. CR-92-46-N; CA-97-225-2 (E.D. Va. Sept. 19, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
##### 



Exhibit 32.01
 Certification of Principal Executive Officer
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) 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 for the periods presented therein.
 Date: March 1, 2007
    
    /s/ Steve TiradoSteve Tirado
President and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          18,001
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,220
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      1,154
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                29,276
<PP&E>                                           1,436
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,249
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  31,249
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,271
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       143,459
<OTHER-SE>                                   (116,493)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    31,249
<SALES>                                          7,705
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 7,705
<CGS>                                            1,584
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,584
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 8,048
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,464)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,464)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,464)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.05)


</TABLE>
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

SOUTH PARK VENTURES, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

JOHN JACK, NOBLE ZICKEFOOSE, 

and TERRY CLARK,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2:17-cv-373

District Judge Nora Barry Fischer

Magistrate Judge Robert C. Mitchell

MEMORANDUM ORDER

The present action was initiated in this Court on March 23, 2017 and was referred to

Magistrate Judge Robert C. Mitchell for pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrate 

Judges Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and Local Rules of Court 72.C and 72.D. On May 2, 2017, 

the above-captioned Defendants filed the pending Motion to Transfer and Brief in Support, 

seeking to have the case transferred to the United States District Court for the Southern District 

of Ohio, Eastern Division pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). (Docket Nos. 8 Errata 11, 9). 

Plaintiff filed a Brief in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion on May 30, 2017, (Docket No. 16), 

and Defendants filed a Reply Brief on June 13, 2017. (Docket No. 13). On August 28, 2017, 

Magistrate Judge Mitchell issued a Report & Recommendation (“R&R”) that recommended 

granting Defendants’ Motion to Transfer. (Docket No. 24). Service of the R&R was made on all 

parties. 

The parties were informed that objections to the R&R were due by September 11, 2017 

and that failure to timely file same will waive the right of appeal. To date, no objections have 

been filed and the time to do so has expired. Accordingly, after a de novo review of the 

pleadings and documents in this case, together with the R&R, the following order is entered:
2

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the R&R [24] of Magistrate Judge Robert C. Mitchell is 

hereby adopted as the opinion of the district court;

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Defendants’ Motion to Transfer [8] Errata [11] is 

GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall transfer this action to the 

United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Eastern Division FORTHWITH.

/s/ Nora Barry Fischer

Nora Barry Fischer

United States District Judge

Date: September 13, 2017

cc/ecf: All counsel of record.
Case 1:01-cv-00067-HJW Document 94 Filed 09/15/2003 Page 1 of 4
Case 1:01-cv-00067-HJW Document 94 Filed 09/15/2003 Page 2 of 4
Case 1:01-cv-00067-HJW Document 94 Filed 09/15/2003 Page 3 of 4
Case 1:01-cv-00067-HJW Document 94 Filed 09/15/2003 Page 4 of 4
----

EXHIBIT 31.1

**CERTIFICATION**

I, Jeffrey Simon, certify that:

I have reviewed this report on Form 10-QSB of WiFiMed Holdings Company, Inc.;

1.                  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;

2.                  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;

3.                  The registrant's other certifying officer(s) 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)        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

(c)        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

4.                  The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditor 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 19, 2007

/s/ Jeffrey Simon                                

Jeffrey Simon

Chief Executive Officer
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### United States Institute of Peace

# AGENCY:

United States Institute of Peace (USIP) and Endowment of the United States Institute of Peace.

# ACTION:

Announcement of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

                        Meeting of the Board of Directors: Chair's Report; Vice Chair's Report; President's Report; Approval of Minutes; USIP Key Current Initiatives:                         *Ethiopia; Afghanistan and Pakistan; Strategic Stability;*                         and                         *Youth;*                         Reports from USIP Board Committees: Governance and Compliance; Strategy and Program; Audit and Finance; Security and Facilities; and Talent and Culture.                    

# DATES:

Friday, January 21, 2022 (10:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m.).

# ADDRESSES:

                        Virtual Board Meeting Information: Join by video: Join ZoomGov Meeting                         *https://usip-org.zoomgov.com/​j/​1617695522?​pwd=​dzMwNWFCbzJGZHlPOGZzUk15TjNBZz09;​*                         Meeting ID: 161 769 5522; Passcode: 249160.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Megan O'Hare, 202-429-4144,                         *mohare@usip.org.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Open Session—Portions may be closed pursuant to Subsection (c) of Section 552(b) of Title 5, United States Code, as provided in subsection 1706(h)(3) of the United States Institute of Peace Act, Public Law 98-525.

*Authority:*22 U.S.C. 4605(h)(3).                

Dated: January 10, 2022.

Megan O'Hare,

Chief of Staff.

[FR Doc. 2022-00921 Filed 1-18-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6820-AR-P