alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit No. 32

 

CERTIFICATION 

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

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

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of United Retail Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended April 29, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), we, Raphael Benaroya, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and George R. Remeta, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, that based on our 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 Company.

 
| /s/ RAPHAEL BENAROYA

Raphael Benaroya

Chief Executive Officer

June 5, 2006         |   |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                                                                  |   |
| /s/ GEORGE R. REMETA

George R. Remeta

Chief Financial Officer

June 5, 2006

  |   |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>

</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           1,377
<SECURITIES>                                    12,399
<RECEIVABLES>                                      354
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                14,511
<PP&E>                                           5,346
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,097
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  15,760
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,956
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          1
<COMMON>                                            15
<OTHER-SE>                                      13,788
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    15,760
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 3,336
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    8,417
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4,686)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,686)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,686)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.31)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.31)


</TABLE>
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.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Office of Foreign Assets Control

# AGENCY:

Office of Foreign Assets Control, Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is publishing the names of one or more individuals and entities that have been placed on OFAC's Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List (SDN List) based on OFAC's determination that one or more applicable legal criteria were satisfied. All property and interests in property subject to U.S. jurisdiction of these persons are blocked, and U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with them.

# DATES:

                        See                         **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION**                         section for applicable date.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

OFAC: Andrea Gacki, Director, tel.: 202-622-2490; Associate Director for Global Targeting, tel.: 202-622-2420; Assistant Director for Licensing, tel.: 202-622-2480; Assistant Director for Regulatory Affairs, tel.: 202-622-4855; or the Assistant Director for Sanctions Compliance & Evaluation, tel.: 202-622-2490.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

## Electronic Availability

                    The SDN List and additional information concerning OFAC sanctions programs are available on OFAC's website (                    *https://www.treasury.gov/​ofac*).                

## Notice of OFAC Action

On January 21, 2022, OFAC determined that the property and interests in property subject to U.S. jurisdiction of the following persons are blocked under the relevant sanctions authority listed below.
      ( print page 4329)    

## Individuals

      ( print page 4330)    

## Entities

      ( print page 4331)          ( print page 4332)    

Dated: January 21, 2022.

Bradley T. Smith, 

Deputy Director, Office of Foreign Assets Control, U.S. Department of the Treasury.

BILLING CODE 4810-AL-P

[FR Doc. 2022-01542 Filed 1-26-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4810-AL-C
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 21 (Tuesday, February 1, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 5455]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-01977]


========================================================================
Notices
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules 
or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings 
and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings, 
delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency 
statements of organization and functions are examples of documents 
appearing in this section.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 21 / Tuesday, February 1, 2022 / 
Notices

[[Page 5455]]



UNITED STATES AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION


Public Quarterly Meeting of the Board of Directors

AGENCY: United States African Development Foundation.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The US African Development Foundation (USADF) will hold its 
quarterly meeting of the Board of Directors to discuss the agency's 
programs and administration. This meeting will occur at the USADF 
office.

DATES: The meeting date is Tuesday, February 1, 2022, 10:00 a.m. to 
11:30 a.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting location is USADF, 1400 I St. NW, Suite 1000, 
Washington, DC 20005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nina-Belle Mbayu, (202)233-8808.
    Authority: Public Law 96-533 (22 U.S.C. 290h).

    Dated: January 26, 2022.
Nina-Belle Mbayu,
Associate General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2022-01977 Filed 1-31-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6117-01-P
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Lynne M. Jurek v. Jeffrey S. Shannon II

Appellate case number: 01-15-00092-CV

Trial court case number: 2012-38540

Trial court: 312th District Court of Harris County

Appellant’s “Motion to Voluntary Dismiss Appeal” [sic] is DENIED, without prejudice 

to refiling. The certificate of service is not compliant with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 

9.5 and lists a document other than a motion to dismiss as the document served. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 9.5.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Harvey Brown

X Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: June 2, 2015
Jose DIAZ, Kirsys Diaz, and Danielle Cohen, Appellants, v. Lino CALVO, Appellee.

No. 3D17-77

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed March 14, 2018.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
4
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : CASE NO. 3:18cr92

Plaintiff,

JUDGE WALTER H. RICE

vs.
JEREMY WELLS

Defendant.

ENTRY REFERRING DEFENDANT TO THE FORENSIC PSYCHIATRY
CENTER FOR WESTERN OHIO FOR PURPOSES OF A MENTAL STATUS
EVALUATION, PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. §3552(c); PROCEDURES
ORDERED OF COUNSEL

This Court, upon its own motion, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3552(c), refers Defendant herein
to the Forensic Psychiatry Center for Western Ohio, for the purposes of a mental status evaluation.

Accordingly, it is the request of this Court that counsel for the Defendant and the
government furnish the Forensic Psychiatry Center for Western Ohio with any materials and/or
statements they wish within seven days from date of this Entry. For its part, the Court will furnish
the Criminal Complaint and the Pre-Sentence Investigation Report once available. The Forensic
Psychiatry Center for Western Ohio should delay any evaluation until expiration of the seven day
period.

The officials at the Shelby County Jail are to do all within their power to facilitate this

evaluation.

December 17, 2019 Cn

WALTER H. RICE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies to:

Counsel of record
United States Marshal
Shelby County Jail
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-4869

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

BRADLEY LANIER CALDWELL,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle

District of North Carolina, at Durham. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr.,

Chief District Judge. (CR-04-188)

Submitted: January 31, 2006 Decided: March 6, 2006

Before WILKINSON and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Louis C. Allen, III, Federal Public Defender, Gregory Davis,

Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greensboro, North Carolina, for

Appellant. Anna Mills Wagoner, United States Attorney, Robert

Michael Hamilton, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro,

North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Bradley Lanier Caldwell appeals from the district court’s

order revoking his supervised release and sentencing him to twentyfour months’ imprisonment. Caldwell’s attorney has filed a brief

pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), representing

that, in his view, there are no meritorious issues for appeal.

Caldwell has been notified of his right to file a pro se

supplemental brief but has not done so.

We review the district court’s judgment revoking

supervised release and imposing a term of imprisonment for abuse of

discretion. See, e.g., United States v. Davis, 53 F.3d 638, 642-43

(4th Cir. 1995). The conduct upon which the revocation was based

included illegal drug use, a Grade B violation. See U.S.

Sentencing Guidelines § 7B1.1(a)(2) (2004). Caldwell’s criminal

history level was V. Combining these two factors, the district

court correctly determined Caldwell’s sentencing range was eighteen

to twenty-four months. See USSG § 7B1.4(a). 

The sentence imposed by the district court was within

both the statutory and guideline range. Caldwell admitted to

testing positive for cocaine on eight occasions as well as other

supervised release violations. The district court gave Caldwell a

choice of sentences and he selected the twenty-four month sentence

because it included a drug treatment program. The sentence was
- 3 -

reasonable and the district court did not abuse its discretion in

imposing it.

Pursuant to Anders, we have examined the entire record

and find no meritorious issues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm

Caldwell’s sentence. This court requires that counsel inform his

client, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of

the United States for further review. If the client requests that

a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition

would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave

to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that

a copy thereof was served on the client. 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
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WESTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff,

Plaintiff,

v.

Andrey Shuklin, et al.,

Defendants. Defendant.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Case No. 1:18CR109

Judge Black

ADDENDUM TO MOTION FOR BOND

Now comes Defendant, Andrey Shuklin, by and through counsel, and respectfully 

moves this honorable Court to release him on bond with any conditions that this Court 

deems appropriate, including the surrender of his passport along with his wife’s and child’s

passports. The addendum to Shuklin’s motion for bond is attached. 

As this Court is aware, Mr. Shuklin has previously filed a motion for bond based on 

a lack of dangerous or risk of flight. We have received a voluminous amount of discovery 

regarding Mr. Shuklin’s case in a non-searchable format. At least the first round of 

discovery contains TIF files which require that each page be opened individually. There 

are years’ worth of documents, phone recordings, interviews, etc., that will require several 

hundred hours of work. While we are chipping away at the discovery, we are unable to 

have the assistance of Mr. Shuklin without somebody visiting him in jail. 

Case: 1:18-cr-00109-TSB Doc #: 70 Filed: 11/12/18 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: 477
2

We respectfully ask that this Court release Mr. Shuklin so that, in addition to the 

reasons stated in previous filings, he may assist us in reviewing discovery.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Martin S. Pinales

MARTIN S. PINALES (0024570)

ERIC G. ECKES (0091840)

Pinales, Stachler, Young, Burrell & Crouse Co., LPA

455 Delta Ave., Suite 105

Cincinnati, Ohio 45226

(513) 252-2750

(513) 252-2751

mpinales@pinalesstachler.com

eeckes@pinalesstachler.com

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been served via this 

Court’s electronic filing system on all counsel of record on this 12th day of November, 2018.

/s/ Martin S. Pinales _____________

MARTIN S. PINALES (0024570)

Case: 1:18-cr-00109-TSB Doc #: 70 Filed: 11/12/18 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: 478
James Amar WOODS v. Ericka Holt STEPHENS

2160244

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

March 31, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
### JUDGMENT 

## Court of Appeals First District of Texas

NO. 01

- 1 4

- 00 2 8 3

- CV

CYNTHIA HOLLAND , Appellant

V.

MEMORIAL HERMANN HEA LTH SYSTEM , Appellee
Appeal from the 165th District Court of Harris County. (Tr. Ct. No. 2013

- 17174 ).

This case is an appeal from the final judgment signed by the trial court on February 3, 2014 . After submitting the case on the appellate record and the arguments properly raised by the parties, the Court holds that there was reversible error in the trial court’s judgment . Accordingly, the Court reverses the trial court’s judgment and remands the case to the trial court for further proceedings

.
The Court orders that the appellee, Memorial Hermann Health System , pay all appellate costs.

The Court orders t hat this decision be certified below for observance.

Judgment rendered November 24 , 2015

.Panel consists of Justices Jennings , Higley, and Huddle . Opinion delivered by Justice

Jennings.
<PAGE>   1




                          SUBURBFED FINANCIAL CORP


                                 EXHIBIT 11

            STATEMENT REGARDING COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                     Three Months Ended
                                                       March 31, 1998
                                                       --------------
<S>                                                     <C>
Net Income                                              $   585,564
                                                        ===========
Weighted average shares outstanding                       1,269,208
                                                        ===========
Basic earnings per share                                $       .46
                                                        ===========
Total weighted average common shares
Outstanding for basic computation                         1,269,208
Common stock equivalents due to
Dilutive effect of stock options                            131,090
                                                        -----------
Total weighted average common shares and
Equivalents outstanding for diluted computation           1,400,298
                                                        ===========
Diluted earnings per share                              $       .42
                                                        ===========
</TABLE>
From: Gail Fallon/R8/USEPA/US

To: Jonah Staller/R8/USEPA/US@EPA, Hans Buenning/R8/USE PA/US@EPA, Aaron

Worstell/R8/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 02/24/2012 03:31 PM Subject: FYI Fw: Big Brown and Monticello

_____________________________ Gail Fallon Regional Haze Program Manager Air Quality Planning Unit (8P-AR) US EPA Region 8 1595 Wynkoop Street Denver, CO 80202-1129

Phone: 303-312-6281

Fax: 303-312-6064 Email: Fallon.Gail@epa.gov

----- Forwarded by Gail Fallon/R8/USEPA/US on 02/24 /2012 03:31 PM -----

From: grano.doug@ecrweb.com

To: Gail Fallon/R8/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 02/24/2012 03:05 PM Subject: Fwd: Re: Big Brown and Monticello



### Gail-- Some potentially helpful information from Region 6. Confirmation that Big Brown and Monitcello sell their fly ash (all units) and there have been no issues with ammonia

contamination. The ash is somewhat different from C oal Creek's in that it is a blend in Texas. --Doug

----- Forwarded message from Joe Kordzi -----

Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 15:15:30 -0600

From: Joe Kordzi Reply-To: Joe Kordzi Subject: Re: Big Brown and Monticello To: Doug

Doug,

It took a week, but I finally got through to Lumina nt. I was able to keep the conversation hypothetic al. All the units at Big Brown and Monticello sell their fl y ash. They have not had any issues with ammonia contamination. However, they noted a few caveats, should their experience be applied elsewhere. They note that the potential for ammonia contamination w ould be dependent on the amount injected - other units that use SNCR to control NOx to a higher degr ee than they do may have a greater potential for contamination. Also, they burn a mixture of lignit e and PRB - other units that burn different coals w ould have different coal chemistries and may or may not have a greater propensity for ammonia contamination. For instance, they stated their coa l is alkaline and thought that was somewhat responsible for the lack of contamination. I asked if they would be open to discussing specifics and their response was "maybe" but they may not be willing to share data.Regards,

Joe

" ... and miles to go before I sleep."

-- Robert Frost

From: "Doug" <grano.doug@ecrweb.com>

To: Joe Kordzi/R6/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 02/17/2012 11:11 AM Subject: Big Brown and Monticello



### Joe—
Good talking with you today. The questions we have are noted below. Thanks for your help.

--Doug Big Brown 1 & 2 and Monticello 1, 2 & 3 (all with S NCR)
For which units is the fly ash marketable?
For which units is some portion of the fly ash curr ently being sold?
Are any of the units using ammonia mitigation technology?

----- End forwarded message -----
EXHIBIT 32.2
                                  ------------

     CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                                   SECTION 906
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                        ---------------------------------


The undersigned hereby certifies,  pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350), that, to the best of my knowledge:

1.   The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Cumberland Technologies,  Inc. for the
     period ended June 30, 2003 as filed August 19, 2003 with the Securities and
     Exchange Commission,  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 quarterly report fairly presents,  in all
     material  respects,  the  financial  condition and results of operations of
     Cumberland Technologies, Inc.




Dated:  August 19, 2003                  By: /s/  Carol S. Black
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                         Carol S. Black, Chief Financial Officer
                                         of Cumberland Technologies, Inc.
#### Chinchen v Chinchen,

Nos. 90817, 90818;

Court of Appeals Nos. 118100, 123333.
**THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS**

**Post Office Box 12248**

**Austin, Texas 78711**

**(512) 463-1312**

June 26, 2009

Mr. Frank W. Mitchell

Frank W. Mitchell & Associates LLP.

America Tower, 42nd Floor

2929 Allen Parkway

Houston, TX 77019

Mr. Troy Ford

Beck Redden & Secrest LLP

1221 McKinney, Suite 4500

Houston, TX 77010-2010

Mr. Jeffrey C. Kubin

Gibbs & Bruns, LLP

1100 Louisiana, Suite 5300

Houston, TX 77002

RE:Case Number:  08-0990

Court of Appeals Number:  01-06-00719-CV

Trial Court Number:  98-03885-A

Style:ANTHONY AUTHORLEE, DEXTER BURNETT, ROBERT DEROUSSELLE, JOHN HENRY YOUNG, JEROME STUBBLEFIELD AND FLOYD MORAN

v.

TUBOSCOPE VETCO INTERNATIONAL, INC., AMF INCORPORATED AND MINSTAR, INC.

Dear Counsel:

Today the Supreme Court of Texas issued the enclosed abatement order in the above-referenced case.

Sincerely,

Blake A. Hawthorne, Clerk

by Claudia Jenks, Chief Deputy Clerk

Enclosure

**Case No. 08-0990Page 1**
# Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed September 22, 2021. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________ No. 3D21-1503 Lower Tribunal Nos. F82-20079, F82-21104

________________ 

### Goldwire Anderson, Appellant, vs. 

### The State of Florida, Appellee. An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Teresa M. Pooler, Judge. Goldwire Anderson, in proper person. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, for appellee. Before FERNANDEZ, C.J., and GORDO and LOBREE, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

AKIL JOHNSON,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 245 WAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 3rd day of January, 2018

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.