alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Carmine MACEDONIO, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-2563

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed February 7, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
**EXHIBIT99.2**

 

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of DawTechnologies, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30,2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, Donald K. McCauley, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, tothe best of my knowledge:

 

(1)                                  TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, except that the financial statements in theReport have not been reviewed by an independent auditor because the Company wasunable to retain an auditor to replace Arthur Andersen LLP in sufficient timeto allow a review of the financial statements; and

 

(2)                                  Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
|   |  /s/ Donald  K. McCauley |   |
|--------|-------------------------------|--------|
|   | Donald K. McCauley            |
|   | Chief Financial Officer       |
|   | Daw Technologies, Inc.        |
|   | August 13, 2002               |

 

----
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ronald Daryl MCDONALD, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 03-10436.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 11, 2004.*

Decided May 27, 2004.

Edward Torpoco, Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Francisco, CA, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Mark D. Eibert, Half Moon Bay, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: O’SCANNLAIN, SILER,** and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

**

 The Honorable Eugene E. Siler, Jr., United States Circuit Judge for the Sixth Circuit, sitting by designation.

*803ORDER ***

McDonald has completed the entirety of his sentence and has established no collateral consequences — stigmatic or otherwise — sufficient to maintain the appeal. *See Spencer v. Kemna,*523 U.S. 1, 118 S.Ct. 978, 140 L.Ed.2d 43 (1998).

DISMISSED AS MOOT.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Walter Lee RHONE, Jr. v. STATE

CR-15-1236

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

March 17, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Roger Peter MORRISON, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. OLIVE GARDEN RESTAURANT, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D16-2792

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

January 25, 2018

BY ORDER OF THE COURT:

Appellee's motion to dismiss is granted. This appeal is hereby dismissed.

NORTHCUTT, MORRIS, and BLACK, JJ., Concur.
Christopher K. TALBERT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-4045

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 22, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND THE CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS
OF INCOME AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY RERERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER>      1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   39,677
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,345
<INVENTORY>                                     19,823
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                60,572
<PP&E>                                          71,880
<DEPRECIATION>                                  38,686
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 101,970
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           46,862
<BONDS>                                         10,872
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            63
<OTHER-SE>                                      41,403
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   101,970
<SALES>                                        273,953
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               273,953
<CGS>                                          229,260
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  253,571
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,067
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 143
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 20,239
<INCOME-TAX>                                     7,792
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             12,447
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    12,447
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        


</TABLE>
Benjamin LIGERI, Appellant, v. INFINITY OF TAMPA and Ashland, Inc., Appellees.

Case No. 2D17-707

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed February 21, 2018

Benjamin Ligeri, pro se.

Marie A. Borland and Christopher S. Branton of Hill, Ward & Henderson, P.A., Tampa, for Appellee Infiniti of Tampa.

Peter P. Murnaghan and Jill K. Schmidt of Murnaghan & Ferguson, P.A., Tampa, for Appellee Ashland Inc.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

KELLY, KHOUZAM, and CRENSHAW, JJ., Concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000882342
<NAME> 90CC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                          76,726
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   48,634
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               125,360
<PP&E>                                       5,756,703
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,525,277
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,356,786
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           18,933
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,337,853
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,356,786
<SALES>                                        119,959
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               121,243
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  112,851
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  8,392
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              8,392
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     8,392
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
IN the INTEREST OF L.W., a child.

R.W., Appellant, v. Department of Children and Families and Guardian Ad Litem Program, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-1249

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed February 28, 2018

Colleen M. Glenn, Bradenton, for Appellant.

Kelley Schaeffer of Children's Legal Services, Bradenton, for Appellee Department of Children and Families.

David P. Krupski, Sanford, and Shannon M. Arsenault of McGlinchey Stafford, Ft. Lauderdale, for Appellee Guardian ad Litem Program.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

SILBERMAN, LUCAS, and BADALAMENTI, JJ., Concur.
Case: 1:18-cv-00087-MWM-KLL Doc #: 99 Filed: 11/20/18 Page: 1 of 14 PAGEID #: 718
Case: 1:18-cv-00087-MWM-KLL Doc #: 99 Filed: 11/20/18 Page: 2 of 14 PAGEID #: 719
Case: 1:18-cv-00087-MWM-KLL Doc #: 99 Filed: 11/20/18 Page: 3 of 14 PAGEID #: 720
Case: 1:18-cv-00087-MWM-KLL Doc #: 99 Filed: 11/20/18 Page: 4 of 14 PAGEID #: 721
Case: 1:18-cv-00087-MWM-KLL Doc #: 99 Filed: 11/20/18 Page: 5 of 14 PAGEID #: 722
Case: 1:18-cv-00087-MWM-KLL Doc #: 99 Filed: 11/20/18 Page: 6 of 14 PAGEID #: 723
Case: 1:18-cv-00087-MWM-KLL Doc #: 99 Filed: 11/20/18 Page: 7 of 14 PAGEID #: 724
Case: 1:18-cv-00087-MWM-KLL Doc #: 99 Filed: 11/20/18 Page: 8 of 14 PAGEID #: 725
Case: 1:18-cv-00087-MWM-KLL Doc #: 99 Filed: 11/20/18 Page: 9 of 14 PAGEID #: 726
Case: 1:18-cv-00087-MWM-KLL Doc #: 99 Filed: 11/20/18 Page: 10 of 14 PAGEID #: 727
Case: 1:18-cv-00087-MWM-KLL Doc #: 99 Filed: 11/20/18 Page: 11 of 14 PAGEID #: 728
Case: 1:18-cv-00087-MWM-KLL Doc #: 99 Filed: 11/20/18 Page: 12 of 14 PAGEID #: 729
Case: 1:18-cv-00087-MWM-KLL Doc #: 99 Filed: 11/20/18 Page: 13 of 14 PAGEID #: 730
Case: 1:18-cv-00087-MWM-KLL Doc #: 99 Filed: 11/20/18 Page: 14 of 14 PAGEID #: 731
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 


WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR 

Mr. William G. Ross Jr. 

Chairman 

National Advisory Council on Environmental Policy and Technology 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

1200 Permsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, D.C. 20460 

On behalf of everyone at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, I wish to thank you and your 

colleagues on the National Advisory Council on Environmental Policy and Technology for your second 

advisory letter on sustainability. 

Please be assured that we at the EPA are now incorporating principles of sustainability more fully into 

our ongoing regulatory and nonregulatory work. We very much appreciate your helpful 

recommendations on setting direction and creating alignment on the EPA's path to sustainability, 

engaging stakeholders in the EPA's commitment to sustainability and demonstrating the EPA's 

leadership in sustainability. 

As you are aware from recent conversations, we are already implementing some of your 

recommendations. For example, I recently established a committee of senior career deputies to work 

with me in guiding our sustainability efforts. That group has been working to embed sustainability 

principles into our strategic-planning process and documents. We have also begun discussions about 

bolstering our work on sustainability metrics. Finally, with additional encouragement from the release of 

the National Academy of Sciences' new report, Sustainability for the Nation: Resource Connections and 

Government Linkages, we are evaluating the EPA's leadership role in sustainability in the context of the 

federal government at large, and we appreciate your confidence. 

We also are grateful for your recommendations on potential breakthrough objectives. The idea of our 

setting these, as both you and the National Academy of Sciences recommended, remains a topic for 

thoughtful discussion. In establishing such objectives, we will, of course, carefully consider the 

scientific bases for evaluating achievement of the objectives as well as the resource implications in 

pursuing them. 

Further, we are pleased to begin working with a subcommittee of your members to explore the EPA's 

role within the social pillar of sustainability. This effort follows up on your recommendation that the 

EPA should link sustainability, community engagement and environmental-justice approaches 

Internet Address (URL) • http://www epa.gov


Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer, Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paper
agencywide. As we move forward on sustainability, we might ask you and your advisory-council 

colleagues for additional advice. 

In the meantime, I thank you once more for the hard work you devoted to your thoughtful and 

informative advisory letter.

Sincere)i, 

Bo Perciasepe 

cc: Cynthia Jones-Jackson
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT -]
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION tyr K
hs
: Ul [ S

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
CASE NO. 1:18-po-00054

v. :
: MOTION TO DISMISS

BRANDY OLIVER,
Defendant.

The United States moves to dismiss the above-captioned case.
Respectfully submitted,

BENJAMIN C. GLASSMAN
United States Attorney

s/ Timothy A. Landry
TIMOTHY A. LANDRY

Special Assistant United States Attorney
221 East Fourth Street, Suite 400
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Office: (513) 684-3711
Timothy.Landry@usdoj.gov
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                             875
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  262,086
<ALLOWANCES>                                    12,355
<INVENTORY>                                    279,099
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               529,705
<PP&E>                                         846,260
<DEPRECIATION>                                (660,097)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 734,009
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,964,024
<BONDS>                                         18,568
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  2,966,969
<COMMON>                                        34,221
<OTHER-SE>                                  (4,249,773)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   734,009
<SALES>                                        298,517
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               388,218
<CGS>                                          290,084
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  576,471
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              12,415
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (199,214)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (199,214)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (199,214)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.08)


</TABLE>
APPENDIX C Page 1

SMALL COMMUNITY AIR SERVICE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

DOCKET DOT-OST-2011-0119

SUMMARY INFORMATION

All applicants must submit this information with their proposal, along with a completed form SF424 on http://www.grants.gov

.

A. A PPLICANT I NFORMATION : ( CHECK ALL THAT APPLY ) ⌧ Not a Consortium Interstate Consortium Intrastate ConsortiumCommunity now receives EAS subsidy ⌧ Community (or Consortium member) previously recei ved a Small Community Grant If previous recipient: Date of grant: 09/1 5/2004 Expiration date of grant: 08/17/2006

B. P UBLIC /P RIVATE P ARTNERSHIPS : (L IST ORGANIZATION NAMES )

Public Private 1. Wilkes-Barre/Scranton International Airport 1. Greater Pittston Chamber of Commerce 2. Luzerne County 2. Greater Pocono Chamber of Commerce 3. Lackawanna County 3. Greater Scranton Chamber of Commerce
4. 4. Greater Wilkes-Barre Chamber of Comm.
5. 5. Lackawanna Co. Conv. & Visitors Bur.
6. Luzerne Co. Conv. & Visitors Bureau 7. W-B/Scranton Penguins AAA Hockey
C. P ROJECT P ROPOSAL : ( CHECK ALL THAT APPLY ) ⌧ Marketing ⌧ Upgrade Aircraft ⌧ New RouteTravel Bank ⌧ Service Restoration ⌧ SubsidySurface Transportation ⌧ Regional Service Revenue Guarantee ⌧ Launch New Carrier ⌧ Start-Up Cost Offset First ServiceStudy ⌧ Secure Additional Service Other (explain below)APPENDIX C Page 2
D. E XISTING L ANDING A IDS AT L OCAL A IRPORT : ⌧ Full ILS Outer/Middle Marker ⌧ Published Instrument Approach ⌧ Localizer Other (specify)

E. P ROJECT C OST : D O NOT ENTER TEXT IN SHADED AREA L INE D ESCRIPTION S UB T OTAL T OTAL A MOUNT 1 Federal Amount Requested $ 500,000
2 State cash financial contributions $ 0 Local cash financial contribution
3a Airport cash funds $ 100,000
3b Non-airport cash funds $ 200,000
3 Total local cash funds ( 3a + 3b ) $ 300,000 4 TOTAL CASH FUNDING ( 1+2+3 ) $ 800,000
In-Kind Contribution
5a Airport In-Kind contribution** $ 280,000 (est.)

5b Other In-Kind contribution** $ 31,900
5 TOTAL IN-KIND CONTRIBUTION ( 7a + 7b ) $ 311,900 (est.) 6 TOTAL PROJECT COST ( 4+8 ) $ 1,111,900 (est.)

F. IN-KIND CONTRIBUIONS** For funds in lines 7a (Airport In-Kind contribution ) and 7b (Other In-Kind contribution, please descri be the source(s) of fund(s) for each. 7a. minimum 6 month waiver of landing fees/space rentals, billboard usage, direct mail campaigns 7b. ad placements, trade show exposure, staff fulf illments, mailings, web site exposure/ads, newslett er insertsAPPENDIX C Page 3

F. I S THIS APPLICATION SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY S TATE UNDER E XECUTIVE O RDER 12372 PROCESS ?a. This application was made available to the St ate under the Executive Order 12372 Process for review on (date) _____________.b. Program is subject to E.O. 12372, but has not been selected by the State for review. ⌧ c. Program is not covered by E.O. 12372.

G. I S THE A PPLICANT DELINQUENT ON ANY F EDERAL DEBT ? ( IF “ YES ”, PROVIDE EXPLANATION ) ⌧ No Yes (explain) __________________________________

___________
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 23 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 23

  Directing the Architect of the Capitol to preserve evidence of the 
January 6, 2021 attack on the United States Capitol so that evidence of 
    the attack may be made available for viewing by visitors to the 
                                Capitol.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 9, 2021

Mr. Sean Patrick Maloney of New York submitted the following concurrent 
resolution; which was referred to the Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
  Directing the Architect of the Capitol to preserve evidence of the 
January 6, 2021 attack on the United States Capitol so that evidence of 
    the attack may be made available for viewing by visitors to the 
                                Capitol.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),

SECTION 1. PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE OF ATTACK ON UNITED STATES CAPITOL.

    (a) Preservation; Availability for Viewing by Visitors.--The 
Architect of the Capitol shall preserve evidence of the January 6, 2021 
attack on the United States Capitol, including by preserving features 
which were damaged in the attack, so that evidence of the attack may be 
made available for viewing by visitors to the Capitol.
    (b) Consultation.--In carrying out this section, the Architect 
shall consult with the Office of the Historian of the House of 
Representatives, the Senate Historical Office, and the Joint Committee 
on the Library to determine which evidence is most appropriate for 
preservation and the most effective methods for making such evidence 
available for viewing by visitors to the United States Capitol.
                                 <all>
```
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


      The undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the
undersigned's best knowledge and belief, the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
Geodyne Energy Income Limited Partnership I-D ("Issuer") for the period ending
December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"):

      (a)   fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
            the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (b)   the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Issuer.

      Dated this 30th day of March, 2005.

                                    GEODYNE ENERGY INCOME LIMITED
                                    PARTNERSHIP I-D
                                    ("Issuer")

                                    //s// Dennis R. Neill
                                    -----------------------------------
                                    Dennis R. Neill
                                    President (Chief Executive Officer)

                                    //s// Craig D. Loseke
                                    -----------------------------------
                                    Craig D. Loseke
                                    Chief Accounting Officer
                                    (Chief Financial Officer)