alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. (S)1350

      (ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)

In connection with the periodic report of Dynegy Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-K for the period ended December 31, 2002 dated April 11, 2003, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Bruce A. Williamson,
President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the
date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the
United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:

(1)  the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d),
     as applicable, 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
     at the dates and for the periods indicated.



Date: April 11, 2003                      /s/ Bruce A. Williamson
                                          ----------------------------
                                          Bruce A. Williamson
                                          President and Chief Executive Officer
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. David HINES, Defendant-Appellant

No. 17-30270 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed December 28, 2017

Vikram Swaruup, Tovah Calderon, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Div— Appellate Section, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff-Appellee .

Elizabeth Cary Dougherty, Esq., Dougherty Law Firm, L.L.C., Baton Rouge, LA, for Defendant-Appellant

Before WIENER, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Defendant-Appellant David Hines appeals his 40-month sentence imposed fol*804lowing his guilty plea conviction for deprivation of rights under color of law in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 242. He contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable because it is greater than necessary to accomplish the sentencing goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3558(a).

To the extent the district court granted a U.S.S.G § 5K1.1 downward departure, Hines’s reasonableness challenge is unavailing. As a general rule, we lack jurisdiction to consider a challenge to the extent of a § 5K1.1 departure. *United States*v. Malone, 828 F.3d 331, 341 (5th Cir.), *cert. denied,*— U.S. -, 137 S.Ct. 526, 196 L.Ed.2d 408 (2016). “District courts have almost complete discretion to determine the extent of a departure under § 5K1.1,” so a defendant may only appeal the extent of such a departure if it was imposed in violation of the law. *United States v. Hashimoto,*193 F.3d 840, 843 (5th Cir. 1999). Hines has made no such showing.

To the extent the sentence was a downward variance from the guidelines range, Hines’s substantive reasonableness challenge is similarly without merit. *See United States v. Simpson,*796 F.3d 548, 557 (5th Cir. 2015), *cert. denied,*— U.S. -, 136 S.Ct. 920, 193 L.Ed.2d 807 (2016). As a threshold matter, we need not decide whether to apply plain error review because Hines’s contentions fail to show any abuse of discretion. *See United States v. Rodriguez,*523 F.3d 519, 525 (5th Cir. 2008).

Hines’s arguments amount to a disagreement with the district court’s weighing of the § 3553(a) factors. We will not reweigh the § 3553(a) factors, however, because “the sentencing judge is in a superior position to find facts and judge their import under § 3553(a) with respect to a particular defendant.” *United States v. Campos-Maldonado,*531 F.3d 337, 339 (5th Cir. 2008). Neither has Hines shown any unwarranted sentencing disparity. *See United States v. Balleza,*613 F.3d 432, 435 (5th Cir. 2010). Finally, we lack jurisdiction to consider Hines’s claim that he should have received a downward departure under U.S.S.G. § 5K2.10 because he fails to show that the district court mistakenly believed it lacked authority to depart. *See United States v. Sam,*467 F.3d 857, 861 (5th Cir. 2006).

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be *804published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 68 (Friday, April 8, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 20813]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-07473]


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

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Notice of Public Meeting of the Illinois Advisory Committee; 
Correction

AGENCY: Commission on Civil Rights.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Commission on Civil Rights published a notice in the 
Federal Register on Tuesday, March 29, 2022, concerning a meeting of 
the Illinois Advisory Committee. The document contained the incorrect 
meeting time.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Liliana Schiller, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#244857474c4d484841566451574747560a434b52"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5b372838333237373e291b2e28383829753c342d">[email protected]</span></a>, 
202-376-7756.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Correction

    In the Federal Register on Tuesday, March 29, 2022, in FR Document 
Number 2022-06530, on page 17981, second column, correct the meeting 
time in the SUMMARY to 1:00 p.m. CT.

    Dated: Tuesday, April 4, 2022.
David Mussatt,
Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
[FR Doc. 2022-07473 Filed 4-7-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### ADOPTION OF W.F.S., a Minor, Appeal of: D.W.S.

637 WDA 2017

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

09/15/2017

(Armstrong)

Affirmed
IV

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 74

Concerning the situation between the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea

and the Republic of Korea.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 6, 1997

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida submitted the following concurrent resolution; which

was referred to the Committee on International Relations

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Concerning the situation between the Democratic People’s

Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea.

Whereas the Korean demilitarized zone remains extremely

tense 44 years after the ending of the Korean War;

Whereas with more than 1,000,000 soldiers in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and 600,000 soldiers in

the Republic of Korea, both militaries are on a constant

high alert;

Whereas the threat of North-South military confrontation between the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the

Republic of Korea is of grave concern to the United

States;

Whereas 37,000 United States troops are stationed on the

Korean Peninsula;
2

•HCON 74 IH

Whereas the United States and the Republic of Korea have

long had a close relationship based on mutual respect,

shared security goals, and shared interests;

Whereas in April 1996 President Clinton and Republic of

Korea President Kim Young Sam invited China and the

Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to participate in

four-way talks with the goal of replacing the 1953 armistice agreement with a permanent peace settlement;

Whereas the participation of China is integral to the success

of any agreement;

Whereas it will be impossible to resolve the conflict on the

Korean Peninsula and fashion a lasting solution unless

the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea engage in direct dialogue, without depending on other parties to act as intermediaries;

Whereas there is estimated to be a 2,300,000 ton grain

shortfall in 1997 in the Democratic People’s Republic of

Korea;

Whereas there have been recent eyewitness reports of starvation, malnutrition, and widespread disease in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea; and

Whereas these food shortages could lead to political instability: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That the Congress—

3 (1) supports United States troops who have

4 faithfully served the interests of the United States

5 by ensuring stability on the Korean Peninsula;
3

•HCON 74 IH

1 (2) supports our Republic of Korea allies who

2 have made good faith efforts to resolve this conflict;

3 and

4 (3) supports four-way talks between the United

5 States, China, the Republic of Korea, and the Demo6 cratic People’s Republic of Korea to peacefully and

7 permanently resolve the conflict between the two Ko8 reas.

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 66 (Wednesday, April 6, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19956-19957]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-07241]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health (ABRWH); Notice of 
Charter Renewal

AGENCY: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of 
Health and Human Services (HHS).

ACTION: Notice of charter renewal.

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

SUMMARY: This gives notice under the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 
October 6, 1972, that the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health 
(ABRWH), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Department of 
Health and Human Services, has been renewed

[[Page 19957]]

for a 2-year period through March 22, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rashaun Roberts, Ph.D., Designated 
Federal Officer, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 
CDC, 1090 Tusculum Avenue, Mailstop C-24, Cincinnati, Ohio 45226, 
Telephone: (513) 533-6800, Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#b1ded2d0c2f1d2d5d29fd6dec7"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="8ae5e9ebf9cae9eee9a4ede5fc">[email protected]</span></a>.
    The Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the 
Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 
has been delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices 
pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management 
activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and 
the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

Kalwant Smagh,
Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the Chief 
Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2022-07241 Filed 4-5-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This Financial Data Schedule contains summary financial information extracted
from the Consolidated Financial Statements of Pogo Producing Company, including
the Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 1996 and the Consolidated
Statements of Income for the year ended December 31, 1996, and is qualified in
its entirety by reference to such Consolidated Financial Statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           3,054
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   65,058
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0<F1>
<INVENTORY>                                      6,165
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                74,918
<PP&E>                                       1,199,488
<DEPRECIATION>                                 814,623
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 479,242
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           68,247
<BONDS>                                        246,230
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        33,322
<OTHER-SE>                                      73,960
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   479,242
<SALES>                                        204,142<F2>
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               203,977
<CGS>                                           37,628<F3>
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   37,628<F3>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               105,241<F4>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0<F5>
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              13,203
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 52,381
<INCOME-TAX>                                    18,800
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             33,581
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  (821)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    32,760
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.96
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.94
<FN>
<F1>This amount is not disclosed on the face of the Consolidated Financial
Statements due to lack of materiality, but is included as a contra-asset in
Accounts Receivable.
<F2>Does not include Gains or Losses on Property Sales.
<F3>Includes Lease Operating Expense, but excludes General and Administrative,
Exploration, Dry Hole and Impairment and Depreciation, Depletion and
Amortization Expenses.
<F4>Includes General and Administrative, Exploration, Dry Hole and Impairment and
Depreciation, Depletion and Amortization Expenses.
<F5>This amount is not disclosed on the face of the Consolidated Financial
Statements due to lack of materiality, but is included in Oil and Gas Revenues.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2
 
                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
 
  We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Registration Statement
on Form S-3 (no. 33-    ) of our report, which includes an explanatory
paragraph pertaining to a change in the method of accounting for certain
turnaround costs during 1993, dated February 10, 1995 on our audits of the
consolidated financial statements of Lyondell Petrochemical Company as of
December 31, 1994 and 1993, and for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 1994, which report is included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 1994. We also consent to the reference to our
firm under the caption "Experts".
 
 
/s/ Coopers and Lybrand L.L.P.

 
Houston, Texas
January 31, 1996
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

###### Internal Revenue Service

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

                        An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel's Notices and Correspondence Project Committee will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service. Due to a delay in the approval process and a late start with our initial meetings, we are getting a late start to the TAP year. Because of this we will not be able to meet the 15 calendar-day notice requirement. We anticipate all future                         **Federal Register**                         notices to be timely moving forward. This meeting will be held via teleconference.                    

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Tuesday, April 12, 2022.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert Rosalia at 1-888-912-1227 or (718) 834-2203.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. app. (1988) that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel's Notices and Correspondence Project Committee will be held Tuesday, April 12, 2022, at 12:00 p.m. Eastern Time. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit written statements for consideration. Due to limited time and structure of meeting, notification of intent to participate must be made with Robert Rosalia. For more information please contact Robert Rosalia at 1-888-912-1227 or (718) 834-2203, or write TAP Office, 2 Metrotech Center, 100 Myrtle Avenue, Brooklyn, NY 11201 or contact us at the website:                     *http://www.improveirs.org.*                     The agenda will include various IRS issues.                

Dated: March 31, 2022.

Kevin Brown,

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

[FR Doc. 2022-07114 Filed 4-4-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
July 28, 2015

Jack Elston

2100 Central Avenue, Suite 102

Boulder, CO 80301

Dear Mr. Elston:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption. It 

explains why we cannot process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Cannot Process Your Request

We entered your April 29, 2015 exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2015-

1684), but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does 

not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request 

any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your 

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.
2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-4264.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Aircraft and 

 Airport Rules Division

Enclosure
No. 11-9740.

#### Cota *v.*Arizona.

Sup. Ct. Ariz. Certiorari denied.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-07-00540-CV

T. Christopher Robson, Appellant

v.

Garrett Gilbreath and David Gilbreath, Appellees

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 126TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. D-1-GN-04-002474, HONORABLE DARLENE BYRNE, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

This appeal challenges the same order as that challenged in a prior appeal numbered

03-06-00364-CV. After the prior appeal was initially dismissed as interlocutory on August 9, 2007,

T. Christopher Robson obtained a final judgment in the trial court on August 24, 2007, and that same

day filed a motion to reinstate the prior appeal. In an abundance of caution, on September 24, 2007,

Robson filed the notice of appeal that generated this appellate cause, challenging the same order

that is the subject of the prior appeal. After the order at issue in both appeals became final and

appealable, we reinstated the prior appeal and, accordingly, did not require a record or briefing to

be filed in this cause number.

On this day, we have released an opinion and judgment in the prior appellate cause.

See Robson v. Gilbreath, No. 03-06-00364-CV (Aug. 1, 2008) (opinion by Waldrop, J.; dissenting
2

opinion by Patterson, J.). As our opinion and judgment in that case dispense with all issues in this

appeal, this appeal is dismissed as moot.

__________________________________________

G. Alan Waldrop, Justice

Before Justices Patterson, Pemberton and Waldrop

Dismissed as Moot

Filed: August 1, 2008
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

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 of Applied Imaging Corp. (the Company) on Form
10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Terence Griffin, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my 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.



|                        |  |  |  |     |  |                        
|----------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | -----------------------
|Date: November 13, 2006 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ TERENCE GRIFFIN    
|                        |  |  |  |     |  | Terence Griffin        
|                        |  |  |  |     |  | Chief Financial Officer

This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kenneth Ray HUNTER, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-7352

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: January 30, 2018

Decided: February 2, 2018

*586Kenneth Ray Hunter, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Donald Warner, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Elkins, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Before MOTZ and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Kenneth Ray Hunter appeals the district court’s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion to vacate his underlying criminal judgment, which had already become final, based on alleged fraud on the court. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. *See United States v. Breit,*754 F.2d 526, 530-31 (4th Cir. 1985) (there is no rule similar to Rule 60(b) for criminal judgments and district courts therefore may not vacate a judgment in a criminal case that has already become final). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED*