alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 13.2





PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350





In connection with this Annual Report of Aegean Marine Petroleum Network Inc. (the "Company") on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") on or about the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Spyros Gianniotis, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)
The Report fully complies with the requirements of 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.





A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request.





Date: April 26, 2013











/s/ Spyros Gianniotis


Spyros Gianniotis


Chief Financial Officer
#### Soto v. State

110,371

07/24/2015

Denied. ..

Unpublished
#### *In re*Adoption of Baby R.

108,175

06/19/13

Denied.

Unpublished
..r..

., . ,. *



### OFFICE OF THE ATT’ORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN

**Eonorubla 8.**  **F. Molea**  

### CountyAudltlor ILiddgooooalt~ xa.nbug, exua

**You? lattu**  **of 8**  **opinion of**  **thll deputwnt** i

.

Honorable D. P. NcKse, page 2

moor6 all lmtrumente of vrlting authorlrd 

### or rsqulrad to be reoordod In the county clerk’r orfloe in the mnnnor helvllmlter pr0vld.d.’ ArtLola.

6594 of 

### 8U.d

l tatutea, provldorr 3fhM any lMtruault of lrr1tlng 

### l uthcrlLed by 1~ to be reaorded rhll be dapoalted ln the county alerk'm offlae for maord, if the I- 18 

### l aknovla&ed or pow4 In the mannerprerorlbed by lav for record, the alerk mhll oator in a 

### book to be providedfor tht purpoao, in 8lph&etlaal order, the name of the partlam and date and suture thereof, md the tire 

### of dollvery for reoord~ end 8hoU give to tha perron deporltlng themane,

if require?,

l reaupt 

### l

pealfylng the mtlaulma thereof. 

### Atiieb 6595 of arid 

### mtatater,prwldewa "Emah reaordrr 8W1, vithout delay, moor4 

### every ln8trutmut of vrltlng 

### l uthorlscUto bo r8- acdetlbyb 

### ublah la dapoolt8dvlthhlmfor roaoml, vlth &he 

### l akzWwlmdgmuit8, proofr, 8ffld#- vltr and autlflo~to8 theroto &tkah+d In the order aepoutc4 for rcaord b7 

### l ntorlng t&r vord for rord und letter for 

### lrttu, ad noting at the toot of tha 

### reaord the hour ax& t& da7 of the monthand 7ear vhon the lnetrwnnt lo reaordod vaa depaeitea in bir offloe for roaord.* 

### Artlale 6596 of rrid 8tatut.8, prorldlng for the alerket aortlrloetlon aa untlonrd **above,** 

### provld~r:

%ver78aah lnatrtannt8hallbe aonaldued 48~?u8braed 

### trot8tb tin it vu aapa8lted 

### ror Wcordj and the alerk ahall oertlf7 under hlr band and ra81 of eel:* to 

### l ru7 

### rueh 1natrument OS rritlng 80 

### rwxu'ded, tha hour, d47 month and 7ouvbn~mo1d0dit, aoath 

### ~ookuaapcg~ or pay In uhlah it lr reoordad~ and uhon recorded do 

### lvu tbo wno to tlu part7 antitled 

### tbroto.?<is:‘,

., ; ,.
tionorabls

B. P. tdcRec,

page J

Article

6595, lup ra,

requires the clerk to record vithout delay every lnatrument of witlug authorized to be reoorded by hln vhloh la depomlted vith hl.mfor reaord, with the 8oknov~edgmenta, proof@, l ffldavltv and certlfloatem thereto attaohed. The alerk'e oertiflcatlon to the lnstruBent, aootalnlng the data ~8 provided in Artlole 

### 6596, l **upra,** being mere evldenae of the Mt of reoordlng, lr not vlthln the provlwiolu of Artlalo 6595 requiring it to be 

### reoordea a~ A part of tb lnstrumont ltaelf. The olerk'r authority to reoord l

uoh lrutrument La not 

### in any visa oondltloned upon muoh a awtlflaate ovldenou the lnetrumnt'r having been. recorded in anothrr aounty.

It le therefore the opinion of thlm drpartmnt that the alork'e aertffloate on reaordlng 111Instrument u proridrd In Artlala 

### 6596, ibVi80d Civil YtatUtea, 

### 1925, lr (notaox+ rldued l put of rwh ln8trumnt requiring it to be reaorded vhere the lnatrumnt otborwlm l Wmrlred to b recorded 18 dapooltod for roaord in mOthor aounty. Your8 very **truly**
|                                                                                           
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                           
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                   
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                             
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                             
|View History:                                                                              
|                                                                                           
|Percent of Industrial Natural Gas Deliveries in Indiana Represented by the Price  (Percent)
|                                                                                           
|                                                                                           
|Percent of Industrial Natural Gas Deliveries in Indiana Represented by the Price  (Percent)
|                                                                                           

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1990's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 16.0   | 9.3    | 5.8   
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 10.3   | 7.7    | 8.6    | 9.0    | 8.3    | 7.9    | 7.2    | 7.4    | 6.7    | 7.0   
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 5.6    | 3.5    | 1.9    | 2.0    | 2.1    | 1.9    | 1.7    | 1.6    | 1.6    | 1.5   
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 1.5    | 1.9    | 2.2    | 1.9    |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-2000
<CASH>                                          11,244
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   82,598
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,726)
<INVENTORY>                                     60,096
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               166,883
<PP&E>                                         207,123
<DEPRECIATION>                                (91,719)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 495,679
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           91,289
<BONDS>                                        176,523
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        27,794
<OTHER-SE>                                     139,388
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   495,679
<SALES>                                        406,714
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               406,714
<CGS>                                          266,480
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   96,662
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   498
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              13,531
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 30,041
<INCOME-TAX>                                    10,513
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             18,056
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    18,056
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.65
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.53


</TABLE>
#### State v. Verstraete

106,856

01/17/14

Denied.

Unpublished
#### Requena v. Pryor

110,787

07/27/2015

Denied. ..

Unpublished
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

April 18, 2011 

Order 

 

April 18, 2011 

133725 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 SC: 133725 

v COA: 247039 

Wayne CC: 02-005508 

RICHARD PERRY BRYANT, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

___________________________________ 

 On order of the Court, in conformity with the mandate of the Supreme Court of the 

United States the judgment and opinion of this Court dated June 10, 2009 (reported at 

483 Mich 132) are VACATED. The judgment of the Circuit Court for the County of 

Wayne and the Court of Appeals are AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit 23.2**

 

 

April 3, 2008

 

ReefGlobal Energy VII, L.P.

1901 N Central Expy Suite 300

Richardson TX 75080

 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEER

 

Gentlemen:

 

As independent petroleum engineers, Gleason Engineeringhereby consents to the incorporation by reference in the Annual Report on Form 10-Kof Reef Global Energy VII, L.P. ofinformation from our reserve report dated March 31, 2008 and entitled “Estimate of Reserves and Future Revenues to ReefGlobal Energy VII, L.P. in Certain Oiland Gas Properties located in the United States as of December 31, 2007,Based on Constant Prices and Costs inaccordance with Securities and Exchange Commission Guidelines” and allreferences to our firm included in or made a part of the Reef Global Energy VII, L.P. Annual Report on Form 10-Kfor the year ended December 31, 2007.

 

 
|   | Yours very truly,                              |
|--------|------------------------------------------------|
|   | Gleason Engineering                            |
|   |                                           |
|   | /s/  Dennis M. Gleason, P.E.                   |
|   | Dennis  M. Gleason, P.E.

President  and Owner |

 

 

GLEASONENGINEERING

4621South Cooper; Suite 131-343 Arlington, Texas

(817)271-2148 * fax (817) 472-0522

www.gleason-engr.com

 

----
#### State v. White

108,775

02/12/14

Denied.

Unpublished
#### State v. Hall

102,117

07/21/2015

Denied

Unpublished
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-10257

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ROBERTO BERRONES-VARGAS,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:14-CR-59-1

Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Roberto Berrones-Vargas appeals the 71-month within-guidelines 

sentence he received following his guilty plea to illegal reentry, in violation of 

8 U.S.C. § 1326. For the first time on appeal, he contends that his sentence is 

procedurally unreasonable because the district court failed to adequately 

explain the reasons for the sentence imposed, specifically failing to address his 

mitigation arguments.

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

September 15, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-10257 Document: 00513193437 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/15/2015
No. 15-10257

2

Because Berrones-Vargas did not raise the objection below, review is for 

plain error only. See United States v. Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d 357, 361 

(5th Cir. 2009). To establish plain error, Berrones-Vargas must show a 

forfeited error that is clear or obvious and that affects his substantial rights. 

Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009). Even if he makes such a 

showing, this court has the discretion to correct the error but will do so only if 

it seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial 

proceedings. Id. 

Given that the sentence imposed was within the guidelines range, little 

explanation of the sentence was required, and the district court’s statement, in 

response to Berrones-Vargas’s plea for a more lenient sentence, that a sentence 

at the high end of the guidelines range was necessary for just punishment and 

deterrence, was sufficiently explanatory. See Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 

338, 356-57 (2007). Moreover, even if it is assumed that the district court’s 

statement amounted to clear or obvious error, the error is not reversible given 

that Berrones-Vargas has not shown that his substantial rights were affected. 

See United States v. Whitelaw, 580 F.3d 256, 262-63 (5th Cir. 2009); 

Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d at 365. 

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

 Case: 15-10257 Document: 00513193437 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/15/2015
III 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 337 

Designating December 6, 2009, as ‘‘National Miners Day’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 4, 2009 

Mr. REID (for Mr. BYRD (for himself, Mr. ROCKEFELLER, Mr. ENZI, Mr. 

DORGAN, Mr. CASEY, Mrs. MURRAY, Mr. SPECTER, Mr. BARRASSO, Mr. 

BROWN, Mr. BAUCUS, Mr. TESTER, and Mr. ENSIGN)) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

DECEMBER 3, 2009 

Committee discharged; considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Designating December 6, 2009, as ‘‘National Miners Day’’. 

Whereas the foundations of civilization are constructed from, 

advanced by, and sustained with, the materials procured 

with the sweat and blood of miners; 

Whereas the miners of the United States have labored long 

and hard over our Nation’s existence to make it the economically strong, militarily secure Nation that it is today; 

Whereas miners and their families have achieved, provided, 

and sacrificed so much for the betterment of their fellow 

Americans; 

Whereas miners have struggled, in their lives and in their 

work, to obtain health and safety protections; 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

SRES 337 ATS 

Whereas the terrible mining tragedy at Monongah, West Virginia, that occurred on December 6, 1907, is recognized 

for causing the greatest loss of lives in American industrial history, and this tragedy helped to launch the national effort to secure the safety and health of our miners 

that continues to this day; and 

Whereas miners still today risk life and limb in their labors: 

Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) designates December 6, 2009, as ‘‘National 

3 Miners Day’’, in appreciation, honor, and remem4 brance of the accomplishments and sacrifices of the 

5 miners of the Nation; and 

6 (2) encourages the people of the United States 

7 to participate in local and national activities cele8 brating and honoring the contributions of miners. 

Æ 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
#### Clark v. State

109,982

07/24/2015

Denied.

Unpublished
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








In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Lufkin Industries, Inc. (the “Company”)
on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Christopher L.
Boone, 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:





(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.





/s/ Christopher L.
Boone





Christopher
L. Boone


Chief
Financial Officer


August
10, 2009


This
certification is made solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. §1350, and not for any
other purpose.
D S74 , po1’ UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION IX 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 94105.3901 DEC

1

‘zoos Mr. Gary Kendall Director of Technical Services Bay Area Air Quality Management District 939 Ellis Street San Francisco, CA 94109 Dear Mr. Kendall: Thank youfor your timely submission of the 2009 Annual Monitoring Network Plan for the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. We have reviewed the submitted document and have found that it meetsthe minimum requirements
setforth under 40 CFR Part 58.10. Further, this letter constitutes approval of suggested site modifications

asoutlined in the plan and supported by the addendum submitted onDecember

2, 2009. If youhave any questions regarding this letter orthe enclosed comments, please feelfree tocontactmeat (415) 947-422 orMeredith Kurpius
at (415) 947-4534. cc:Dick Duker, BAAQMD Eric Stevenson, BAAQMD Meredith Kurpius Analysis Office Printed on Recycled Paper
5U>I$ E COPY

ELECTRONIC RECORD

COA# 11-14-00215-CR OFFENSE: 30.02F

Ernest Villa Marquez v.

STYLE: The State of Texas COUNTY: Midland

COA DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED TRIAL COURT: 142nd District Court

DATE: 4/23/15 Publish: NO TC CASE #: CR42478

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

Ernest Villa Marquez v.

style: The State of Texas cca#: PD-0561-15

PRO SE

FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS:

Petition CCA Disposition:

DATE:

*Rgfu*0T> JUDGE:

DATE: / O/pdzWS

JUDGE: Id^fJAA^i—

SIGNED:

PUBLISH:

PC:

DNP:

MOTION FOR

REHEARING IN CCA IS:

JUDGE:

ELECTRONIC RECORD
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 67 (Tuesday, April 8, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16746-16747]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-8897]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[IL 150; FRL-5804-3]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plan; Illinois

AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The USEPA is proposing to approve the State Implementation 
Plan (SIP) revision request submitted by the Illinois Environmental 
Protection Agency (IEPA) on August 15, 1996. In the August 15 request, 
IEPA requested that the Marathon Oil Company in Robinson, Illinois be 
granted a carbon monoxide variance with specified conditions beginning 
January 19, 1996, and ending August 4, 1997. In the Final Rules section 
of this Federal Register, USEPA is approving the State's SIP revision 
as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the agency views 
this as a noncontroversial SIP revision and anticipates no adverse 
comments. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the 
direct final rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to 
this proposed rule, no further activity is contemplated in relation to 
this rule. If USEPA receives adverse comments, the direct final rule 
will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in 
a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. USEPA will not 
institute

[[Page 16747]]

a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in 
commenting on this action should do so at this time.

DATES: Comments must be received in writing by May 8, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the revision request are available for inspection 
at the following address: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 
5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 
Illinois 60604. (It is recommended that you telephone Ryan Bahr at 
(312) 353-4366 before visiting the Region 5 Office.)
    Written comments should be sent to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief, 
Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 
Illinois 60604.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ryan Bahr, at (312) 353-4366.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: See the information provided in the Direct 
Final action of the same title which is located in the Rules and 
Regulations Section of this Federal Register.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

    Dated: March 19, 1997.
David A. Ullrich,
Acting Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 97-8897 Filed 4-7-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P