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



EXHIBIT 99.1

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

I, Christopher G. Kenber, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the
Quarterly Report of hi/fn, inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31,
2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the
financial condition and results of operations of hi/fn, inc.

|                 |  |        |  |                                              
|---------------- |  | ------ |  | ---------------------------------------------
|February 4, 2003 |  | By:    |  | /s/ CHRISTOPHER G. KENBER                    
|                 |  |        |  |                                              
|                 |  | Name:  |  | Christopher G. Kenber                        
|                 |  | Title: |  | Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer

34
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 123 (Friday, June 26, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 34921]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-16991]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management
[MT-922-08-1310-00-P; MTM 82796]


Notice of Proposed Reinstatement of Terminated Oil and Gas Lease

    Under the provisions of Pub. L. 97-451, a petition for 
reinstatement of oil and gas lease MTM 82796, Richland County, Montana, 
was timely filed and accompanied by the required rental accruing from 
the date of termination.
    No valid lease has been issued affecting the lands. The lessee has 
agreed to new lease terms for rentals and royalties at rates of $10 per 
acre and 16-\2/3\% respectively. Payment of a $500 administration fee 
has been made.
    Having met all the requirements for reinstatement of the lease as 
set out in Sec. 31(d) and (e) of the Mineral Lands Leasing Act of 1920 
(30 U.S.C. 188), the Bureau of Land Management is proposing to 
reinstate the lease, effective as of the date of termination, subject 
to the original terms and conditions of the lease, the increased rental 
and royalty rates cited above, and reimbursement for cost of 
publication of this Notice.

    Dated: June 12, 1998.
Karen L. Johnson,
Chief, Fluids Adjudication Unit.
[FR Doc. 98-16991 Filed 6-25-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-DN-P
No. 10-5724.

#### Michael Wiest, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 935, 131 S. Ct. 339,

178 L. Ed. 2d 220,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7555.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.

*221Same case below, 596 F.3d 906.
SCPR-22-0000574

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

IN RE PATRICIA C. ABURANO, Petitioner.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

ORDER GRANTING PETITION TO RESIGN IN GOOD STANDING

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.)

Upon consideration of the petition to resign from the 

practice law in the State of Hawai#i, filed by attorney 

Patricia C. Aburano, pursuant to Rule 1.10 of the Rules of the

Supreme Court of the State of Hawai#i (RSCH), but to retain the

paper license as a memento, as authorized by RSCH Rule 1.10(b),

and the affidavits submitted in support thereof, we conclude that

Petitioner Aburano has fully complied with the requirements of 

RSCH Rule 1.10. Therefore, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition to resign is

granted. Petitioner Aburano may retain the paper license as a

memento. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to RSCH Rule 1.10(g),

that the Petitioner shall comply with the notice, affidavit, and

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCPR-22-0000574

13-OCT-2022

09:56 AM

Dkt. 7 OGP
record requirements of RSCH Rules 2.16(a), (b), (d), and (g).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall remove the

name of Petitioner Aburano, attorney number 3598, from the roll

of attorneys of the State of Hawai#i, effective with the filing

of this order.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, October 13, 2022. 

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna 

/s/ Michael D. Wilson

/s/ Todd W. Eddins

2
#### People v Davis

App Div, *1st*Dept: 2016 NY Slip Op 73031(U) (Bronx)

dismissed 8/8/16 (Garcia, J.)
No. 10-5256.

#### Nathaniel L. Morris, Petitioner v. E. K. McDaniel, Warden, et al.

562 U.S. 911, 131 S. Ct. 266,

178 L. Ed. 2d 176,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7083.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Exhibit 13.1

CERTIFICATION OF CEO AND CFO

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the annual report of Atlatsa Resources Corporation (the
Registrant) filed under cover of Form 20-F for the period ended December 31, 2012, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Harold Motaung as President and Chief Executive
Officer of the Registrant and De Wet Schutte as Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his knowledge
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 Registrant.



|                   |  |                                      
|------------------ |  | -------------------------------------
|/s/ Harold Motaung
|By:                |  | Harold Motaung                       
|Title:             |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|Dated:             |  | March 28, 2013                       
|                  
|/s/ De Wet Schutte
|By:                |  | De Wet Schutte                       
|Title:             |  | Chief Financial Officer              
|Dated:             |  | March 28, 2013                       

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and
shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Registrant for purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-13-00178-CV

IN RE WALTER ROY RELATOR

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

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

The court has considered relator’s petition for writ of mandamus and is of 

the opinion that relief should be denied. Accordingly, relator’s petition for writ of 

mandamus is denied.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: LIVINGSTON, C.J.; GARDNER and WALKER, JJ.

DELIVERED: May 30, 2013

 1

See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4, 52.8(d).
No. 10-16.

#### Jubani Agostin aka Zef Gjon Volaj, Petitioner v. Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General.

562 U.S. 952, 131 S. Ct. 224,

178 L. Ed. 2d 250,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7836.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.

Justice Sotomayor took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

Same case below, 363 Fed. Appx. 107.
# C_2013274EN.01003302.xml

| 21.9.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 274/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.9.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 274/33

---

Action brought on 25 July 2013 — ZZ v Commission

(Case F-74/13)

2013/C 274/56

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: S. Orlandi, J.-N. Louis, D. Abreu Caldas, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Application for annulment of the decision on the transfer of the applicant’s pension rights into the European Union pension scheme applying the new general implementing provisions (‘GIP’) relating to Articles 11 and 12 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | annul the decision to transfer the applicant’s pension rights acquired before his entry into service into the pension scheme applicable to staff of the European institutions in accordance with the calculations for the transfer drawn up pursuant to the GIP of Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations of 3 March 2011; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision to transfer the applicant’s pension rights acquired before his entry into service into the pension scheme applicable to staff of the European institutions in accordance with the calculations for the transfer drawn up pursuant to the GIP of Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations of 3 March 2011;

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2679 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2679

     To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow tax free 
   distributions from section 529 college savings plans for certain 
      expenses associated with registered apprenticeship programs.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 10, 2019

 Mr. Norcross (for himself, Mr. Kelly of Pennsylvania, Mr. Kildee, and 
  Ms. Dean) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow tax free 
   distributions from section 529 college savings plans for certain 
      expenses associated with registered apprenticeship programs.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``529 Opening Paths To Invest in Our 
Nation's Students Act'' or the ``529 OPTIONS Act''.

SEC. 2. DISTRIBUTIONS FROM QUALIFIED TUITION PROGRAMS FOR CERTAIN 
              EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH REGISTERED APPRENTICESHIP 
              PROGRAMS.

    (a) In General.--Section 529(e)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
                    ``(C) Certain expenses associated with registered 
                apprenticeship programs.--The term `qualified higher 
                education expenses' shall include--
                            ``(i) books, supplies, and equipment 
                        required for the enrollment or attendance of a 
                        designated beneficiary in an apprenticeship 
                        program registered and certified with the 
                        Secretary of Labor under section 1 of the 
                        National Apprenticeship Act (29 U.S.C. 50),
                            ``(ii) child care at a licensed day care 
                        center, and transportation, in connection with 
                        such enrollment or attendance, and
                            ``(iii) costs associated with obtaining an 
                        industry certification, or other type of 
                        credential, in connection with such enrollment 
                        or attendance or in connection with the 
                        completion of such program.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to expenses paid or incurred after the date of the enactment of this 
Act, in taxable years ending after such date.
                                 <all>
```
#### Peter Casanas et al., Respondents, v The Carlei Group, LLC, et al., Appellants.

[52 NYS3d 330]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (David B. Cohen, J.), entered March 15, 2016, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied defendants’ motion to strike the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3126 and to declare that plaintiffs do not have a valid lease for the subject premises, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The motion court providently exercised its discretion in denying defendants’ motion for an order striking the complaint, since such a drastic sanction is generally warranted “only upon a clear showing that the party’s conduct was willful and contumacious” *(CEMD El. Corp. v Metrotech LLC I,*141 AD3d 451, 453 [1st Dept 2016]; *see Perez v New York City Tr. Auth.,*73 AD3d 529 [1st Dept 2010]). Here, the record does not clearly support defendants’ contentions that plaintiffs submitted a “phony” version of their lease, that they wilfully delayed in disclosing various versions of the lease, or that their deposition testimony about when the landlord’s principals executed the lease was knowingly false.

Concerning the delay in providing complete document disclosure, plaintiff Peter Casanas averred that the original lease had always been kept in a file in plaintiffs’ home office, but that all of their papers were thrown into boxes and moved to a storage unit after there was a fire in the building while they were away. Peter’s brother, defendant Richard Casanas, *516does not dispute that the fire occurred or that he had access to plaintiffs’ apartment in the days following the fire. In light of the reasonable excuse provided by plaintiffs concerning the disarray of their papers, and their showing that they repeatedly searched for relevant documents and produced them when found, there is no indication of bad faith warranting the imposition of sanctions *(see Cespedes v Mike & Jac Trucking Corp.,*305 AD2d 222 [1st Dept 2003]).

The record also fails to establish that plaintiffs’ testimony concerning the timing of the execution of the lease, 23 years after the event occurred, was intentionally incorrect. To the contrary, plaintiffs had no reason to be dishonest on the issue, since it is not dispositive of their claim. Defendants’ arguments raise issues of credibility that would be more appropriately addressed at trial.

Concur — Acosta, J.P., Ren wick, Manzanet-Daniels, Kapnick and Webber, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 107 (Thursday, June 4, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 30495]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-14769]


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

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Ocean Freight Forwarder License Applicants

    Notice if hereby given that the following applicants have filed 
with the Federal Maritime Commission applications for licenses as ocean 
freight forwarders pursuant to section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 
(46 U.S.C. app. 1718 and 46 CFR 510).
    Persons knowing of any reason why any of the following applicants 
should not receive a license are requested to contact the Office of 
Freight Forwarders, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, D.C. 
20573.

Freight and Export Management Expeditors International, 12818 Skyknoll 
Lane, Houston, TX 77082, Officers: Angel Ortiz, Partner; Juan Garza, 
Partner
OverOceans, Inc., 2902 Airfreight Road, Houston, TX 77032, Officers: 
George J. Smith, CEO; Kahne D. Smith, President
Reto Shipping Corporation d/b/a Reto Services, 8364 N.W. 66 Street, 
Miami, FL 33166, Officers: Angel Gonzalez, President; Loraine V. 
Gonzalez, Vice President.

    Dated: May 29, 1998.
Joseph C. Polking,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-14769 Filed 6-3-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-M
No. 10-5966.

#### Dennis Black, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 942, 131 S. Ct. 362,

178 L. Ed. 2d 234,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7115.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 364 Fed. Appx. 810.
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report of
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy Carolinas) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, James E. Rogers, Chief
Executive Officer of Duke Energy Carolinas, 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 Duke Energy Carolinas.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: March 13, 2009



|                                                              
|--------------------------------------------------------------
|/S/    JAMES E.
ROGERS James E. Rogers Chief Executive Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7467

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

TYRONE DALE,

 Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. 

(1:10-cr-00144-RDB-1; 1:14-cv-00816-RDB)

Submitted: March 29, 2016 Decided: March 31, 2016

Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tyrone Dale, Appellant Pro Se. Clinton Jacob Fuchs, Assistant 

United States Attorney, Rod J. Rosenstein, United States 

Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Tyrone Dale seeks to appeal the district court’s order 

denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion as untimely. The 

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues 

a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B)

(2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a 

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies 

relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by 

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the 

district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is 

debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 

(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). 

When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the 

prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural 

ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable 

claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. 

at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Dale has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a 

certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<Page>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

The Board of Directors,
DRS Technologies, Inc.:

    We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements
(No. 333-14487, No. 333-69751 and No. 333-83700) on Form S-8 of DRS
Technologies, Inc. of our report dated May 16, 2002, except for the first
paragraph of Note 18 which is as of May 28, 2002, and the second paragraph of
Note 18 which is as of May 29, 2002, relating to the consolidated balance sheets
of DRS Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries as of March 31, 2002 and 2001, and
the related consolidated statements of earnings, stockholders' equity and
comprehensive earnings, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year
period ended March 31, 2002 and the related consolidated financial statement
schedule, which report appears in the March 31, 2002 Annual Report on Form 10-K
of DRS Technologies, Inc.

    Our report refers to a change in accounting for business combinations and in
accounting for goodwill and intangible assets.

                                          /s/ KPMG LLP

Short Hills, New Jersey
June 27, 2002
No. 10-5710.

#### Winford K. Bishop, Petitioner v. Grievance Committee for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

562 U.S. 1106, 131 S. Ct. 848,

178 L. Ed. 2d 553,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9790.

December 13, 2010.

Motion of petitioner for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 126 (Wednesday, July 1, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 35985]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-17406]



[[Page 35985]]

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

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

[Notice 98-085]


Government-Owned Inventions, Available for Licensing

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

ACTION: Notice of Availability of Inventions for Licensing.

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

SUMMARY: The inventions listed below are assigned to the National 
Aeronautics and Space Administration, have been filed in the United 
States Patent and Trademark Office, and are available for licensing.

DATE: July 1, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas H. Jones, Patent Counsel, NASA 
Management Office-JPL, 4800 Oak Grove Drive, Mail Stop 180-801, 
Pasadena, CA 91109; telephone (818) 354-5179.
    NPO-19293-2-CU: Convex Diffraction Grating Imaging Spectrometer;
    DRC-098-001: On-Line <greek-m>-Method for Robust Flutter Prediction 
in Expanding a Safe Flight Envelope for an Aircraft Model under Flight 
Test;
    NPO-20263-1-CU: An Improved Infrared Detector System with 
Controlled Thermal Conductance;
    NPO-18414-4-CU: Synchronous Parallel System for Emulation and 
Discrete Event Simulation.

    Dated: June 24, 1998.
Edward A. Frankle,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 98-17406 Filed 6-30-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510-01-P
No. 10-6236.

#### Jemel Marcano, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 972, 131 S. Ct. 486,

178 L. Ed. 2d 307,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7975.

October 12, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.

Same case below, 382 Fed. Appx. 222.
No. 10-554.

#### Bradley Stinn, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1065, 131 S. Ct. 676,

178 L. Ed. 2d 484,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9231.

November 29, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.

Same case below, 379 Fed. Appx. 19.