alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Jf**ourtlj Court** **of Appeals'** **grnii Antonio,** **Ccxns September** **30. 2014** **No. 04-14-00004-CR,** **04-14-00005-CR 04-14-00006-CR,** **and 04-14-00007-CR** **Devon Alexander** **Kane. Appellant** **v. State** **of Texas,** **Appellee Trial** **Court Case** **No. A1319** 

## ORDER**The Court** **has reviewed** **the record** **and briefs** **in these** **appeals and** **has determined** **that**

### oral**argument will** **not significantly** **aid it** **in determining** **the legal** **and factual** **issues presented** **in the** **appeals. See** **Tex. R.** **App. P.** **39.8. Therefore,** **all requests** **for oral** **argument are** **denied, and** **the causes** **are advanced** **for ON** **BRIEFS submission** **on November** **5. 2014.** **to the** **following panel:** **Justice Martinez.** **Justice Alvarez,** **and Justice** **Chapa. All** **parties will** **be notified** **of the** 

### Court's**decision in** **these appeals** **in accordance** **with TEX.** **R. APP.** **P. 48.** **Either party may** **file motion** **requesting the** **Court to** **reconsider its** **determination that** **oral argument** **will not** **significantly aid** **the Court** **in determining** **the legal** **and factual** **issues presented** **in the** **appeals. See** **'['EX. R.** **APP. P.** **39.8. Such** **motion should** **be filed** **within ten** **(10) days** **from the** **date of** **this order.** 

### It**is so** **ORDERED on** **September 30,** **2014.**

## feebcof**C. MarUHez.** **Justic IN** **WITNESS WHEREOF,** **have hereunto** **sot my** **hand and** **a/iixed the** **seal o/thc** **said court** **on this** **September 30,** **2014.**

### €\lh**li./iollie. Clerk'**
No. 11-6406.

#### In re Helen M. Harris-Scott, Petitioner.

565 U.S. 1032, 132 S. Ct. 587,

181 L. Ed. 2d 442,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8178.

November 14, 2011.

Petition for writ of mandamus denied.
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT VARDAN FELIKSOVIC H GRIGOR IAN, AKA Va rdan Grigoria

n, Pe t i tione r, v. LORETTA E. LYNC H, Attorne y Ge ne ra l, R e sponde nt. No. 10-72757 Age n c y No. A070-176-182 M EM O R ANDUM *

On Pe tition for Re vie w of a n Orde r of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls Subm itte d Se pte m

be r 27, 2016 * * B e fore : TASHIM A , SILVER M AN a nd M . SM ITH, C irc uit Judge s . Vardan Fe liksovic h Grigoria n, a native and c itiz e n of Arm e nia , pe titions pro se for re vie w of the B oa

rd of Im m igration Appe a ls’ (“ B IA” ) orde r de ny ing his m otion to re o pe n b a se d on ine ffe c tive a s sista nc e of c ounse l . W e have jurisdic tion unde r 8 U.S.C . § 1252. W e re v ie w for a b use of disc re tion thede nia l of a m otion to 

# FIL ED OCT 04 2016 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3.

* * The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).re ope n , A v agy an v . Holde r , 646 F.3d 672, 678 (9th C ir. 2011), a nd we de ny

the pe tition for re vie w. The B IA did not a

buse its disc re tion in de ny ing Grigoria n’ s m o tion to re ope n whe re he file d the m otion fivey e ars a fte r the B IA issue d its fina l orde r of re m ova l, se e 8 C .F.R . § 1003.2(c )(2), and fa ile d to de m onstra te tha t he e xe rc ise d the d ue dilige nc e re q

uire d to obta in e quita

b le tolling of the

filing de a d line , se e Av agy an , 646 F.3d a

t 679. W e do not c onside r doc um e ntation a tta c he d to theope ning brie f tha t wa s not pa rt of the a dm inistra

tive re c ord be low. Se e 8 U.S.C . § 1252(b)(4)(A). In light of our disposition, we do not a ddre ss Grigoria

n’ s othe r c onte ntions. PE T IT IO N FO R RE V IE WDE NIE D.

1 0 - 7 2 7 5 7 2
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 this Quarterly  Report on Form 10-QSB (the "Report") of China
Agritech,  Inc.  (the  "Company")  for the quarter ended June 30, 2005, I, Lijun
Peng, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company,  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 best of the undersigned knowledge and belief:

(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:  August 16, 2005                                   /s/ Lijun PENG
                                                         -----------------------
                                                         Lijun PENG
                                                         Chief Financial Officer
No. 11-6590.

#### Christopher Smith, Petitioner v. California.

565 U.S. 1041, 132 S. Ct. 591,

181 L. Ed. 2d 434,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8272.

November 14, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, Third Appellate District, denied.
No. 09-8744.

#### In re Rayshon Thomas, Petitioner.

559 U.S. 1036, 130 S. Ct. 2065,

176 L. Ed. 2d 431,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2895.

March 29, 2010.

Petition for writ of mandamus and/or prohibition denied.
H. R. 4911

One Hundred Ninth Congress

of the

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and six 

An Act 

To temporarily extend the programs under the Higher Education Act of 1965, 

and for other purposes.

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 ‘‘Higher Education Extension 

Act of 2006’’. 

SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF PROGRAMS. 

Section 2(a) of the Higher Education Extension Act of 2005 

(Public Law 109–81; 20 U.S.C. 1001 note) is amended by striking 

‘‘March 31, 2006’’ and inserting ‘‘June 30, 2006’’. 

SEC. 3. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION. 

Nothing in this Act, or in the Higher Education Extension 

Act of 2005 as amended by this Act, shall be construed to limit 

or otherwise alter the authorizations of appropriations for, or the 

durations of, programs contained in the amendments made by the 

Higher Education Reconciliation Act of 2005 (Public Law 109–

171) to the provisions of the Higher Education Act of 1965 and 

the Taxpayer-Teacher Protection Act of 2004.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4921 

To amend the Act popularly known as the Death on the High Seas Act 

to limit application of that Act to maritime accidents, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 9, 2006 

Mr. DOGGETT (for himself and Mr. LEWIS of Georgia) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend the Act popularly known as the Death on the 

High Seas Act to limit application of that Act to maritime accidents, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. LIMITATIONS ON ACTIONS UNDER DEATH ON 

4 THE HIGH SEAS ACT FOR COMMERCIAL MAR5 ITIME ACCIDENTS. 

6 (a) LIMITATIONS.—The Act of March 30, 1920 

7 (chapter 111; 46 App. U.S.C. 761 et seq.), popularly 

8 known as the Death on the High Seas Act, is amended— 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
2 

•HR 4921 IH 

1 (1) in the first section in subsection (b) by in2 serting ‘‘or maritime’’ after ‘‘commercial aviation’’; 

3 and 

4 (2) in section 2(b)(1) by inserting ‘‘or mari5 time’’ after ‘‘commercial aviation’’. 

6 (b) APPLICATION.—The amendments made by sub7 section (a) shall apply with respect to a death occurring 

8 after August 25, 2005. 

Æ 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

MARK ANDREW RIVERS, JR.,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 386 WAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 21st day of April, 2020

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
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 Quarterly Report of Brownie’s Marine Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form
10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the United States
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the
undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:




1.           The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and




2.           The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.








Date:May 17,
      2010
                      By:
                      /s/ Robert M.
      CarmichaelName:
                      Robert
      M. CarmichaelTitle:
                      Chief
      Executive Officer


A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authentications, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906, has been provided to Brownie’s Marine Group, Inc. and will be
retained by Brownie’s Marine Group, Inc. and furnished to the United States
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
J.

Because we discern no abuse of the district court's broad discretion in this instance, 

### Houk v. State, 103 Nev. 659, 664, 747 P.2d 1376, 1379 (1987), we

ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.

Gibbons Douglas Saitta cc: Hon. Michael Montero, District Judge Humboldt County Public Defender Attorney General/Carson City Humboldt County District Attorney Humboldt County Clerk

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA (0) 1947A 2 IMINEWANMEMENSEMIErwail .177.
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 on Form 10-Q of LIN Television Corporation.
for the three months ended March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Vincent
L. Sadusky, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Richard J.
Schmaeling, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, hereby certifies,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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.







Dated:
May 8,
2009                    /s/ Vincent L.
Sadusky


Vincent L.
Sadusky


President and Chief Executive
Officer








Dated:
May 8,
2009                      /s/ Richard J.
Schmaeling


Richard
J. Schmaeling


Senior
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4676 

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study to determine 

the feasibility and suitability of designating the 9–11 Memorial in West 

Orange, New Jersey, as a unit of the National Park System, and for 

other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 31, 2006 

Mr. PASCRELL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Resources 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study 

to determine the feasibility and suitability of designating 

the 9–11 Memorial in West Orange, New Jersey, as 

a unit of the National Park System, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. NATIONAL PARK SERVICE STUDY REGARDING 

4 THE 9–11 MEMORIAL IN WEST ORANGE, NEW 

5 JERSEY. 

6 (a) STUDY.—The Secretary of the Interior, in con7 sultation with the State of New Jersey, shall carry out 
2 

•HR 4676 IH 

1 a study regarding the suitability and feasibility of desig2 nating the the 9–11 Memorial in West Orange, New Jer3 sey, as a unit of the National Park System. 

4 (b) STUDY PROCESS AND COMPLETION.—Except as 

5 provided by subsection (e) of this section, section 8(c) of 

6 Public Law 91–383 (16 U.S.C. 1a–5(c)) shall apply to the 

7 conduct and completion of the study required by this sec8 tion. 

9 (c) SUBMISSION OF STUDY RESULTS.—Not later 

10 than 3 years after the date that funds are made available 

11 for this section, the Secretary shall submit to the Com12 mittee on Resources of the House of Representatives and 

13 the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the 

14 Senate a report describing the results of the study. 

Æ
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**OFFICERCERTIFICATION**

 

I,Timothy J. Dodd, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Dakota GrowersPasta Company, Inc.;

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsiblefor establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as definedin Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and have:

 

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and

 

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annualreport) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

 

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and

 

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.

 

Date:December 17, 2007

 

 
|   | /s/ Timothy J. Dodd                   |   |
|--------|---------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Timothy J. Dodd                       |
|   | President and Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
# C_2017429EN.01000201.xml

| 14.12.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 429/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.12.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 429/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8562 — Cargill/Faccenda Investments/JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2017/C 429/03)

On 15 November 2017, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8562. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8562. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
Exhibit 31.2

                                  CERTIFICATION


I, William A. Sutherland, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Exhaust Technologies,
Inc.;

2. Based on my  knowledge,  this  quarterly  report  does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact  necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the  circumstances  under which such statements
were made, not  misleading  with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;

3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial
information  included in this quarterly  report,  fairly present in all material
respects,  the financial condition,  results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4.  The  registrant's  other  certifying  officer  and  I  are  responsible  for
establishing and maintaining  disclosure  controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d- 14) for the registrant and we have:

     a)   designed  such  disclosure  controls  and  procedures  to ensure  that
          material  information related to the registrant is made known to us by
          others within the entity, particularly during the period in which this
          quarterly report is being prepared;

     b)   evaluated the  effectiveness of the registrant's  disclosure  controls
          and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of
          this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

     c)   presented  in  this  quarterly   report  our  conclusions   about  the
          effectiveness  of the disclosure  controls and procedures based on our
          evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed,  based on our
most recent evaluation,  to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equvalent function):

     a)   all  significant  deficiencies  in the design or operation of internal
          controls  which could  adversely  affect the  registrant's  ability to
          record,  process,   summarize  and  report  financial  data  and  have
          identified for the  registrant's  auditors any material  weaknesses in
          internal controls; and

     b)   any fraud, whether or not material,  that involves management or other
          employees who have a  significant  role in the  registrant's  internal
          controls; and

6. The  registrant's  other  certifying  officer  and I have  indicated  in this
quarterly  report  whether or not there  were  significant  changes in  internal
controls or in other factors that could  significantly  affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent  evaluation,  including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.





Date: March 18, 2003            /s/ William A. Sutherland
                                -------------------------
                                   Chief Financial Officer
ex10-wetherell.htm



Exhibit 10.45


 


Fifth Amendment


to


Employment Agreement







This Fifth Amendment to Employment Agreement (the “Fifth Amendment”), is being entered into effective January 31, 2012 by and between ImageWare Systems, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”) and Mr. Wayne Wetherell (the “Executive”).


                    


Whereas, the Company and Executive entered into an Employment Agreement dated as of September 27, 2005 and subsequently amended on September 27, 2008, April 6, 2009, December 10, 2009 and again on March 10, 2011 (as amended, the “Employment Agreement”);







WHEREAS, the Executive continues to perform valuable services for the Company and the Company desires to assure itself of the continuing services of Executive; and







WHEREAS, in consideration of the foregoing and in order to amend the terms of the Agreement and to provide for the continued services of the Executive in accordance with the present intent of the Company and the Executive.







NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and for other good and valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, and in further consideration of the mutual covenants contained in the Employment Agreement, the parties do hereby agree that the Employment Agreement is hereby amended as follows:








	
1.

	
Section “2. Term of Agreement” strike the language “continue until December 31, 2011” and replace it with “continue until June 30, 2012”.







 



	
2.

	
Except as expressly amended herein, the Employment Agreement shall continue and be in full force in all respects.




















	
/s/ S. James Miller


ImageWare Systems, Inc. 

	
s/ Wayne Wetherell


Wayne Wetherell
No. 09-9016.

#### Haywood Thomas, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 1041, 130 S. Ct. 2072,

176 L. Ed. 2d 422,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2759.

March 29, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
No. 09-8263.

#### Martin Walters, Petitioner v. Florida.

559 U.S. 979, 130 S. Ct. 1702,

176 L. Ed. 2d 192,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2035,

March 1, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District, denied.

Same case below, 20 So. 3d 859.