alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 99.2





Liquid Audio, Inc.


Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002


(18 U.S.C. Section 1350)





Pursuant to the requirements of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Sections 1350(a) and (b)), the undersigned hereby certifies as follows:





|1. |  | Michael R. Bolcerek is the Chief Financial Officer of Liquid Audio, Inc. (the Company).
|-- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




|2. |  | To the best of my knowledge:
|-- |  | ----------------------------




| | (A) |  | The Companys annual report on Form 10-K accompanying this Certification, in the form filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act); and
| | --- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




| | (B) |  | The information in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Dated: September 9, 2002








/s/    MICHAEL R. BOLCEREK Michael R. Bolcerek Chief Financial Officer and Senior Vice President
#### Bailly *v.*Nashawannuck Manuf’g Co.

*(Supreme Court, Special Term, New York County.*

April 15, 1890.)

Trade-Marks—Descriptive Words—“Hygieniques. ”

The word “hygieniques, ” as applied to suspenders, is not descriptive, in the ordinary sense, and may become the subject of a valid trade-mark.

Action by Paul Bailly against the Hashawannnck Manufacturing Company, arising out of the use by defendant of certain marks and devices on suspenders, and on the boxes in which the suspenders were packed, and to which plaintiff claimed the right.

*Lee*(6 Zee, for plaintiff. *Wetmore & Jenner,*for defendant.

Babbett, J.

The word “hygieniques,” as applied to suspenders, is not descriptive, in the ordinary sense. The word “elastic” would be. The word “hygieniques” is suggestive of the good quality of the suspenders, and of its usefulness; but it does not directly characterize the article, nor the methods which tend to make it healthful. At the outside, such word is descriptive only in a modified or indirect sense, and, as it does not monopolize a part of the language essential or appropriate to describe the article, it may become the subject of a valid trade-mark. Words which are but inferentially or remotely descriptive, indicating neither origin nor ownership, but merely some special quality or peculiarity of the article itself, may properly be regarded as fanciful or arbitrary in the legal sense. The case on this head is within the principles enunciated in *Selchow*v. *Baker,*93 N. Y. 59, and the injunction should run against the defendant. Upon the facts, it is a barefaced attempt to defraud the plaintiff, and to palm off the defendant’s goods as his.
EXHIBIT 23(b)








                    (REED W. FERRILL & ASSOCIATES LETTERHEAD)

                                February 10, 1999




Columbus Energy Corp.
1660 Lincoln Street, Suite 2400
Denver, Colorado 80264




     Reed W. Ferrill & Associates,  Inc. consents to the use of its name and its
reports  dated  January 27, 1999 entitled  "Columbus  Energy Corp.,  Reserve and
Revenue Forecast as of November 30, 1998, Constant Prices and Costs" in whole or
in part, by Columbus  Energy Corp.  (Columbus) in Columbus'  Form 10-K Report to
the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission for the fiscal year ended November 30,
1998.



                               for and on behalf of
                               Reed W. Ferrill & Associates, Inc.

                               \s\Reed W. Ferrill
                               -----------------------
                               Reed W. Ferrill
                               President


RWF/mlb
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          20,164
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  218,340
<ALLOWANCES>                                    12,270
<INVENTORY>                                    139,986
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               573,787
<PP&E>                                         108,983
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 871,905
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,224,351
<BONDS>                                        679,872
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          200,000
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           199
<OTHER-SE>                                  (1,302,208)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   871,905
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,394,261
<CGS>                                        2,179,006
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   88,816
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    35
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              86,895
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 39,509
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,087
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             36,457
<DISCONTINUED>                                (199,310)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (162,888)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.85)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.83)


</TABLE>
Comparison of GCMRC Portion of Glen Canyon 

Comparison of GCMRC Portion of Glen Canyon 

Management Program Management Program

FY 2007 Approved and FY 2008 Draft B

FY 2007 Approved and FY 2008 Draft B

March 22, 2007 March 22, 2007

0.00%5.00%

10.00%15.00%20.00%25.00%30.00%35.00%

GOAL 1 FOOD BASE

GOAL 2 NATIVE FISHES

GOAL 3 EXTIRPATED SPECIES

GOAL 4 RAINBOW TROUT

GOAL 5 KANAB AMBERSNAIL

GOAL 6 SPRINGS/RIPARIAN

GOAL 7 QUALITY OF WATER

GOAL 8 SEDIMENT

GOAL 9 RECREATIONAL

GOAL 10 HYDROPOWER

GOAL 11 CULTURAL

GOAL 12 DASA

GOAL 12 LOGISTICS/SU

GO
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Agroclimate and Hydraulics Research Unit: El Reno, OK
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                                    Software
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Explore
                        History
                                    Outreach/Education
                                    Visitor Information
                                    Media
                    Other Research Topics
                        Standard Embankment Design
                                    Dam Rehabilitation
                                    Site Specific Models
                                    Cloud Based Technology
                                    Decision Support Technology
                                    CEAP
                                    LTARSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us






Docs from ANRRheadline bar Docs


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
#### Dale Halpern et al., Appellants, v Costco Warehouse/ Costco Wholesale, Respondent.

[943 NYS2d 567]—

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Feinman, J.), dated March 2, 2011, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied.

A defendant who moves for summary judgment in a slip-and-fall case has the initial burden of making a prima facie showing that it neither created the alleged hazardous condition nor had actual or constructive notice of its existence for a sufficient length of time to discover and remedy it *(see Kokin v Key Food Supermarket, Inc.,*90 AD3d 850 [2011]; *Amendola v City of New York,*89 AD3d 775 [2011]; *Lee v Port Chester Costco Wholesale,*82 AD3d 842 [2011]). A defendant has constructive notice of a hazardous condition on property when the condition is visible and apparent, and has existed for a sufficient length of time to afford the defendant a reasonable opportunity to discover and remedy it *(see Gordon v American Museum of Natural History,*67 NY2d 836, 837-838 [1986]). In addition, a defendant who has actual knowledge of a particular ongoing and recurring hazardous condition may be charged with constructive notice of each specific reoccurrence of that condition *(see Amendola v City of New York,*89 AD3d at 775-776; *Milano v Staten Is. Univ. Hosp.,*73 AD3d 1141 [2010]).

Here, the defendant established its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by offering evidence that it neither created the alleged hazardous condition which caused the injured plaintiffs fall, nor had actual or constructive notice of it *(see Lee v Port Chester Costco Wholesale,*82 AD3d at 842; *Cusack v Peter Luger, Inc.,*77 AD3d 785, 786 [2010]; *Sloane v Costco Wholesale Corp.,*49 AD3d 522, 523 [2008]). However, in opposition, the plaintiffs submitted evidence sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the defendant can be charged with constructive notice on the theory that it was aware of a particular recurring condition in the area where the accident *829occurred which it failed to adequately address (see *Black v Kohl’s Dept. Stores, Inc.,*80 AD3d 958, 960-961 [2011]; *Milano v Staten Is. Univ. Hosp.,*73 AD3d at 1142; *Lehr v Mothers Work, Inc.,*73 AD3d 564 [2010]; *Erikson v J.I.B. Realty Corp.,*12 AD3d 344, 345-346 [2004]; *cf. Piacquadio v Recine Realty Corp.,*84 NY2d 967, 969 [1994]; *DeJesus v New York City Hous. Auth.,*53 AD3d 410, 411 [2008], *affd*11 NY3d 889 [2008]; *Gloria v MGM Emerald Enters.,*298 AD2d 355, 356 [2002]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have denied the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

In light of our determination, we need not reach the plaintiffs’ remaining contentions. Balkin, J.E, Eng, Hall and Sgroi, JJ., concur.
#### In the Matter of Alberto C., Jr., an Infant. Erie County Department of Social Services, Respondent; Tibet H., Appellant.

[946 NYS2d 517]

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Erie County (Margaret O. Szczur, J.), entered February 22, 2011 in a proceeding pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b. The order terminated the parental rights of respondent.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

*1488Memorandum: Respondent contends on appeal that Family Court erred in granting the petition to terminate her parental rights based on mental illness *(see*Social Services Law § 384-b [4] [c]). We agree with the court that petitioner established by clear and convincing evidence that respondent could not adequately care for her child by presenting the testimony of a psychiatrist regarding respondent’s mental illness *(see*Social Services Law § 384-b [6] [c], [e]). The expert testified that respondent was presently and for the foreseeable future unable, by reason of her mental illness, to provide proper and adequate care for the child *(see Matter of Vincent E.D.G. [Rozzie M.G.],*81 AD3d 1285, 1285 [2011], *lv denied*17 NY3d 703 [2011]). We further conclude that the court did not err in refusing to hold a dispositional hearing. There is no requirement that a separate dispositional hearing be held following a determination that a parent is incapable of caring for his or her child based on mental illness *(see id.*at 1286). Present — Smith, J.P., Fahey, Garni, Sconiers and Martoche, JJ.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON 

KEITH JOHN FINO, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

COMMISSIONER, 

Social Security Administration, 

Defendant. 

Case No. 6:15-cv-01910-MC 

ORDER FOR PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY 

FEES PURSUANT TO BAJA & COSTS 

PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C § 1920 

Based upon the Stipulation of the parties, it is hereby ORDERED that attorney fees in the 

amount of $15,000.00 are hereby awarded to Plaintiff, pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act 

(BAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412, and costs of $400.00, for the filing fee, pursuant to 28 U.S.C § 1920. 

Payment of this award shall be made via check payable to Plaintiff and mailed to Plaintiff's 

attorneys at HARDER, WELLS, BARON & MANNING, P.C., 474 Willamette Street, Eugene, 

Oregon 97401. Pursuant to Astrue v. Ratliff, the award shall be made payable to Plaintiff's 

attorneys, HARDER, WELLS, BARON & MANNING, P.C., if the Commissioner confirms that 

Plaintiff owes no debt to the Government through the federal treasury offset program. 

Dated this _(;,_ day of /\,o.J 2018. 

Michael J. McShane 

United States District Judge · 

Proposed Order submitted by: 

Katherine Eitenmiller 

HARDER, WELLS, BARON & MANNING, P.C. 

474 Willamette Street, Eugene, OR 97401 

(541) 686-1969 

keitenmiller@hwmb.net -

Of Attorneys for Plaintiff
EXHIBIT 23(a)



                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS



We consent to the  incorporation by reference in the registration  statements of
Columbus  Energy  Corp.  on Form S-8  (File  No.  33-63336)  Form S-8  (File No.
33-93156),  Form S-8 (File No.  33-25743) of our report dated February 11, 1998,
on our audits on the consolidated  financial statements of Columbus Energy Corp.
as of November  30, 1997 and 1996,  and for the years ended  November  30, 1997,
1996, and 1995, which report is included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.



                               COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.


Denver, Colorado
February 11, 1998
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.                  

###### Federal Election Commission

# TIME AND DATE:

Thursday, September 2, 2021 at 10:00 a.m.

# PLACE:

Virtual Meeting. NOTE: Because of the Covid-19 Pandemic, We Will Conduct the Open Meeting Virtually. If You Would Like to Access The Meeting, See the Instructions Below.

# STATUS:

The September 2, 2021 Open Meeting has been canceled.

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Judith Ingram, Press Officer, Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

*Authority:*                         Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b.                    

Vicktoria J. Allen,

Acting Deputy Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 2021-19132 Filed 8-31-21; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Anton M. Miles, Appellant.

[943 NYS2d 752] —

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the County Court, Suffolk County (Braslow, J.), imposed February 7, 2011, on the ground that the sentence was illegal.

Ordered that the sentence is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that his previous conviction did not qualify as a predicate felony conviction pursuant to Penal Law § 70.06 (1) (b) (i) is unpreserved for appellate review *(see People v Samms,*95 NY2d 52, 57 [2000]; *People v Smith,*73 NY2d 961, 962-963 [1989]; *People v Alves,*282 AD2d 613 [2001]). In any event, the defendant was properly sentenced as a second felony offender based upon his predicate conviction of an offense in Illinois which would constitute a felony under New York law *(see People v Smalls,*293 AD2d 500, 501 [2002]; *cf. People v Horvath,*81 AD3d 850 [2011]). Accordingly, contrary to the defendant’s contention on appeal, his sentence was not illegal. Mastro, A.P.J., Angiolillo, Dickerson and Hall, JJ., concur.
Page 1- MOTION TO STAY ORDERS TO SELF-SURRENDER

Ruben L. Iñiguez

Assistant Federal Public Defender

101 S.W. Main Street, Suite 1700

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 326-2123 Telephone

(503) 326-5524 Facsimile

ruben_iniguez@fd.org

Attorney for Defendant

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

WINSTON SHROUT,

Defendant.

Case No. 3:15-cr-00438-JO-1

MOTION TO STAY ORDERS TO 

SELF-SURRENDER

The defendant, Winston Shrout, through counsel, Ruben L. Iñiguez, respectfully moves the 

Court to enter an Order staying all previous orders directing him to “surrender for service of 

sentence at FCI Sheridan, the institution designated by the Bureau of Prisons, on Monday, January 

7, 2018 [sic] no later than 2 p.m.” ECF 180. See also ECF 181. The government, through Stuart 

A. Wexler and Lee F. Langston, Trial Attorneys, Tax Division, does not oppose this motion. It 

agrees that Mr. Shrout “accurately states the [Ninth Circuit] rule” governing release pending 

appeal, but it “would defer to the Court’s judgment regarding any necessary stay.”

Case 3:15-cr-00438-JO Document 182 Filed 12/21/18 Page 1 of 2
Page 2- MOTION TO STAY ORDERS TO SELF-SURRENDER

BACKGROUND

On October 26, 2018, Mr. Shrout timely filed a Notice of Appeal from the Judgment and 

Conviction with the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. ECF 163; see also United 

States v. Winston Shrout, CA No. 18-30228. On December 20, he filed a Motion for Release 

Pending Appeal with the Ninth Circuit pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 9 and

Ninth Circuit Rule 9-1.2. See CA No. 18-30228 at Docket Entry 6.

MOTION

Ninth Circuit Rule 9-1.2(e) states: “If the appellant is on bail at the time the motion [for 

bail pending appeal] is filed in this Court, that bail will remain in effect until the Court rules on 

the motion.”

Mr. Shrout remains on bail at this time, and the Ninth Circuit has yet to rule on the motion 

for release pending appeal he filed yesterday. Accordingly, he respectfully moves the Court to 

enter an Order staying all previous orders directing him to surrender for service of his sentence on 

January 7, 2019. See ECF 180 and 181.

Counsel has discussed this Motion to Stay Orders to Self-Surrender with counsel for the 

government, Stuart A. Wexler and Lee F. Langston, Trial Attorneys, Tax Division. As noted 

above, the government “would defer to the Court’s judgment regarding any necessary stay.”

RESPECTFULLY submitted this 21st day of December, 2018.

/s/ Ruben L. Iñiguez

Ruben L. Iñiguez

Assistant Federal Public Defender

Case 3:15-cr-00438-JO Document 182 Filed 12/21/18 Page 2 of 2
Glen Canyon Releases

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

Jan-02

Feb-02Mar-02Apr-02

May-02

Jun-02

Jul-02

Aug-02

Sep-02

Oct-02

Nov-02Dec-02

Jan-03

Feb-03Mar-03Apr-03

May-03

Jun-03

Jul-03

Aug-03

Sep-03

Average CFS

With Experiment

No Experiment
Glen Canyon Releases 

 No Experiment

Daily Minimum and Maximum Flow

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

45000

50000

Jan-02

Feb-02Mar-02Apr-02

May-02

Jun-02

Jul-02

Aug-02

Sep-02

Oct-02

Nov-02Dec-02

Jan-03

Feb-03Mar-03Apr-03

May-03

Jun-03

Jul-03

Aug-03

Sep-03

Average CFS

Actual minimum and maximum values

would deviate somewhat due to flow

reductions on weekends and changing

load following schedules
Daily Minimum and Maximum Flow

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

45000

50000

Jan-02

Feb-02Mar-02Apr-02

May-02

Jun-02

Jul-02

Aug-02

Sep-02

Oct-02

Nov-02Dec-02

Jan-03

Feb-03Mar-03Apr-03

May-03

Jun-03

Jul-03

Aug-03

Sep-03

Average CFS

Actual minimum and maximum values

would deviate somewhat due to flow 

reductions on weekends and changing

load following schedules