alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998             DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1998             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998             SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                           7,357                   7,357
<SECURITIES>                                     9,775                   9,775
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,920                   7,920
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,477                   1,477
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                24,813                  24,813
<PP&E>                                           8,078                   8,078
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,344                   4,344
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  29,170                  29,170
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           13,022                  13,022
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                        57,562                  57,562
<OTHER-SE>                                    (41,546)                (41,546)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    29,170                  29,170
<SALES>                                          8,047                  25,156
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 8,047                  25,156
<CGS>                                            3,244                   9,073
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,244                   9,073
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 9,960                  31,668
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   6                      30
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4,873)                (14,593)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       123                     413
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,996)                (15,006)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,996)                (15,006)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.40)                  (1.20)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.40)                  (1.20)
        

</TABLE>
#### Ex Parte William Cooper.

To justify a denial of bail there must be that evidence of deliberate malice, or those circumstances which prove murder in the first degree. (Paschal’s Dig., Art. 2267, Note 672.)

Appeal from Denton: The case was tried before Hon. Hardin Hart, one of the district judges.

The applicant having been committed-by a justice of the peace, he renewed the application for bail before the district court. Bail having been refused, he appealed to the Supreme Court. To make the precedent of any value the facts should be given.

The step-mother of Martha Wirt, sister of the deceased, and Martha got into a squabble about the ownership of a piece of cloth, and the right of Martha to make a pair of pantaloons out of it for deceased. From words the women came to a scuffle; the daughter calling for'her brother, the deceased,'and the old lady for her sons. About the beginning of the scuffle the step-mother and daughter disagreed. When the young men came in there seemed to be some controversy about who made the cloth, the old lady alleging that she spun and colored it, and the step-daughter that she wove it.

There was some discrepancy as to the character of the scuffle among the young men. The fight was the two Coopers against Wirt. John Cooper fired twice during *186the scuffle, both charges taking effect, and killing John Wirt almost immediately. Wirt was unarmed, and there was no evidence that William Cooper was armed or did anything except his part in the scuffle, in which, according to his mother, he got the worst of it. All in all, it was a general family fracas, about which there were no witnesses except the two exasperated women who commenced it. There seemed to have been no good feeling between John Wirt and John Cooper. There was no proof of ill-blood between deceased and William Cooper.

hlo briefs have been furnished to the *Reporter.*

Caldwell, J.

—The applicant is charged with murder, and having been denied bail by the justice, sitting as a court of inquiry, sued out his writ of *habeas corpus,*before the district court of Denton county. The district court took the same view as the justice, denied bail, and thus the case is before the court on appeal.

The record does not disclose that sedate mind and deliberate preconceived purpose which indicate express malice; nor do we discover those circumstances which point with unerring certainty to malice express.

The defendant is therefore entitled to bail, which is fixed at the sum of $10,000. It is ordered that the officer in whose custody the defendant may he shall take the required bail bo.nd.

Ordered accordingly.
EXHIBIT 32



CERTIFICATIONS



Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, in his capacity as an officer of SPACEHAB, Incorporated (SPACEHAB), that,
to the best of his knowledge, the Quarterly Report of SPACEHAB on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2005, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the
information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of SPACEHAB.



Date: November 10, 2005



/s/ Michael E. KearneyMichael E. Kearney President and Chief Executive Officer




/s/ Brian K. HarringtonBrian K. Harrington Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer




A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to SPACEHAB and will be retained by SPACEHAB and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Rene SIGALA-MARISCAL, aka Rene Sagala, Rene Sigala, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 06-10608.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 16, 2007.*

Filed April 20, 2007.

Robert Don Gifford, II, Esq., USREOffice of the U.S. Attorney, Reno, NV, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Donald C. Gish, Esq., Sparks, NV, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: O’SCANNLAIN, GRABER, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.

*

This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Rene Sigala-Mariscal appeals from the 41-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for unlawful reentry by a deported alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

*780Sigala-Mariscal contends that the district court erred by failing to consider the disparity between his sentence and sentences imposed upon unlawful reentry defendants in districts with fast-track sentencing programs. This contention is foreclosed. *See United States v. Marcial-Santiago,*447 F.3d 715, 718-19 (9th Cir.2006).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**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

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Southern Copper Corporation (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2007 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, OscarGonzalez Rocha, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifypursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirementsof section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 

 
|   | /s/ Oscar Gonzalez Rocha                      |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------|
|   |      Oscar Gonzalez Rocha |
|   | President and Chief Executive Officer         |
|   |                                          |

 

October31, 2007

 

 

Asigned original of this written statement required by section 906 has beenprovided to Southern Copper Corporation and will be retained by Southern CopperCorporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.

 

1

----
**Premier Foods plc**
**Exhibit 12.2**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Paul Thomas, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of PremierFoods plc; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows ofthe company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The company’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the company andhave:
(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to thecompany, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known toU.S. by others within those entities, particularly during the periodin which this report is being prepared; (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the company’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the company’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the periodcovered by the annual report that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the company’s internalcontrol over financial reporting; and
5. The company’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,to the company’s auditors and the audit committee of the company’s boardof directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the company’sability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves managementor other employees who have a significant role in the company’sinternal control over financial reporting.     Date: June 30, 2004 By: /s/ Paul Thomas     Name: Paul Thomas Title: Finance Director
**EXHIBIT 12.2****Certifications**I, Terrence Norman Fern, certify that:1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Petsec Energy Ltd; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the Company as of and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The Company’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15e and15d-15e) for the Company and have: a. designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report isbeing prepared;  b. evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  c. disclosed in this report any change in the Company’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during period covered by the annual report that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and5. The Company’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Company’s auditors and theaudit committee of the Company’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunction): a. all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe Company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the Company’s internal controls over financial reporting;Date: May 16, 2006          /s/ Terrence Norman Fern        Terrence Norman Fern  Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 31.1



CERTIFICATIONS



I, Stephen G. Kasnet, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Harbor Global Company Ltd.;



2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial
statements, and other financial information included in this 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 report;



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



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



b) [paragraph omitted
pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238 and 34-47986];



c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and



d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and



5. The registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):



a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over
financial reporting which are reasonably likely 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 other employees who have a significant
role in the registrants internal controls over financial reporting.



|                                         
|-----------------------------------------
|Date:    March 23, 2005                  
|                                         
|/s/    STEPHEN G. KASNET                 
|Stephen G. Kasnet Chief Executive Officer
UNITED STATES OF AMEzuCA

IJ.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

UNITED STATES COAST GUARI)

LINITED STATES COAST GUARD

Complainant

vs.

CHRISTIAN ANGELES

Respondent

Docket Number 2023-0084

Enforcement Activity No. 7630231

CONSENT ORDER

Issued: March 22. 2023

By Administrative Law Judqe: Honorable Timothv G. Stueve

Appearances:

Paul Ledoux

USCG Sector Virginia

For the Coast Guard

Christian Angeles, Pro Se

For Respondent
CONSENT ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

On or about March16,2023, the parties in this case submitted a Motion for Approval of

Settlement Agreement and Entry ofConsent Order to be approved as a settlement ofthe case

under 33 C.F.R. $ 20.502.

I have carefully reviewed the terms of the Settlement Agreement and find it is fair and

reasonable and in substantial compliance with the requirements of 33 C.F.R. $ 20.502.

ORDER

Upon consideration of the record, it is hereby ORDERED, the Settlement Agreement is

APPROVED in full and incorporated herein by reference. This Consent Order shall constitute

full, final, and complete adjudication of this proceeding.

Done and dated March22,2023, at

Alameda, California

Timothy G. Stueve

Administrative Law Judge

U.S. Coast Guard
#### William Gibson et al., Respondents, v Transact International, Inc., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff. Flying Tiger Lines, Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Appellant.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the third-party defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Posner, J.), dated February 3, 1987, which *808granted the plaintiffs’ motion to vacate the third-party defendant’s notice of deposition on condition that (1) the plaintiffs’ attorney stipulate in writing that the third-party defendant may use the plaintiffs’ depositions, previously taken by the defendant, at the trial, and (2) third-party defendant have leave, within 60 days, to submit written interrogatories to the plaintiffs with respect to any matters not adequately covered in their prior depositions by the defendant.

Ordered that the order is modified by deleting the provision thereof which granted the third-party defendant leave to submit written interrogatories, and substituting therefor a provision granting the third-party defendant leave to take further depositions of the plaintiffs with respect to any aspect of the facts of the accident and the alleged negligence of the parties not adequately covered on the plaintiffs’ prior depositions by the defendant; as so modified, the order is affirmed, with costs to the third-party defendant; the depositions of the plaintiffs shall take place upon written notice of at least 10 days, or at such time and place as the parties may agree.

The Supreme Court, Queens County, could properly find that the plaintiffs would be unreasonably inconvenienced by granting further disclosure of matters already fully disclosed in the depositions of the plaintiffs by the defendant held prior to the third-party defendant’s joinder as a party to this suit. However, the court erred in relegating it to the use of written interrogatories, rather than oral examination, with respect to those facts of the accident and the parties’ alleged negligence not adequately explored in the prior depositions. Mangano, J. P., Brown, Lawrence, Weinstein and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.
Skip to main content

Privacy Policy•Site map

# David A. Tapp

Judge David A. Tapp serves as a Judge of the United States Court of Federal Claims, a court with nationwide jurisdiction. Prior to his confirmation in 2019 by the U.S. Senate, Judge Tapp served fifteen years as Judge of the 28th Circuit for the Commonwealth of Kentucky, a court of general jurisdiction, and as a limited jurisdiction judge within the Commonwealth of Kentucky. He currently co-chairs the U.S. Court of Federal Claims Advisory Counsel.

Judge Tapp has served in numerous advisory capacities for justice-involved organizations including the National RX Drug Abuse and Heroin Summit, the United States Coordinating Council for Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention which reports to the President and Congress regarding issues affecting the nation's justice involved children, the Regional Judicial Opioid Initiative, and Kentucky's Criminal Justice Policy Assessment Council. He is a graduate of the University of Louisville Brandeis School of Law, Chaminade University of Honolulu, and Morehead State University.

In 2023, the Brandeis School of Law recognized Judge Tapp as a distinguished alumnus. Judge Tapp has also been acknowledged for his efforts related to treatment alternatives for justice involved individuals. In 2011, the National Association of Drug Court Professionals presented Judge Tapp the *All Rise!* award relating to his contributions. In 2015, the NADCP again recognized Judge Tapp's treatment team's contributions by awarding its prestigious *Community Transformation Award*. For many years, Judge Tapp directed judicial education for Kentucky's general jurisdiction and family court judges. He has taught on diverse justice related topics and continues to be involved in legal education efforts for attorneys and judges.

Judge Tapp's Employment Information

Howard T. Markey National Courts Building • 717 Madison Place, NW, Washington, DC 20439 • 202-357-6400
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Eddie McLoyd, Jr., Also Known as Eddie Williams, Appellant.

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Aylward, J.), rendered June 3, 1982, convicting him of resisting arrest, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contentions, the record discloses that there was ample evidence to support the jury’s verdict. Although there were certain inconsistencies in the testimony of the prosecution’s witnesses, the assessment of credibility and the weight to be accorded such testimony are for the trier of fact to resolve *(see, People v Storm,*114 AD2d 477; *People v Di Girolamo,*108 AD2d 755, *lv denied*64 NY2d 1133; *People v Leonard,*106 AD2d 470). Further, the defendant failed to request the justification charge to which he now claims he was entitled and, accordingly, the issue of law has not been preserved for appellate review *(see, People v Thomas,*50 NY2d 467; *People v Glinsman,*107 AD2d 710, *lv denied*64 NY2d 889). We have examined the defendant’s remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Lazer, J. P., Niehoff, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.