alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Juan Reyes, Also Known as Johnny Esteban, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (John Collins, J.), rendered on August 3, 1984, unanimously affirmed.

Application by appellant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted. *(See, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Saunders,*52 AD2d 833.) We have reviewed this record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous points which could be raised on this appeal. Concur — Sandler, J. P., Carro, Asch and Milonas, JJ.
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 Annual Report of The PBSJ Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ending September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, W. Scott DeLoach, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                  |  |  |  |     |  |                      |  |                                                                     
|----------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | -------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------
|                  |  |  | 
|December 23, 2004 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ W. Scott DeLoach
|                  |  |  |  |     |  |                      |  | W. Scott DeLoach                                                    
|                  |  |  |  |     |  |                      |  | Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
CONSENT ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

On or about April26,2023, 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 of33 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 May 3,2023, at

Alameda, California

Timothy G. Stueve

Administrative Law Judge

U.S. Coast Guard
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2491 

To amend the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 to require consultation with State and local elected 

officials and a public hearing before awarding grants or contracts for 

housing facilities for unaccompanied alien children. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 21, 2015 

Mr. OLSON (for himself, Mr. SANFORD, Mrs. BLACK, Mr. CULBERSON, and 

Mr. MULLIN) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 to require consultation with State and local elected officials and a public 

hearing before awarding grants or contracts for housing 

facilities for unaccompanied alien children. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Our Communities, Our 

5 Choices Act of 2015’’. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2491 IH

1 SEC. 2. REQUIRING CONSULTATION WITH STATE AND 

2 LOCAL ELECTED OFFICIALS AND A PUBLIC 

3 HEARING BEFORE AWARDING GRANTS OR 

4 CONTRACTS FOR HOUSING FACILITIES FOR 

5 UNACCOMPANIED ALIEN CHILDREN. 

6 Section 235(i) of the William Wilberforce Trafficking 

7 Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 (8 U.S.C. 

8 1232(i)) is amended by adding at the end the following: 

9 ‘‘Before awarding any grant or contract under this sub10 section that provide for housing of unaccompanied alien 

11 children in a facility that is not on property of the Federal 

12 Government, the Secretary shall— 

13 ‘‘(1) consult with State and local elected offi14 cials regarding the location of the facility as well as 

15 the duration of the award and the safety, security, 

16 and funding of the facility; and 

17 ‘‘(2) conduct a public hearing, no earlier than 

18 90 days after the announcement of a potential loca19 tion for such facility, for which— 

20 ‘‘(A) advance public notice has been pro21 vided, in mediums available for general circula22 tion in the proposed jurisdiction, at least 10 

23 days before the date of the hearing; and 

24 ‘‘(B) a representative of the Department of 

25 Health and Human Services is in attendance in 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 2491 IH

1 an official capacity for the purpose of receiving 

2 public comments.’’. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
```

                                                                    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 Chinawe.com Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Man
Keung Wai, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations of the
Company.

/s/ Man Keung Wai
Chief Executive Officer
November 22, 2004

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, 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 Chinawe.com Inc. and will be
retained by Chinawe.com Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
```
[J-79-2015] 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

MIDDLE DISTRICT 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

 Appellant 

 v. 

TYRONE LOWE, 

 Appellee 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 134 MAP 2014 

Appeal from the Order of the Superior 

Court entered on May 7, 2014 at No. 

1178 MDA 2013, affirming in part and 

reversing in part the Judgment 

of Sentence of the Court of Common 

Pleas of York County, Criminal 

Division, entered on February 6, 2013 at

No. CP-67-CP-4522-2012 

SUBMITTED: November 12, 2015 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM DECIDED: February 16, 2016 

AND NOW, this 16th day of February, 2016, the appeal is dismissed as having 

been IMPROVIDENTLY GRANTED. 

Mr. Justice Eakin did not participate in the consideration or decision of this 

matter.
#### Donald Wilkinson, Appellant, v Francis J. Sukiennik et al., Defendants, and Robert Hoelscher, Respondent.

This order is contrary to our order of January 24, 1986 [116 AD2d 987], as amended on April 4, 1986 [119 AD2d 1011], wherein we held that until the contract is terminated, defendant has an equitable interest in the property and that, except for the order of February 25, 1985 (which granted defendant Hoelscher a judgment for $500), plaintiff is not obligated to pay rent for the period of his occupancy because the contract makes no provision for rental payments. The contract provides that it may be canceled "by giving written notice of such cancellation to the other party, in which event the monies paid on account hereof shall be returned to purchaser and this contract shall become null and void and neither party hereto shall have claim against the other”. Although plaintiff concedes that the contract was canceled and the $15,000 tendered *1071after the date of our prior order, there is no evidence in the record concerning the date of cancellation. Because plaintiff is not obligated to pay rent for the period before the cancellation of the contract, we delete that part of the order appealed from directing plaintiff to pay the sum of $500 per month as rent beginning February 1985. This determination shall not preclude defendant Hoelscher from bringing any action or proceeding that may lie to recover rents for the period of occupancy after the termination of the contract. We do not, however, pass upon the merits of such an action or proceeding. (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Joslin, J. — ejectment.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Denman, Boomer, Pine and Balio, JJ.
# C_2021459EN.01000201.xml

| 12.11.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 459/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.11.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 459/2

---

BIO-BASED INDUSTRIES JOINT UNDERTAKING

Publication of the final accounts for the financial year 2020

(2021/C 459/02)

The complete version of the final accounts may be found at the following address:

https://www.bbi.europa.eu/sites/default/files/bbi-ju-final-accounts-2020.pdf

---
#### Michael Zeferu WELDETENSAYE, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 10-2042.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 4, 2011.

Decided: May 10, 2011.

David Allen Garfield, Garfield Law Group LLP, Washington, D.C., for Petitioner. Tony West, Assistant Attorney General, Jennifer Levings, Senior Litigation Counsel, Kristen Giuffreda Chapman, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Michael Zeferu Weldetensaye, a native and citizen of Ethiopia, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) denying his motion to reconsider. We have reviewed the administrative record and the Board’s order and find that the Board did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion. *See*8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a) (2010); *Narine v. Hold*
      *234
      *er,*559 F.3d 246, 249 (4th Cir.2009) (setting forth standard of review). We therefore deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. *See In re: Weldetensaye*(B.I.A. Aug. 16, 2010). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*PETITION DENIED.*
# C_2021266EN.01001101.xml

| 6.7.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 266/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.7.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 266/11

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.10354 — Macquarie/Beauparc Utilities)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 266/09)

1.

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| — | Macquarie European Infrastructure Fund 6 ScSp (‘MEIF 6’, Luxembourg), managed by Macquarie Infrastructure and Real Assets (Europe) Limited (‘MIRA’, United Kingdom), a subsidiary of Macquarie Group Limited (‘Macquarie’, Australia), |
| --- | --- |

—

Macquarie European Infrastructure Fund 6 ScSp (‘MEIF 6’, Luxembourg), managed by Macquarie Infrastructure and Real Assets (Europe) Limited (‘MIRA’, United Kingdom), a subsidiary of Macquarie Group Limited (‘Macquarie’, Australia),

| — | Beauparc Utilities Holdings Limited (‘Beauparc Utilities’, Ireland). |
| --- | --- |

—

Beauparc Utilities Holdings Limited (‘Beauparc Utilities’, Ireland).

Macquarie acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of Beauparc Utilities.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

| — | for Macquarie: the provision of banking, financial, advisory, investment and funds management services globally, |
| --- | --- |

—

for Macquarie: the provision of banking, financial, advisory, investment and funds management services globally,

| — | for Beauparc Utilities: the collection, sorting/processing and treatment of non-hazardous waste in Ireland, the UK and the Netherlands, and the generation/wholesale and retail supply of electricity and the retail supply of gas in Ireland. |
| --- | --- |

—

for Beauparc Utilities: the collection, sorting/processing and treatment of non-hazardous waste in Ireland, the UK and the Netherlands, and the generation/wholesale and retail supply of electricity and the retail supply of gas in Ireland.

3.

Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

4.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.10354 — Macquarie/Beauparc Utilities

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax +32 22964301

Postal address:

| European Commission |
| --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

1

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.

2

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
CONTIFINANCIAL CORPORATION CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND STATEMENTS OF
OPERATIONS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                           1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                           9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                 MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                      DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                                 87,403
<SECURITIES>                                          351,341
<RECEIVABLES>                                         400,945
<ALLOWANCES>                                          (19,402)
<INVENTORY>                                                 0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                            0
<PP&E>                                                 33,800
<DEPRECIATION>                                        (15,434)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                        838,653
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                       0
<BONDS>                                                     0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                       0
<PREFERRED>                                                 0
<COMMON>                                                  477
<OTHER-SE>                                           (478,259)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                          838,653
<SALES>                                                    0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                      17,793
<CGS>                                                      0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                              0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     104,424
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                       1,143
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                    26,795
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     (114,509)
<INCOME-TAX>                                              17
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 (114,586)
<DISCONTINUED>                                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                            0
<CHANGES>                                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                        (114,586)
<EPS-BASIC>                                           2.46
<EPS-DILUTED>                                           2.46


</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Kirk Toussaint, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Douglass, J.), entered January 16, 1985, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, *870after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress certain physical evidence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Since the officers observed the defendant on the street with a gun which the defendant refused to drop after being ordered to do so, the officers had probable cause for his arrest (CPL 140.10 [1] [a]). The seizure of the weapon was incident to a lawful arrest *(see, People v Weintraub,*35 NY2d 351). The bullets which were subsequently recovered from the defendant’s shirt pocket at the precinct were properly seized pursuant to a routine inventory search *(see, People v Gonzalez,*62 NY2d 386; *People v Troiano,*35 NY2d 476). Suppression of these items was, therefore, properly denied.

Viewing the evidence adduced at trial in the light most favorable to the People, we find that it was legally sufficient to support the defendant’s conviction of the crime charged *(People v Lewis,*64 NY2d 1111; *People v Conyers,*130 AD2d 677). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the evidence established the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s contention that the court’s charge to the jury deprived him of a fair trial is unpreserved for our review (CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Thomas,*50 NY2d 467; *People v Gonzalez,*97 AD2d 423). In any event, we find this contention to be without merit. Mangano, J. P., Thompson, Lawrence and Harwood, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-2001             JAN-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-2000             FEB-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-2000             APR-30-1999
<CASH>                                          13,403                   9,470
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   20,020                  54,911
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (3,716)                (37,333)
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                45,780                 150,956
<PP&E>                                          13,030                  14,560
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (4,127)                 (3,270)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  75,720                 253,351
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          147,441                  29,629
<BONDS>                                        100,000                 100,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                           372                     327
<OTHER-SE>                                    (73,873)                  93,909
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    75,720                 253,351
<SALES>                                         25,654                  60,664
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                25,654                  60,664
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                31,605                  69,180
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,918                   2,619
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (7,869)                (11,135)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (19)                      50
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (7,850)                (11,185)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (7,850)                (11,185)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.21)                   (.33)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.21)                   (.33)


</TABLE>
#### Richard A. Williamson, as Successor Liquidating Trustee on Behalf of Lipper Convertibles, L.P., Respondent, v PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Appellant.

Submitted February 13, 2007;

decided February 20, 2007

Motion by American Institute of Certified Public Accountants et al. for leave to appear amici curiae on the appeal herein granted only to the extent that the proposed brief is accepted as filed. Two copies of the brief may be served and 24 copies filed within seven days.
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 Trycera Financial, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2004, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), the undersigned Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

     (2)  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of
          operations of the Company.


Date:  April 14, 2005

/s/ Bryan Kenyon
Bryan Kenyon, Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32.2



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 her knowledge, the Quarterly Report of SPACEHAB on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2004, 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 12, 2004



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




A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to SPACEHAB, INC. and will be retained by SPACEHAB, INC. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



29