alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.2



STATEMENT REQUIRED BY 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 on Form 20-F of Stora Enso Corporation (the Company) for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Esko Mäkeläinen, Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 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: June 25, 2003



/s/    ESKO
MÄKELÄINENEsko Mäkeläinen Senior Executive Vice President, Finance, Accounting and Legal
Affairs, and Chief Financial Officer




A SIGNED ORIGINAL OF THIS
WRITTEN STATEMENT REQUIRED BY SECTION 906 HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO STORA ENSO CORPORATION AND WILL BE RETAINED BY STORA ENSO CORPORATION AND FURNISHED TO THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OR ITS STAFF UPON REQUEST.



1
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

November 13, 2015

N o. 04

- 15

- 00412

- CR

Javier CARDENAS, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From th e 187th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015CR1577 Honorable Steve Hilbig, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

The appellant’s brief was originally due to be filed in this appeal on September 21, 2015. After two motions for extensions of time were filed and granted extending the deadline for filing the appellant’s brief to November 20, 2015, appellant’s court

- appointed attorney withdrew from representing appellant a nd new counsel was substituted.

On November 12, 2015, appellant’s new attorney filed a third motion for extension of

time. The motion is GRANTED , and appellant’s brief must be filed no later than December 21, 2015. Given the original deadline for the filing of appellant’s brief, FURTHER REQUESTS

FOR EXTENSIONS OF TIME TO FILE THE BRIEF ARE DISFAVORED

.

_______________ __________________ Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 13th day of November, 2015

.

____ _______________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

EVELYN L. MIDDLETON, pro se, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF 

LABOR, 

Defendant. 

 

Case No. 1:17-cv-00878 (TNM) 

ORDER 

 Upon consideration of the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss for lack of subject matter 

jurisdiction and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, the pleadings, relevant 

law, and related legal memoranda in opposition and in support, for the reasons set forth in the 

accompanying Memorandum Opinion, it is hereby 

ORDERED that the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED and the Second 

Amended Complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and 

ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED as moot. It is 

further 

ORDERED that the following pre-filing restrictions are implemented: Ms. Middleton is 

not permitted to file any actions in the District Court for the District of Columbia related to the 

above-captioned matter (i.e,. her retirement account or the handling of her complaints about the 

account by any individual, the Department of Labor, or the United States), without preauthorization from a judge in this District upon a finding that the case could be meritorious rather 

than repetitive. If Ms. Middleton wishes to file a related action, she shall submit to the Clerk of
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Wayne ROGERS; Latanicia McMillan Rogers, Defendants-Appellants.

No. 10-60770.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

June 9, 2011.

Gaines H. Cleveland, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Kiana L. Foster, Esq., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Gulfport, MS, Jason Scott Gilbert, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Jackson, MS, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Peter Hickman Barrett, William Carl Barrett, Esq., P. & W. Barrett Lawyers, P.L.L.C., Jackson, MS, Ian Avery Brendel, Esq., Law Office of Jim Davis, Gulfport, MS, for Defendants-Appellants.

Before GARWOOD, SMITH, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Wayne and Latanicia Rogers were convicted of Medicare fraud and related crimes for operating a physical therapy business that employed unlicensed physical therapists, who did not act under the supervision of a physician, and for fraudulently overcharging Medicare for physical therapy services by billing more time than what the treatments actually consumed and for billing for nonexistent services. The defendants raise numerous arguments on appeal. We have reviewed the briefs and pertinent portions of the record and have consulted the applicable law and have heard the arguments of counsel.

The defendants contend there is insufficient evidence to convict. We ask whether a rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict. The evidence is sufficient.

The defendants challenge the denial of their pretrial motions. The assertion of selective prosecution is without merit. The claim that the trials of the respective *316defendants should have been severed is not frivolous but ultimately fails based on the presumption that defendants indicted together should be tried together. The asserted speedy-trial violations are nonexistent; some of the delays were occasioned by defendants’ own motions for continuance.

We deny defendants’ claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. We seldom review such assertions on direct appeal. Moreover, there is no showing of harm. There is also no error in the various evidentiary rulings, including the admission of exhibits to which defendants assert their counsel should have objected.

We see no error in the giving of a deliberate-ignorance instruction. Also, the denial of a good-faith instruction is justified by the evidence.

There are no reversible errors in the sentences. For example, the risk of bodily injury from using unlicensed physical therapists is obvious, despite defendants’ protestations.

This trial was conducted competently and fairly. The evidence of guilt was overwhelming. There is no reversible error, and the judgments of conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 76 (Wednesday, April 19, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 20918-20919]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-9699]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 635

[Docket No. 981216308-9124-02; I.D. 040500B]
RIN 0648-AJ67


Atlantic Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Fisheries; Vessel 
Monitoring Systems

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Delay of effectiveness.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS further delays the effective date of a section of a final 
rule published May 28, 1999, which required certain vessel owner/
operators to install a NMFS-approved vessel monitoring system (VMS). 
The effective date of the VMS requirement is delayed until September 1, 
2000.

DATES: The effective date of 50 CFR 635.69 is September 1, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management 
Plan (HMS FMP), the final rule and supporting documents can be obtained 
from Rebecca Lent, Chief, Highly Migratory Species Division, Office of

[[Page 20919]]

Sustainable Fisheries, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 
20910.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jill Stevenson, NMFS, (301) 713-2347, 
or Buck Sutter (727) 570-5447.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The final regulations to implement the HMS 
FMP, and Amendment 1 to the Atlantic Billfish Fishery Management Plan 
(64 FR 29090, May 28, 1999) included a provision requiring an owner or 
operator of a commercial vessel permitted to fish for Atlantic HMS 
under Sec. 635.4 and that fishes with a pelagic longline to install a 
NMFS-approved VMS unit on board the vessel and operate the VMS unit 
whenever the vessel leaves port with pelagic longline gear on board. 
The VMS requirement of the final rule (Sec. 635.69) was to be effective 
September 1, 1999.
    On August 9, 1999, NMFS delayed the effective date of this final 
rule until January 1, 2000 (64 FR 43101). On October 14, 1999, NMFS 
again delayed the effective date of this final rule until June 1, 2000 
(64 FR 55633). NMFS further delays the effective date of implementation 
of the VMS regulations until September 1, 2000.

    Dated: April 10, 2000.
George H. Darcy,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 00-9699 Filed 4-18-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
- How To Appeal 
    - Court Forms  and Fees        - Court Forms
      - Fee Schedule
      - Filing Fee 
    - Court Rules and Procedures        - Rules of Practice  and Procedure
      - Procedural Requirements for Staff Conferences
      - Internal Operating Procedures
      - Rules of Admission  and Practice
      - Rules Governing Complaints of Judicial Misconduct and Disability
      - E-Filing Rules
      - Court Process
      - Court Efforts to Ensure Compliance with Court Rules 
    - Information About Practitioners        - Search List of Practitioners
      - Disciplinary Action
      - Key Points in Finding a Representative
      - Compendium of Disciplinary Grievances 
    - Orders and Opinions        - Miscellaneous Orders
      - Ceremonial Orders
      - Opinions and Full Court Orders
      - Search Decisions and Opinions
      - Recent Decisions / Opinions
      - Case Archives 
    - Active Panel Cases 
    - Stayed Cases 
    - Class Action Cases 
    - Electronic Filing 
    - Docket Search 
    - Oral Arguments        - Schedule
      - Oral Arguments via YouTube Live
      - Audio/Video
      - Oral Argument Educational Outreach 

USCAVC 16thJudicial ConferenceSeptember 19-20, 2024

Watch CAVC Oral Arguments on YouTube

Changes to Court Rules Governing Complaints of Judicial Misconduct and Disability - EffectiveJanuary 10, 2024

In the News: Articles

----
6H 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 22-0216

MATTHEW PEAVLER,

 Plaintiff and Appellant,

 v.

ROCKY MOUNTAIN SUPPLY,

 Defendant and Appellee.

ORDER OF MEDIATOR APPOINTMENT

This appeal being subject to M.R.App.P. 7, and the parties having failed to jointly 

and timely select a mediator under M.R.App.P., 7(4),(c),

IT IS ORDERED THAT Carey E. Matovich, whose name appears next on the 

list of attorneys desiring appointment as mediators for Money Judgments appeals which 

is maintained pursuant to M.R.App.P., 7(4)(e), is hereby appointed to conduct the 

mediation process required by M.R.App.P., 7(5), and 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the time periods set forth in M.R.App.P., 

7(5)(d) shall run from the date of this order of appointment.

A true copy of this order is being mailed to counsel of record for the parties, or to 

the parties individually if not represented by counsel, on the date hereof.

DATED this May 18, 2022.

Bowen Greenwood, Clerk of the Supreme Court

c: Nicholas LeTang, Daniela E. Pavuk, Carey E. Matovich

05/18/2022

Case Number: DA 22-0216
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 Duke Energy Field Services, LLC (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, W.
H. Easter III, Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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

        /s/ W. H. Easter III
------------------------------------------------
W. H. Easter III
Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer
March 15, 2004
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 Covad Communications Group,
Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Charles E. Hoffman, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, 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 my knowledge:

         (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 represents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Company.

                            COVAD COMMUNICATIONS GROUP, INC.

                            By:            /s/ CHARLES E. HOFFMAN
                                ------------------------------------------------
                                             Charles E. Hoffman
                                President, Chief Executive Officer and Director

Date: July 29, 2004
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

_____________

No. 12

- 3991

_____________

ERNESTO GALARZA,

Appellant

v.

MARK SZALCZYK; CITY OF ALLENTOWN;

LEHIGH COUNTY; GREG MARINO;

CHRISTIE CORREA

_____________

On Appeal from the United State s District Court

for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania

(Civil Action No. 10

- cv

- 6815)

District Judge: Hon. James Knoll Gardner

_____________

Argued: October 10, 2013

Before: FUENTES, COWEN, and BARRY, Circuit Judges

.

(Opinion Filed: March 4, 2014)

___________

O R D E R

It is O R D E R E D that the Opinion entered on March 4, 2014 is amended to

correct clerical error s, t he March 4, 2014, Opinion is amended as follows:1. On page 3 of the Court’s Opinion “ Christopher N. Lasch, Esq., University of

Denver Sturm College of Law, 2255 East Evans Avenue, Suite 335, Denver, CO

80208”

2. On page 21 of the Court’s Opinion “Br. for Law Professors at 14” should read

“Br. for Law Professors at 4.”

By the Court,

s/ Julio M. Fuentes

Ci rcuit Judge

Dated: April 16, 2014

SLC/cc: Counsel of Record
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 23

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference into MBT Financial Corp.'s
registration statement on Form S-8, filed with the Commission on August 16,
2001, and MBT Financial Corp.'s registration statement on Form S-8, filed with
the Commission on May 30, 2003, of our report dated February 28, 2005 on our
audit of management's assessment of the effectiveness of MBT Financial Corp.'s
internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, including our
opinion on management's assessment and our opinion on the effectiveness of MBT
Financial Corp.'s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit,
which report is included in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2004.



/s/ Plante & Moran, PLLC

Auburn Hills, Michigan
March 15, 2005
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS

MISC. NO. 06-19

IN RE: RECALL OF RETIRED JUDGE

O R D E R

Pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 7257(b)(1), eligible retired Judges of the Court may be recalled by 

the Chief Judge when further service is needed by the Court. Retired Judge Kenneth B. Kramer,

having complied with 38 U.S.C. § 7257, is designated a recall-eligible retired Judge. The 

Chief Judge of the Court has determined that, if recalled, Judge Kramer would provide substantial 

service necessary to meet the needs of the Court. 

Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is

ORDERED that, effective May 1, 2019, through July 30, 2019, recall-eligible retired Judge

Kramer is recalled from retired status in accordance with 38 U.S.C. § 7257(b)(1). Judge Kramer

shall have and exercise all the judicial powers and duties of the office of a Judge in active service 

and shall otherwise perform substantial service for the Court as requested by the Chief Judge. It is 

further

ORDERED that Judge Kramer shall serve in recalled status in calendar year 2019 for up 

to 90 days or its equivalent to review and decide appeals, motions, and other filings with the Court 

and to perform other substantial service at the request of the Chief Judge. With Judge Kramer's 

consent, service may be extended beyond 90 days. 

DATED: April 10, 2019 BY THE COURT:

ROBERT N. DAVIS

Chief Judge
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 81 (Thursday, April 26, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 20991]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-10423]


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

OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL POLICY


Meeting of the Advisory Commission on Drug Free Communities

AGENCY: Office of National Drug Control Policy.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Drug-Free Communities Act, a meeting of 
the Advisory Commission on Drug Free Communities will be held on May 
15-16, 2001 at the Office of National Drug Control Policy in the 5th 
Floor Conference Room, 750 17th Street NW., 7th Floor, Washington, DC. 
The meeting will commence at 1:00 p.m. on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 and 
adjourn for the evening at 5:30 p.m. The meeting will resume at 8:30 
a.m. on Wednesday, May 16, 2001 conclude at 12:00 noon. The agenda will 
include: remarks by ONDCP Acting Director, Edward H. Jurith, a report 
by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention regarding 
the Drug Free Communities grant selection process; and discussion of 
reauthorization of the Drug Free Communities Act. There will be an 
opportunity for public comment from 11:00 a.m. until 11:30 on 
Wednesday, May 16, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Linda V. Priebe, (202) 395-6622.

    Dated: April 19, 2001.
Linda V. Priebe,
Assistant General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 01-10423 Filed 4-25-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3180-02-U
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Joel Mark, Appellant.

Submitted February 13, *2007;*

decided March 27, 2007

Motion to dismiss the appeal herein granted and appeal dismissed without prejudice to a motion to reinstate the appeal should defendant return to this Court’s jurisdiction *(see People v Diaz,*7 NY3d 831 [2006]).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PROVIDED BY ERNST & YOUNG, LLP AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-26-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-27-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-28-1998
<CASH>                                          72,602
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               16,465,739
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,878,000
<INVENTORY>                                 11,903,655
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            29,687,596
<PP&E>                                      33,384,983
<DEPRECIATION>                               5,859,625
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             116,431,394
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       29,578,877
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            10
<OTHER-SE>                                (44,469,146)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               116,431,394
<SALES>                                     38,990,442
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            38,990,442
<CGS>                                       29,047,020
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               29,047,020
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             5,206,906
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           3,793,247
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                943,269
<INCOME-TAX>                                   360,070
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            583,269
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   583,269
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. Section 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report ofSouth Shore Resources Inc.(the"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year endedDecember 31, 2007as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I,Richard Wachter, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

| | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                                
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |   
| | 2. | The information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| |   

Dated this 11thday of April, 2008.

RICHARD WACHTERRichard WachterChief Financial Officer

























---