alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Breadcrumb-  Science Centers 

## Central Energy Resources Science Center

### Interdisciplinary Research on Energy Systems

-  Home 
-  Science 
-  Laboratories 
-  Data 
-  Maps 
-  Multimedia 
-  Publications 
-  Web Tools 
-  Software 
-  News 
-  Connect 
-  Partners 
-  About 

# Central Energy Resources Science Center

The United States Geological Survey (USGS), Central Energy Resources Science Center (CERSC) addresses national and global energy geoscience issues and conducts interdisciplinary research on energy systems.   You can explore the projects that are based here using the 'Science' option to the left.

### Location

We are located on the Denver Federal Center in Lakewood, CO.  For more information, please call 303-236-1647

### Science Topics

We conduct research and assessments to advance the understanding of the Nation's energy resources.  To read more about our what we do, visit the Science tab or select from the links below.

                        - Energy Resources
                        - Assessments
                        - Research
                        - Regional Studies

## News

Bipartisan Infrastructure Law helps fund new USGS facility at Colorado School of Mines, focused on energy and minerals research

November 13, 2023

####   Bipartisan Infrastructure Law helps fund new USGS facility at Colorado School of Mines, focused on energy and minerals research

MEDIA ADVISORY: Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary Brain, Director Applegate to Attend Groundbreaking for USGS Energy and Minerals Research Facility

November 9, 2023

####   MEDIA ADVISORY: Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary Brain, Director Applegate to Attend Groundbreaking for USGS Energy and Minerals Research Facility

EMRF Public Meeting Notice & Public Comment Period for Draft Environmental Assessment

February 9, 2023

####   EMRF Public Meeting Notice & Public Comment Period for Draft Environmental Assessment

View All

## Publications

March 12, 2024

####                 Cathodoluminescence differentiates sedimentary organic matter types              

Energy Resources Program, Central Energy Resources Science Center, Florence Bascom Geoscience Center, Geology, Energy & Minerals Science Center

March 10, 2024

####                 Characterization of the structural–stratigraphic and reservoir controls on the occurrence of gas hydrates in the Eileen Gas Hydrate Trend, Alaska North Slope              

Energy Resources Program, Central Energy Resources Science Center

February 19, 2024

####                 How quickly do oil and gas wells “Water Out”? Quantifying and contrasting water production trends              

Energy Resources Program, Central Energy Resources Science Center

View All
**Exhibit 12.1**Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges               Years ended December 31   2005  2004  2003   (dollars in thousands) Inclusive of interest on deposits:            Pre-tax income from operations $12,739  $15,453  $10,017           Add: Interest on deposits  19,382   11,968   14,585 Interest on short-term borrowings,notes payable and long-term debt  7,278   4,389   3,831           Total fixed charges  26,660   16,357   18,416                        Pre-tax earnings before fixed charges $39,399  $31,810  $28,433                        Ratio of earnings to fixed charges,inclusive of interest on deposits  1.48x   1.94x   1.55x           Exclusive of interest on deposits:            Pre-tax income from operations $12,739  $15,453  $10,017 Add: Total fixed charges — intereston short-term borrowings, notespayable, and long-term debt  7,278   4,389   3,831           Pre-tax earnings before fixed charges $20,017  $19,842  $13,848           Ratio of earnings to fixed charges,exclusive of interest on deposits  2.75x   4.52x   3.61x                      Years ended December 31   2002  2001   (dollars in thousands) Inclusive of interest on deposits:        Pre-tax income from operations $11,298  $9,626        Add: Interest on deposits  17,335   24,455 Interest on short-term borrowings, notespayable and long-term debt  4,853   7,598        Total fixed charges  22,188   32,053                 Pre-tax earnings before fixed charges $33,486  $41,679         Ratio of earnings to fixed charges,inclusive of interest on deposits  1.51x   1.30x        Exclusive of interest on deposits:        Pre-tax income from operations $11,298  $9,626 Add: Total fixed charges — interest onshort-term borrowings, notes payable, andlong-term debt  4,853   7,598        Pre-tax earnings before fixed charges $16,151  $17,224        Ratio of earnings to fixed charges,exclusive of interest on deposits  3.33x   2.27x        
95
**Exhibit** **** **32.2**




**CFO
      CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**


**RULE
      13a - 14(b) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT**


**OF
      1934, AS AMENDED, AND**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350** *****





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Guaranty Federal Bancshares, Inc. (the
      “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2005
      as
      filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), I, Bruce Winston, 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.




/s/
      Bruce Winston




Bruce
      Winston


Chief
      Financial Officer


(Principal
      Financial Officer)





November
      14, 2005





*
      A
      signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company and will be retained
      by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
      staff upon request.
#### Gregory RHEUBOTTOM, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY, Defendant-Appellee, and Alstom Transportation, Inc.; IFE North America, Defendants.

No. 12-2423.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 12, 2013.

Decided: May 20, 2013.

*178Douglas K. Allston, Jr., Allston & Associates, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellant. Mark F. Sullivan, Deputy General Counsel, Carol B. O’Keeffe, General Counsel, Gerard J. Stief, Senior Associate General Counsel, Nicholas L. Phucas, Assistant General Counsel, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.

Before KEENAN, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

In this personal injury case, Gregory Rheubottom appeals the district court’s order granting Appellee’s supplemental motion for summary judgment. On appeal, he argues that the district court misunderstood the evidence and erred in granting the motion. We disagree, and affirm the judgment.

We review whether a district court erred in granting summary judgment de novo, applying the same legal standards as the district court. *Martin v. Lloyd,*700 F.3d 132, 135 (4th Cir.2012). Summary judgment is only appropriate where there is no genuine issue of material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. *Id.*In determining whether there is a genuine issue of material fact, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. *Id.*However, a non-moving party cannot defeat summary judgment with merely a scintilla of evidence. *American Arms Int'l v. Herbert,*563 F.3d 78, 82 (4th Cir.2009). “Where the record taken as a whole could not lead a rational trier of fact to find for the nonmoving party, there is no genuine issue for trial.” *Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp.,*475 U.S. 574, 587, 106 S.Ct. 1348, 89 L.Ed.2d 538 (1986) (internal quotation marks omitted).

We have reviewed the record and agree with the district court’s stated reasons for granting Appellee’s supplemental motion for summary judgment. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. *See Rheubottom v. Washington Metro. Area Transit Auth.,*No. 8:09-cv-00485-PJM, 2012 WL 5200037 (D.Md. Oct. 19, 2012). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
# C_2004276EN.01000201.xml

| 11.11.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 276/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.11.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 276/2

---

Notice of the impending expiry of certain anti-dumping measures

(2004/C 276/02)

| 1. | As provided for in Article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 (1) on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community, the Commission gives notice that, unless a review is initiated in accordance with the following procedure, the anti-dumping measures mentioned below will expire on the date mentioned in the table below. |
| --- | --- |

1.

As provided for in Article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 (1) on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community, the Commission gives notice that, unless a review is initiated in accordance with the following procedure, the anti-dumping measures mentioned below will expire on the date mentioned in the table below.

1

2.   Procedure

Community producers may lodge a written request for a review. This request must contain sufficient evidence that the expiry of the measures would be likely to result in a continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury.

Should the Commission decide to review the measures concerned, importers, exporters, representatives of the exporting country and Community producers will then be provided with the opportunity to amplify, rebut or comment on the matters set out in the review request.

3.   Time limit

Community producers may submit a written request for a review on the above basis, to reach the European Commission, Directorate-General for Trade (Division B-1), J-79 5/16, B-1049 Brussels (2) at any time from the date of the publication of the present notice but no later than three months before the date mentioned in the table below.

2

| 4. | This notice is published in accordance with Article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96.









  Product | Country(ies) of origin or exportation | Measures | Reference | Date of expiry |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Ethanolamines | USA | Anti-dumping duty | Council Regulation (EC) No 1603/2000 (OJ L 185, 25.7.2000, p. 1) as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 153/2003 (OJ L 25, 30.1.2003, p. 23) | 26.7.2005 |

4.

This notice is published in accordance with Article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96.

Product

Country(ies) of origin or exportation

Measures

Reference

Date of expiry

Ethanolamines

USA

Anti-dumping duty

Council Regulation (EC) No 1603/2000 (OJ L 185, 25.7.2000, p. 1) as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 153/2003 (OJ L 25, 30.1.2003, p. 23)

26.7.2005

---

(1)  OJ L 56, 6.3.1996, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 461/2004 (OJ L 77, 13.3.2004, p. 12).

1

(2)  Telex COMEU B 21877; Telefax : (32-2) 295 65 05.

2

---
EXHIBIT
      13.1





**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 Annual Report of ChineseWorldNet.com, Inc. (the "Company")
      on Form 20-F/A for the year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Joe Kin Foon
      Tai,
      Chief Executive 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 , 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 presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.




Dated:December
                22, 2006
            
            /s/*Joe
                Kin Foon Tai*Joe
                Kin Foon TaiChief
                Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 32.2

**CERTIFICATION OF CFO PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OFTHE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

****

            In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Vanguard Health Systems, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2006 (the “Report”), I, JosephD. Moore, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company, certify, for the purpose of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”),as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

            (1)      The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)                       of the Exchange Act; 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/ Joseph D. Moore                             Joseph D. MooreExecutive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and TreasurerMay 12, 2006
June 8, 2006.
Via E-Mail

Office of the Acting Secretary
Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Three Lafayette Centre

1155 21st Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20581

Re: _—_ Rule Certification. NYMEX Submission 06.66: Notification of the Appropriate
Use of Suspense Accounts for Globex® Order Entry.

Dear Ms. Eileen A. Donovan:

The New York Mercantile Exchange ("NYMEX" or the "Exchange") is notifying the Commodity
Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC” or “Commission”) of NYMEX procedures for the appropriate use
of suspense accounts for Globex® order entry.

Effective June 12, 2006, the use of suspense accounts is acceptable for clearing firms, for
execution operations that give-up orders to other clearing firms, and for entry of bunched orders by
Eligible Account Managers which are to be allocated in accordance with CFTC Regulation 1.35(a-1)(5)
and NFA’s Interpretive Notice related to Compliance Rule 2-10. An order ticket must be created any
time an order is received on the NYMEX trading floor, whether such order is for open-outcry execution
or for input on Globex®. Any such order (other than orders eligible for post-execution allocation) must
contain a complete account identifier, notwithstanding the fact that a suspense account is used for order
input on the Globex® system. Further, if an order for NYMEX contracts is received for execution on
Globex® off the trading floor and is input on Globex® using a suspense account, an order ticket must be
contemporaneously prepared that includes a complete account identifier. Additionally, by the end of the
trading day, the ultimate customer account designation must be entered into the clearing system.

Pursuant to Section 5c(c) of the Commodity Exchange Act (“Act”) and CFTC Rule 40.6, the
Exchange hereby certifies that the attached procedures comply with the Act, including regulations under
the Act.

Should you have any questions on this procedure or other recordkeeping rules, please contact
Russell P. Cloughen, Senior Director, Trade Practice Surveillance at 212-299-2880, or Adam E. Wemow,
Compliance Counsel at 212-299-2851.

Very truly yours,

Nancy Minett
Vice President, Compliance
ce: Thomas LaSala
Brian Regan
EXHIBIT 32





PORTAGE RESOURCES INC.





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 Portage Resources Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending February 28, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Martine Caron, as Principal Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(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.




Date: April 19, 2011
By:
/s/Martine CaronName:
Martine CaronTitle:
Principal Executive Officer




A signed original of this written statement required by Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





The foregoing certification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Report pursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K and Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code and, accordingly, is not being filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission as part of the Report and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made before or after the date of the Report, irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.)
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

March 9, 2020

No. 04-19-00736-CV

Robyn Lynn Shalit “Cross-Appellee”,

Appellant

v.

Michael Lawrence Shalit “Cross-Appellant”,

Appellee

From the 451st Judicial District Court, Kendall County, Texas

Trial Court No. 11-177

Honorable Kirsten Cohoon, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

On March 5, 2020, the trial court reporter Kelly M. Grossman filed a notification of late 

record, notifying this court that the reporter’s record was not filed when it was originally due 

because appellant has failed to pay or make arrangements to pay the reporter’s fee for preparing 

the record. It is therefore ORDERED that appellant provide written proof to this court within 

ten (10) days of the date of this order that either (1) the reporter’s fee has been paid or 

arrangements have been made to pay the reporter’s fee; or (2) appellant is entitled to appeal 

without paying the reporter’s fee. The reporter’s record must be filed no later than ten (10) days 

after the date appellant’s written proof is filed with this court. If appellant fails to respond within 

the time provided, appellant’s brief will be due within thirty (30) days from the date of this order, 

and the court will consider only those issues or points raised in appellant’s brief that do not 

require a reporter’s record for a decision. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(c).

_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

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

court on this 9th day of March, 2020.
___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ,

Clerk of Court
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Robert L. Horn, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The trial court did not err in denying defendant’s request to submit the voluntariness of statements made by defendant to police officers to the jury because the issue of voluntariness was not "raised *at the trial*by a proper objection” and no "evidence sufficient to raise a factual dispute has been adduced either by direct or cross-examination” *(People v Cefaro,*23 NY2d 283, 288-289; *see also,*CPL 710.70; *People v Taylor,*135 AD2d 202, 204, *Iv denied*71 NY2d 1034; *People v Berkman,*124 AD2d 590, 592, *Iv denied*69 NY2d 824; *People v Estrada,*109 AD2d 977, 980).

The trial court did not err in declining defendant’s request to charge assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05 [4] [reckless conduct]) as a lesser included offense of first degree intentional assault (Penal Law § 120.10 [1]) because there was no reasonable view of the evidence that would support a finding that defendant accidentally or recklessly stabbed the victim *(see, People v Glover,*57 NY2d 61, 63; *People v Maybee,*148 AD2d 923). Defendant testified that he intentionally stabbed the victim but that he acted in self-defense, a claim that was rejected by the jury.

We have reviewed defendant’s remaining contentions and we find them to be without merit. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Doyle, J. — assault, first degree.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Balio, Lawton and Davis, JJ.
Case 1:07-cv-05798-CM-HBP     Document 12      Filed 08/29/2007     Page 1 of 4

Case 1:07-cv-05798-CM-HBP     Document 12      Filed 08/29/2007     Page 2 of 4

Case 1:07-cv-05798-CM-HBP     Document 12      Filed 08/29/2007     Page 3 of 4

Case 1:07-cv-05798-CM-HBP     Document 12      Filed 08/29/2007     Page 4 of 4
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-40037

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JOSE LUIS REGALADO-SOLIS,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:15-CR-804-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jose Luis RegaladoSolis has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with 

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 

229 (5th Cir. 2011). Regalado-Solis has not filed a response. We have reviewed 

counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We 

concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous 

 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

October 18, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-40037 Document: 00513721893 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/18/2016
No. 16-40037

2

issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw 

is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the 

APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 16-40037 Document: 00513721893 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/18/2016