alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 411.

#### Henry, State Treasurer, *v.*Wadhams Oil Co.

October 21, 1935.

*Mr. Herbert H. Naujoks*for petitioner.

*Mr. Irving A. Fish*for respondent.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Wisconsin denied.
**Exhibit 32.1**

** **

**CERTIFICATION PURUSANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of MicroChannel Technologies Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending May 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on July 15, 2010 (the “Report”), I, Meetesh Patel, 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. 

 

** **

Date:  July 15, 2010                                                    /s/ Meetesh Patel 

                                                                                        Meetesh Patel

                                                                                        President and Chief Executive Officer

 

 

 

----
---

EXHIBIT 32.2

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Theron Resource
Group (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended February 29, 2008, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Periodic Report), I, Jerry R. Satchwell, 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:

|3. | the Periodic Report fully complies with the requirements
      of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
    and                                 
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   |                                                                                                                                                                          
|4. | the information contained in the Periodic Report fairly
      presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.

Date: June 11, 2008

/s/              
Jerry R. Satchwell

Jerry R. Satchwell Chief Financial
Officer

---
```

[Federal Register: September 19, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 181)]
[Notices]
[Page 54801]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr19se06-26]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

Time and Date: 11 a.m., Friday, October 13, 2006.

Place: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission
Conference Room.

Status: Closed.

Matters To Be Considered: Surveillance matters.

For Further Information Contact: Eileen A. Donovan, 202-418-5100.

Eileen A. Donovan,
Acting Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 06-7823 Filed 9-15-06; 3:35 pm]

BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
```
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Bruce TERRY, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 08-50933

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Oct. 26, 2010.

Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Bruce Terry, Fort Worth, TX, pro se.

Before SMITH, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Bruce Terry, federal prisoner # 27254-180, seeks leave to appeal in forma pauper-is (IFP) from the denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion. He was convicted of conspiracy to distribute crack cocaine within 1000 feet of a park and was sentenced as a career offender under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1 to 188 months of imprisonment. By moving to proceed IFP, Terry is challenging the district court’s certification decision that his appeal was not taken in good faith because it is frivolous. *See Baugh v. Taylor,*117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir.1997).

On appeal, Terry argues that he was entitled to a sentence reduction despite the fact that he was sentenced as a career offender. He asserts that the district court should have considered his prison disciplinary record and reduced his sentence on this basis. He also contends that the holding of *United States v. Booker,*543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), applies to § 3582(c)(2) proceedings.

Terry’s guidelines imprisonment range was not derived from the quantity of crack cocaine involved in the offense but rather from his status as a career offender. Therefore, the district court was correct in concluding that a sentencing reduction was not permitted. See § 3582(c)(2); *United States v. Anderson,*591 F.3d 789, 790-91 (5th Cir.2009). The Supreme Court’s decision in *Booker*does not apply to sentence reductions under § 3582(c)(2) because such proceedings are not full resentencings. *United States v. Doublin,*572 F.3d 235, 238 (5th Cir.), *cert. denied,*— U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 517, 175 L.Ed.2d 366 (2009); see *also Dillon v. United States,*— U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 2683, 2691-94, 177 L.Ed.2d 271 (2010) (holding that *Booker*does not apply to § 3582(c)(2) proceedings).

Terry has failed to show that he will raise a nonfrivolous issue on appeal. *See Howard v. King,*707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir.1983). Accordingly, his IFP motion is DENIED. Because the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2. His motion for the appointment of counsel is also DENIED.

*

 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.
Exhibit 23.1








CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM








We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (No. 333-70876, 333-63620 and 333-37808) and S-8 (No. 333-155257, 333-105862, 333-63618, 333-52136, 333-37832, 333-89223 and 333-10167) of Micrel, Incorporated of our report dated February 28, 2011 relating to the consolidated financial statements, the financial statement schedule and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K.











/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP


San Jose, California


February 28, 2011
**Exhibit 10.5**

**DEGOLYER AND MACNAUGHTON**

5001 SPRING VALLEY ROAD

SUITE 800 EAST

DALLAS, TEXAS 75244 

June 27, 2011 

Dr. Juan José Suárez Coppel 

Director General 

Petróleos Mexicanos

Avenida Marina Nacional No. 329 

Colonia Petróleos Mexicanos 

TorreEjecutiva, Piso 41 

11311 Mexico, D.F. Mexico 

Dear Dr. Suárez Coppel; 

We hereby consent to the reference toDeGolyer and MacNaughton as set forth under the headings “Presentation of Information Concerning Reserves” and “Business Overview” under the subheadings “Overview by Business Segment,” “Exploration andProduction,” and “Reserves” in the Annual Report on Form 20-F of Petróleos Mexicanos for the year ended December 31, 2010, and to the filing as an exhibit to the Form 20-F of our report entitled “Appraisal Report asof January 1, 2011 on Reserves of Certain Properties operated by Pemex Exploración y Producción in the Región Marina Suroeste of Mexico.” These estimates were prepared in accordance with the reserves definitions ofRules 4-10(a) (1)-(32) of Regulation S-X of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.
Exhibit31.1



CERTIFICATION



I, Maurice R. Ferré, M.D., certify that:



1.   I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of MAKO Surgical Corp.;



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 officer 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)   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



(c)   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 officer 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 functions):



(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 control over financial reporting.



November 7, 2008

        /s/ Maurice R. Ferré, M.D.Maurice R. Ferré, M.D.
President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of
the Board(Principal Executive Officer)






---
Exhibit 10.1



LOGO

April 26, 2013

Mtro. Emilio R. Lozoya Austin

Director General

Petróleos Mexicanos

Av. Marina Nacional
No. 329

Col. Petróleos Mexicanos

Torre Ejecutiva Piso 44

11311 México D.F., México

Dear Mtro. Lozoya Austin:

We
hereby consent to the references to Ryder Scott Company, L.P. as set forth under the heading Exploration and Production (Reserves) in the annual report on Form 20-F of Petróleos Mexicanos for the year ended December 31, 2012 (the
Form 20-F) and to the filing as an exhibit to the Form 20-F our report describing our review of the estimates of proved oil, condensate, natural gas and oil equivalent reserves owned by the United Mexican States (Mexico) as
of December 31, 2012, for 308 located onshore in and offshore from Mexico in the Northern Region. These estimates were prepared in accordance with the applicable reserves definitions of Rule 4-10(a) of Regulation S-X of the United States Securities
and Exchange Commission.



LOGORYDER SCOTT COMPANY, L.P.TBPE Firm Registration No. F-1580


Houston, Texas

April 26, 2013



|                                |  |                             |  |                    |  |                   
|------------------------------- |  | --------------------------- |  | ------------------ |  | ------------------
|SUITE 600, 1015 4TH STREET S.W. |  | CALGARY, ALBERTA T2R 1J4    |  | TEL (403) 262-2799 |  | FAX (403) 262-2790
|621 17TH STREET, SUITE 1550     |  | DENVER, COLORADO 80293-1501 |  | TEL (303) 623-9147 |  | FAX (303) 623-4258
#### William Michael KRAL, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. BENTON COUNTY, a Washington municipal corporation, Defendant—Appellee.

No. 10-35153.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 19, 2011.*

Filed Jan. 10, 2012.

William Michael Krai, Snoqualmie, WA, pro se.

Stephen John Hallstrom, Kennewick, WA, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

William Michael Krai appeals pro se *686from the district court’s partial summary-judgment and judgment dismissing his action as a sanction for failure to comply with discovery orders. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo partial summary judgment, *Charles Schwab & Co. v. Debickero,*593 F.3d 916, 918 (9th Cir.2010), and review for an abuse of discretion a dismissal for violation of court orders, *Allen v. Bayer Corp. (In re Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) Prods. Liab. Litig.),*460 F.3d 1217, 1226 (9th Cir.2006). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing the action for Krai’s violation of discovery orders after it considered the relevant factors. *See In re Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) Prods. Liab. Litig.,*460 F.3d at 1226-29, 1233 (discussing factors that courts must consider in deciding whether to dismiss an action for failure to comply with a court order, and noting that “ ‘the faults and defaults of the attorney may be imputed to, and their consequences visited upon, his or her client’ ” (citation omitted)).

We do not address the district court’s partial summary judgment because Krai did not specifically and distinctly argue the issues in his opening brief. *See Entm’t Research Grp., Inc. v. Genesis Creative Grp., Inc.,*122 F.3d 1211, 1217 (9th Cir. 1997) (“ ‘We review only issues which are argued specifically and distinctly in a party’s opening brief. We will not manufacture arguments for an appellant, and a bare assertion does not preserve a claim ....’” (citation omitted)).

Krai’s remaining contentions, including those concerning ineffective assistance of counsel, are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provid*686ed by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
#### JUN ZHANG, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 05-61126

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Dec. 20, 2006.

*439Wei Vicky Wang, Alhambra, CA, for Petitioner.

Thomas Ward Hussey, Director, Norah Ascoli Schwarz, John S. Hogan, U.S. Department of Justice Office of Immigration Litigation, Sharon A. Hudson, U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services, Houston, TX, Caryl G. Thompson, Attn: Joe A. Aguilar, New Orleans, LA, for Respondent.

Alberto R. Gonzales, Washington, DC, pro se.

Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals, BIA No. [ AXX XXX XXX ].

Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and GARZA, circuit judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Jun Zhang, a native and citizen of China, petitions this court for review of the BIA’s denial of his motion to reopen removal proceedings based on changed circumstances in China and new evidence. Zhang concedes that his motion to reopen was not filed until after the 90-day deadline in 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i) had passed, but Zhang argued before the BIA — and argues again here — that his late filing is excused under § 1229a(e)(7)(C)(ii) because country conditions changed in China when government officials there communicated threats against Zhang to his father in response to Zhang’s Falun Gong activities in the United States. The BIA rejected this argument and denied Zhang’s motion to reopen, reasoning that China’s repressive policy toward Falun Gong practitioners does not- represent a change in country conditions that was not available or discoverable at the time of Zhang’s previous hearing because the policy existed at that time.

We have jurisdiction to entertain Zhang’s petition for review. *Panjwani v.*Gonzales, 401 F.3d 626, 632 (5th Cir.2005). This situation is analogous to cases affirming the denial of motions to reopen where, for example, the birth of another child in the United States raised for the first time the spectre of persecution under China’s already-existing “one child” policy. *See Zheng v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice,*416 F.3d 129, 130-131 (2d Cir.2005). Like those cases, the policy at issue here was discoverable prior to Zhang’s first hearing even if it only became material for the first time at a later date. Therefore, the BIA’s finding that the threats communicated to Zhang’s father do not reflect the kind of change in country circumstances that is contemplated by § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(ii) was not an abuse of discretion. *See Lara v. Trominski,*216 F.3d 487, 496 (5th Cir. 2000); *see also Gomez-Arevalo v. Gonzales,*161 Fed.Appx. 354, 357 (5th Cir. 2005) (unpublished).

Accordingly, Zhang’s motion for judicial notice is GRANTED, but his petition for review is DENIED.

*

 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.
Exhibit 31.2
   1.
    
    I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Oxford Resource Partners, LP;
 2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q;
 3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q;
 4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer 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 Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q is being prepared;
 b.
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q based on such evaluation; and
 c.
    
    Disclosed in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q 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 officer 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
functions):
 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 control over financial reporting.
  By:
    /s/ JEFFREY M. GUTMANJeffrey M. GutmanSenior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
and Treasurer of Oxford Resources GP, LLC (the
general partner of Oxford Resource Partners, LP)
```

[Federal Register: June 3, 1998 (Volume 63, Number 106)]
[Notices]
[Page 30203]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr03jn98-64]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Public Information Collection Requirement Submitted to the Office
of Management and Budget for Review

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

ACTION: Notice of submission of information collection No. 3038-0025,
practice by former members and employees of the Commission.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Commodity Futures Trading Commission has submitted
information collection 3038-0025, Practice by Former Members and
Employees of the Commission, to OMB for review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13). The information
collected pursuant to 17 CFR 140.735-6 is designed to keep the
Commission aware of any conflicts of interest that may exist, and to
ensure compliance with the requirements of 18 U.S.C. 207 concerning
restrictions in this regard placed upon certain former federal officers
and employees.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 6, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Persons wishing to comment on this information collection
should contact The Desk Officer, CFTC, Office of Management and Budget,
Room 3228, NEOB, Washington, DC 20503, (202) 395-7340. Copies of the
submission are available from the Agency Clearance Officer, (202) 418-
5160.
    Title: Practice by Former Members and Employees of the Commission.
    Control Number: 3038-0025.
    Action: Extension.
    Respondents: Former Commission Members and Employees.
    Estimated Annual burden: .45 hours.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Estimated
                 Respondents                                      number of          Annual      Est. avg. hours
                                                                 respondents       responses       per responses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Former Commission member and employees......  ...............               3              1.5              .10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 28, 1998.
Jean A. Webb,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 98-14606 Filed 6-2-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
```

----

**======== RETURN TO INDEX    ========**

----