alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
(CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER)





In connection with the Quarterly Report of RFP Express, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2003 (the "Report"), I, Zimri C. Putney, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 that:





|(1) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m and 78(d); and      
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|(2) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.







|Dated:  February 11, 2004 |                                                                                             
|------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                          |                                                                                             
|                          | By:  /s/ Zimri C. PutneyZimri C. Putney, Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 163 (Wednesday, August 24, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 49704]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-16945]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY


Public Meeting of the President's Advisory Panel on Federal Tax 
Reform

AGENCY: Department of the Treasury.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice advises all interested persons of a public meeting 
of the President's Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform.

DATES: The meeting will be held on Thursday, September 8, 2005, in the 
Washington, DC area and will begin at 9 a.m.

ADDRESSES: The venue has not been identified to date. Venue information 
will be posted on the Panel's Web site at http://www.taxreformpanel.gov 
as soon as it is available.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Panel staff at (202) 927-2TAX 
(927-2829) (not a toll-free call) or e-mail <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f49d9a929bb480958c8691929b869984959a9198da939b82"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="b6dfd8d0d9f6c2d7cec4d3d0d9c4dbc6d7d8d3da98d1d9c0">[email protected]</span></a> 
(please do not send comments to this box). Additional information is 
available at http://www.taxreformpanel.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose: The September 8 meeting is the 
eleventh meeting of the Advisory Panel. At this meeting, the Panel will 
continue to discuss issues associated with reform of the tax code.
    Comments: Interested parties are invited to attend the meeting; 
however, no public comments will be heard at the meeting. Any written 
comments with respect to this meeting may be mailed to The President's 
Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform, 1440 New York Avenue NW., Suite 
2100, Washington, DC 20220. All written comments will be made available 
to the public.
    Records: Records are being kept of Advisory Panel proceedings and 
will be available at the Internal Revenue Service's FOIA Reading Room 
at 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room 1621, Washington, DC 20024. The 
Reading Room is open to the public from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday 
through Friday except holidays. The public entrance to the reading room 
is on Pennsylvania Avenue between 10th and 12th streets. The phone 
number is (202) 622-5164 (not a toll-free number). Advisory Panel 
documents, including meeting announcements, agendas, and minutes, will 
also be available on http://www.taxreformpanel.gov.

    Dated: August 22, 2005.
Mark S. Kaizen,
Designated Federal Officer.
[FR Doc. 05-16945 Filed 8-23-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4811-33-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
i i i i i i

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-08-00719-CR

Donald HASTING,

Appellant

v.

The State of TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2008-CR-4054

Honorable Sharon MacRae, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Delivered and Filed: November 26, 2008 

DISMISSED

Pursuant to a plea-bargain agreement, Donald Hasting pled nolo contendere to the offense

of possession of cocaine, less than one gram, and was sentenced in accordance with the terms of his

plea-bargain agreement. On September 12, 2008, the trial court signed a certification of defendant’s

right to appeal stating that this “is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.”

See TEX.R.APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). After Hasting filed a notice of appeal, the trial court clerk sent copies
04-08-00719-CR

-2-

of the certification and notice of appeal to this court. See id. 25.2(e). The clerk’s record, which

includes the trial court’s Rule 25.2(a)(2) certification, has been filed. See id. 25.2(d).

“In a plea bargain case ... a defendant may appeal only: (A) those matters that were raised by

written motion filed and ruled on before trial, or (B) after getting the trial court’s permission to

appeal.” Id. 25.2(a)(2). The clerk’s record, which contains a written plea bargain, establishes the

punishment assessed by the court does not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor

and agreed to by the defendant. See id. The clerk’s record does not include a written motion filed and

ruled upon before trial; nor does it indicate that the trial court gave its permission to appeal. See id.

The trial court’s certification, therefore, appears to accurately reflect that this is a plea-bargain case

and that Hasting does not have a right to appeal. We must dismiss an appeal “if a certification that

shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record.” Id. 25.2(d).

We, therefore, warned Hasting that this appeal would be dismissed pursuant to Texas Rule

of Appellate Procedure 25.2(d), unless an amended trial court certification showing that he had the

right to appeal was made part of the appellate record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d), 37.1; Daniels v.

State, 110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, order). No such amended trial court

certification has been filed. This appeal is, therefore, dismissed pursuant to Rule 25.2(d).

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH
<PAGE> 1

                                                                EXHIBIT 18

                        PREFERABILITY LETTER

February 25, 1998

Solutia Inc.
10300 Olive Boulevard
P.O. Box 66760
St. Louis, Missouri 63166-6760

To the Board of Directors:

We have audited the financial statements of Solutia Inc. as of December 31,
1997 and 1996, and for each of the three years in the period ended December
31, 1997, included in your Annual Report on Form 10-K to the Securities and
Exchange Commission, and have issued our report thereon dated February 25,
1998. Note 16 to such financial statements contains a description of your
modification of the application of Statement of Position (SOP) 96-1,
"Environmental Remediation Liabilities" during the year ended December 31,
1997. In our judgment, such change is to an alternative accounting principle
that is preferable under the circumstances.

Yours truly,

/S/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
St. Louis, Missouri
# THEATTOIWEY GENERAL OF ~XAS

Honorable Geo. H. Sheppard Comptroller of Public Accounts Austin, Texas Dear Mr. Sheppard: OpinionNo. O-6322 Re: Expenses provided for under Article 

# 2609, Revised Civil Statutes cannot in any event be paid from the General Maintenance and Contingent Expense Appropriationmade to theA.&M. College. Your letter ofApril 24, 1945,which is copied below, has been given our careful consideration:

"Article

# 2609,

R.C.S., 1925provides: "'There shallbemaintained and instructed at said college annually free of charge to them t_hree students
..... , The Comptrolleron proper vouchers being filed in his office by the directors, is authorized to draw his warrant on the State Treasurer against any appropriation made for suchpurpose.' Emphasis supplied.

"There is no specificappropriation now available for such urpose unless the appropriation made to the A. & M.

-77-n&r n theGeneral Appropriation Bill can be used for such urpose. The General Maintenance Appropriation fos b ollege for the biennium ending August 31, 1945, reads as follows:

For the For the Year Year 

# 1943 1345 "Generalmaintenance, including supplies,material, labor, equipment, traveling and contingent expenses $108,033 $1zJ3,:130’

"I shall thankyou to advise this department whether or nst expenses incurredunder Article

# 2609 may be paid from the GeneralMaintenance and Contingent Expense Appropriationnsde t: the A. & M. College in the biennial appropriationbill.'

Under the specificprovisions of said Article

# 2609, you are not authorized tolay any of said expensesuntil and/or unless the Legislature has "Made for suchpurpose" a specific appropriation.Honorable Oeo. H. Sheppard - Page 2 O-6322

YOU state inyour letter that no such appropriation has been made; that the only possible item from which it could be paid would be that for General Maintenance and Contingent Expense, etc. It Is our opinion that this specific appropriationwould not and does not authorize you to pay any expenses incurred by students, under the provisions of Article 2609.

We are not, of course, passing upon the constitutionality of said Article, or whether the Legislature could, If itdesired, make such appropriation. Very truly yours ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
By s/Geo. W. Barcus Geo. W. Barcus Assistant GWB-MR-WC

APPROVED MAY 3, 1945 s/ Carlos C.AShley FIRST ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL Approved Opinion Committee by s/BwB Chairman
STATE of North Carolina v. George W. BALDWIN.

No. 47P02-7.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 12, 2007.

George W. Baldwin, pro se.

William P. Hart, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State of NC.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the application filed by Defendant on the 12th day of September 2007 in this matter for Writ of Habeas Corpus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, Alamance County:

> "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 12th day of September 2007."
STATE v. LANE.

No. COA07-102.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed November 6, 2007.

Certification Date November 26, 2007.

Appeal from Wake (05CRS119261).

Cases Reported Without Published Opinion. No error.
STATE of North Carolina v. Baudel Peres Villa SARES.

No. 237P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 23, 2007.

Amos Tyndall, Chapel Hill, for Baudel Peres Villa Sares.

Richard Slipsky, Special Deputy Attorney General, C. Colon Willoughby, Jr., District Attorney, for State of NC.

Prior report: ___ N.C.App. ___, 643 S.E.2d 49.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the notice of appeal from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, filed by the Defendant on the 22nd day of May 2007 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-30, and the motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question filed by the Attorney General, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the motion to dismiss the appeal is

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 23rd day of August 2007."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 22nd day of May 2007 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 23rd day of August 2007."
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-6636

MCDONALD WILLIAMS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CHARLES HAWLEY; THOMAS BREEDLOVE, Defendants - Appellees, and T. L. JACOBS, Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, District Judge. (CA-97-736-5F) Submitted: July 13, 2000 Decided: July 25, 2000 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. McDonald Williams, Appellant Pro Se. James Carol Worthington, POE, HOOF & REINHARDT, Durham, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: McDonald Williams appeals the district court’s order granting in part and denying in part relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) complaint. He raised claims regarding the confiscation of tennis shoes and money orders during a search. The district court denied relief on Williams’ claim regarding his tennis shoes. Our review of the record reveals that the district court’s order was correct as to this claim. Accordingly, we affirm on this claim on the reasoning of the district court. See Williams v. Hawley, No. CA-97-736-SF (E.D.N.C. May 11, 1998; May 30, 2000). Williams’ claim regarding his money orders was referred to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (1994). The magistrate judge recommended that partial relief be granted and advised Williams that failure to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district courtorder based upon the recommendation. Despite this warning, Williams failed to object to the magistrate judge’s recommendation.The timely filing of objections to a magistrate’s recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been warned that failure to object will waive appellate review. See Wright v. Collins , 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn , 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Williams has waived appellate review as to this money order claim by failing to file objections after3 receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment ofthe district court as to this claim. 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.

AFFIRMED
Curtis L. SANGSTER v. The Honorable Paul L. JONES, Senior Resident Judge of Greene County.

No. 152P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 3, 2007.

Curtis L. Sangster, Pro Se.

Robert Montgomery, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Plaintiff on the 27th day of March 2007 in this matter for a writ of mandamus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, Greene County:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in Conference this the 3rd day of May 2007."
Exhibit 10.14

June 30, 2007

Campbell & Company, Inc.
Court Tower Building
210 West Pennsylvania Avenue
Suite 770
Towson, MD 21204

Attn: Ms. Terry Becks

Re:    Management Agreement Renewals

Dear Ms. Becks:

We are writing with respect to your management agreements concerning the commodity pools to which reference is made below (the ‘‘Management Agreements’’). We are extending the term of the Management Agreements through June 30, 2008 and all other provisions of the Management Agreements will remain unchanged.

| |   |                                       
| | - | --------------------------------------
| | • | Smith Barney Potomac Futures Fund L.P.

| |   |                                           
| | - | ------------------------------------------
| | • | Smith Barney Diversified Futures Fund L.P.

| |   |                                              
| | - | ---------------------------------------------
| | • | Smith Barney Diversified Futures Fund L.P. II

| |   |                                              
| | - | ---------------------------------------------
| | • | Smith Barney Global Markets Futures Fund L.P.

| |   |                                                  
| | - | -------------------------------------------------
| | • | Smith Barney Global Diversified Futures Fund L.P.

| |   |                                                        
| | - | -------------------------------------------------------
| | • | Salomon Smith Barney Diversified 2000 Futures Fund L.P.

| |   |                              
| | - | -----------------------------
| | • | CMF Campbell Master Fund L.P.

Please acknowledge receipt of this modification by signing one copy of this letter and returning it to the attention of Ms. Jennifer Magro at the address above or fax to 212-793-1986. If you have any questions I can be reached at 212-559-5046.

Very truly yours,

CITIGROUP MANAGED FUTURES LLC

By:


/s/ Jennifer MagroJennifer Magro
Chief Financial Officer & Director


CAMPBELL & COMPANY, INC.

By:


/s/ Theresa Becks


Print Name:


Theresa Becks


JM/sr

---
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3317 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                      Calendar No. 1063
110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3317

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 101 West Main Street in Waterville, New York, as the ``Corporal John 
                       P. Sigsbee Post Office''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 23, 2008

  Mrs. Clinton (for herself and Mr. Schumer) introduced the following 
 bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland 
                   Security and Governmental Affairs

           September 24 (legislative day, September 17), 2008

              Reported by Mr. Lieberman, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 101 West Main Street in Waterville, New York, as the ``Corporal John 
                       P. Sigsbee Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. CORPORAL JOHN P. SIGSBEE POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 101 West Main Street in Waterville, New York, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Corporal John P. Sigsbee Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Corporal 
John P. Sigsbee Post Office''.
                                                      Calendar No. 1063

110th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                                S. 3317

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 101 West Main Street in Waterville, New York, as the ``Corporal John 
                       P. Sigsbee Post Office''.

_______________________________________________________________________

           September 24 (legislative day, September 17), 2008

                       Reported without amendment
```
EXHIBIT 99.1

                            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 Microtek Medical  Holdings,
Inc. (the  "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending June 30, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, Dan R. Lee,  Chairman,  Chief Executive Officer and President 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 results of operations of the
Company.

/s/ Dan R. Lee
----------------------------
Dan R. Lee
Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President
August 13, 2002





1498851
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                             481
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,132
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                       1,028,180
<DEPRECIATION>                                  69,077
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,106,702
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        436,739
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     421,549
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,106,702
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                32,693
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   23,210
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,102
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 10,318
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             10,318
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    10,318
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.29
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.29
        

</TABLE>
# Commission Implementing Decision of 7 November 2013 adopting a seventh updated list of sites of Community importance for the            Mediterranean biogeographical region (notified under document C(2013) 7356) (2013/739/EU) (repealed)         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Decision

# of 7 November 2013

# adopting a seventh updated list of sites of Community importance for the Mediterranean biogeographical region

# (notified under document C(2013) 7356)

# (2013/739/EU) (repealed)

F1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                        

Textual Amendments

F1Repealed by Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/74 of 3 December 2014 adopting an eighth update of the list of sites of Community                                 importance for the Mediterranean biogeographical region (notified under document C(2014) 9098).