alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
registrant's quarterly report on Form 10-Q and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-03-1998
<PERIOD-END>                              APR-03-1998
<CASH>                                         33,170
<SECURITIES>                                   10,149         
<RECEIVABLES>                                  13,330
<ALLOWANCES>                                      188
<INVENTORY>                                     1,055
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               58,534 
<PP&E>                                        872,294
<DEPRECIATION>                                175,467
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                814,158
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         101,833
<BONDS>                                       648,987
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                           63
<OTHER-SE>                                     17,476
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  814,158
<SALES>                                             0 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               78,952
<CGS>                                               0         
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  29,522 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               38,298
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             13,569
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (623)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       30
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (653)
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 (316)
<CHANGES>                                           0 
<NET-INCOME>                                    (969)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (.15)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (.15)
        


</TABLE>
Cornelio Salas SANCHEZ v. Sec. of Corr. Theodis BECK Super. of L.C.I. George Kenworthy.

No. 334P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 11, 2007.

Cornelio Salas Sanchez, Pro Se.

LaToya B. Powell, Assistant Attorney General, for Beck and Kenworthy.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Plaintiff on the 5th day of July 2007 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 11th day of October 2007."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Plaintiff on the 5th day of July 2007 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, Cleveland County, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court of that County:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 11th day of October 2007."
EXHIBIT 32.1


CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18 U.S.C. 1350)


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Wells Real Estate Fund VIII, L.P. (the “Registrant”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011 , as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), the undersigned, Leo F. Wells, III, Chief Executive Officer of the corporate general partner of one of the General Partners of the Registrant, and Douglas P. Williams, Chief Financial Officer of the corporate general partner of one of the General Partners of the Registrant, hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350), that, to the best of our knowledge and belief:


|    |                                                                                                                      
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|(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 Registrant.




/s/ LEOF. WELLS, IIILeo F. Wells, IIIChief Executive OfficerMay 12, 2011





/s/ DOUGLASP. WILLIAMSDouglas P. WilliamsChief Financial OfficerMay 12, 2011
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 Othnet, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended January 31, 2003,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned certifies, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of the undersigned's
knowledge, 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:     March 17, 2003      By:  /s/ Jeffrey Wattenberg
                                  Jeffrey Wattenberg,
                                  President and Chief
                                  Executive Officer


Date:     March 17, 2003      By:  /s/ Jeffrey Wattenberg
                                  Jeffrey Wattenberg,
                                  Principal Financial Officer
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 15

- 00567

- CR

Monty Shoopman
v. The State Of Texas

On Appeal from the 94th District Court of Nueces County , Texas Trial Cause No. 10CR2366

- C

JUDGMENT
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on
appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the appeal

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion

.
We further order this decision certified below for observance.

November 3, 2016
STATE of North Carolina v. Vic MACON.

No. 214P02-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

November 8, 2007.

Vic Macon, Pro Se.

Robert Montgomery, Senior Deputy Attorney General, Thomas J. Keith, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 10th day of October 2007 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, Forsyth County, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court of that County:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 8th day of November 2007."
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 13.2

                           INNOVA, S. DE R.L. DE C.V.

              SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Carlos Ferreiro Rivas, the Chief Financial Officer of Innova, S. de R.L. de
C.V. (the "Company"), hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

1.    The Company's annual report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended
      December 31, 2003, to which this statement is filed as an exhibit (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 30, 2004

                                                       /s/ Carlos Ferreiro Rivas
                                                       -------------------------
                                                       Carlos Ferreiro Rivas
                                                       Chief Financial Officer
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LESLY XIOMARA VILLEDAMELARA; et al.,

 Petitioners,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 07-72160

Agency Nos. A098-599-022

 A098-599-023

 A098-599-024

 A098-599-025

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted April 20, 2011** 

Before: RYMER, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

Lesly Xiomara Villeda-Melara, Karla Yolanda Villeda-Melara, Seila Zulema

Villeda-Melara, and Carmen Maria Villeda-Melara, all natives and citizens of

Honduras, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order

dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying their

FILED

MAY 04 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 07-72160

applications for asylum and withholding of removal. Our jurisdiction is governed

by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453

F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the

petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that Karla and Lesly

failed to establish past persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on

account of a protected ground. See Parussimova v. Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734, 740-41

(9th Cir. 2009) (“[t]he Real ID Act requires that a protected ground represent ‘one

central reason’ for an asylum applicant’s persecution”). Petitioners’ contention

that they are members of a particular social group comprised of “young women

opposed to gang violence” was not raised to the agency. See Velasco-Cervantes v.

Holder, 593 F.3d 975, 978 n.3 (9th Cir. 2010) (no jurisdiction to review

unexhausted political opinion claim). In addition, we lack jurisdiction to review

any challenge to the agency’s denial of Seila’s and Carmen’s asylum applications

because they did not exhaust the issues before the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft,

358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, the petitioners’ asylum claims

fail.
3 07-72160

Because petitioners failed to meet the lower burden of proof for asylum,

their claims for withholding of removal necessarily fail. See Zehatye, 453 F.3d at

1190.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 531 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 

Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

AN ACT 

To repeal section 10(f) of Public Law 93–531, commonly 

known as the ‘‘Bennett Freeze’’. 

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


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
2 

S 531 RFH 

1 SECTION 1. REPEAL OF THE BENNETT FREEZE. 

2 Section 10(f) of Public Law 93–531 (25 U.S.C. 

3 640d–9(f)) is repealed. 

Passed the Senate September 18 (legislative day, 

September 17), 2008. 

Attest: NANCY ERICKSON, 

Secretary. 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 425 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand the resources 

eligible for the renewable energy credit to kinetic hydropower, and for 

other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 29, 2007 

Mr. SMITH (for himself and Mr. WYDEN) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand 

the resources eligible for the renewable energy credit 

to kinetic hydropower, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. EXPANSION OF RESOURCES ELIGIBLE FOR RE4 NEWABLE ENERGY CREDIT TO KINETIC HY5 DROPOWER. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 45(c)(1) of the Internal 

7 Revenue Code of 1986 (defining qualified energy re8 sources) is amended by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of sub9 paragraph (G), by striking the period at the end of subVerDate Aug 31 2005 04:15 Jan 30, 2007 Jkt 059200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S425.IS S425

jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
2 

•S 425 IS

1 paragraph (H) and inserting ‘‘, and’’, and by adding at 

2 the end the following new subparagraph: 

3 ‘‘(I) kinetic hydropower.’’. 

4 (b) DEFINITION OF RESOURCES.—Section 45(c) of 

5 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding 

6 at the end the following new paragraph: 

7 ‘‘(10) KINETIC HYDROPOWER.—The term ‘ki8 netic hydropower’ means any of the following: 

9 ‘‘(A) Ocean free flowing water derived 

10 from flows from tidal currents, ocean currents, 

11 waves, or estuary currents. 

12 ‘‘(B) Ocean thermal energy. 

13 ‘‘(C) Free flowing water in rivers, lakes, 

14 man made channels, or streams.’’. 

15 (c) FACILITIES.—Section 45(d) of the Internal Rev16 enue Code of 1986 (relating to qualified facilities) is 

17 amended by adding at the end the following new para18 graph: 

19 ‘‘(11) KINETIC HYDROPOWER FACILITY.—In 

20 the case of a facility using kinetic hydropower to 

21 produce electricity, the term ‘qualified facility’ 

22 means any facility owned by the taxpayer which is 

23 originally placed in service after the date of the en24 actment of this paragraph and before January 1, 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
3 

•S 425 IS

1 2011. Such term shall not include a facility which 

2 includes impoundment structures.’’. 

3 (d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

4 this section shall apply to taxable years ending after the 

5 date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

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 filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Annual Report of VASCO Data Security International, Inc. (the company)
on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2010 (the Report), I, Clifford K. Bown, 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 to the best of my knowledge:



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



| | ii. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Clifford K. Bown   
|Clifford K. Bown       
|Chief Financial Officer

March 11, 2011
STATE v. PARKS.

No. COA07-1178.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed June 17, 2008.

Certification Date July 7, 2008.

Appeal from Mecklenburg (06CRS216778, 06CRS216779, 07CRS31415).

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 207/2014Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 207/2014 of 4 March 2014 establishing the standard import values for determining            the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 207/2014                     

# of 4 March 2014

# establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural                           markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation)(1),                        

Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application                           of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors(2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations,                              the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products                              and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto.

(2)The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU)                              No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its                              publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex to                     this Regulation.                  

# Article 2U.K.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*.                  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 4 March 2014.

*For the Commission, On behalf of the President,*                            

Jerzy Plewa                            

*Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development*                            

## ANNEXU.K.Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Gregory Brown, Appellant.

[800 NYS2d 863]

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Chemung County (Hayden, J.), rendered October 31, 2003, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted promoting prison contraband in the first degree.

Defendant pleaded guilty to the reduced charge of attempted promoting prison contraband in the first degree and was sentenced as a second felony offender in accordance with the negotiated plea agreement to a prison term of IV2 to 3 years, to run consecutive to the sentence he is currently serving. On appeal, defense counsel seeks to be relieved of his assignment as counsel for defendant on the ground that there are no nonfrivolous issues that can be raised on appeal. Upon our review of the record and defense counsel’s brief, we agree. The judgment is, accordingly, affirmed and defense counsel’s application for leave to withdraw is granted *(see People v Cruwys,*113 AD2d 979 [1985], *lv denied*67 NY2d 650 [1986]; *see generally People v Stokes,*95 NY2d 633 [2001]).

Cardona, P.J., Spain, Carpinello, Mugglin and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, and application to be relieved of assignment granted.
STATE of North Carolina v. Dedric Paxton CRUMP.

No. 435P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 9, 2008.

Dedric Paxton Crump, Pro Se.

Anne M. Middleton, Assistant Attorney General, Thomas J. Keith, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 16th day of September 2008 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 9th day of October 2008."
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Dima T. Shcherenkov, Also Known as Timofey Shcherenkov, Appellant.

[799 NYS2d 663]

Mugglin, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Tompkins County (Rowley, J.), rendered April 14, 2004, convicting defendant following a nonjury trial of the crimes of driving while ability impaired by alcohol and aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle in the first degree.

City of Ithaca Police Officer Derrick Moore stopped an automobile being driven the wrong way on a one-way street. During the ensuing conversation, Moore determined that the driver was intoxicated. When Moore reentered his police vehicle to move it because it was blocking traffic, the driver of the stopped vehicle restarted the engine and left the scene. Moore *652found the vehicle, empty and parked in a bus stop, three blocks away. Immediately Moore observed defendant walking a short distance from the vehicle and arrested him for driving while intoxicated. Following a bench trial, defendant was convicted of driving while ability impaired by alcohol and aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle in the first degree. Defendant now appeals.

Although Moore had no difficulty identifying defendant at trial, his testimony that defendant was wearing a necktie when arrested conflicted with his police report. When he was booked, the police took two full-length frontal digital photographs of defendant. One was cropped to show only the face, as required by the regulations of the Division of Criminal Justice Services. The other was destroyed. This routine police practice gives rise to defendant’s sole appellate claim that the full frontal photograph depicting his clothing was potentially exculpatory and failure of the police to preserve it was a *Brady*violation.

The photographs in question are clearly discoverable *(see generally*CPL 240.20) and, thus, failure to disclose can warrant the imposition of a sanction *(see*CPL 240.70; *People v Jenkins,*98 NY2d 280, 284 [2002]). The type of sanction is left to the sound discretion of the court, after weighing prejudice to defendant against the interests of society. On this record, we find no basis to disturb County Court’s discretionary determination to impose no sanction. First, the absence of a necktie in the photograph would not exculpate defendant, as such a discrepancy is material only to the officer’s credibility, an issue to be resolved by the trier of fact. Second, defendant made no specific demand for the preservation of these photographs *(see People v Johnson,*239 AD2d 361, 361-362 [1997], *lv denied*90 NY2d 1012 [1997]). Third, the destruction and cropping of these photographs occurred as a direct result of routine procedure in the City of Ithaca Police Department, precluding any inference of bad faith on the part of the police or prosecution *(see People v Barber,*247 AD2d 485, 485 [1998], *lv denied*91 NY2d 1005 [1998]).

Mercure, J.P., Carpinello, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.