alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                  EXHIBIT 99.2


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Annual Report of American Commercial Lines LLC (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the Fiscal Year ended December 27, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Michael C. Hagan, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, 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 Sections
                  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.


March 27, 2003

/s/ Michael C. Hagan
------------------------------------
Michael C. Hagan
Chief Executive Officer


              A signed original of this written statement required by Section
              906 has been provided to American Commercial Lines LLC and will be
              retained by American Commercial Lines LLC and furnished to the
              Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 196 (Wednesday, October 12, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 59388]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-20376]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration <greek-i> 10205 and <greek-i> 10206]


Louisiana Disaster Number LA-00004.

AGENCY: Small Business Administration

ACTION: Amendment 1.

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

SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a 
major disaster for the State of Louisiana (FEMA-1607-DR), dated 09/24/
2005.
    Incident: Hurricane Rita.
    Incident Period: 09/23/2005 and continuing.
    Effective Date: 09/27/2005.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 11/23/2005.
    EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date: 06/26/2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to : Small Business 
Administration, Disaster Area Office 3, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort 
Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, Suite 6050, 
Washington, DC 20416.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the Presidential disaster 
declaration for the State of Louisiana , dated 09/24/2005 is hereby 
amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the 
disaster:

Primary Parishes:
    Acadia, Iberia, Lafayette, Saint Mary.
Contiguous Parishes:
    Louisiana: Assumption, Iberville, Saint Landry, Saint Martin, 
Terrebonne.

    All other information in the original declaration remains 
unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)

S. George Camp,
Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. 05-20376 Filed 10-11-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-14-00226-CV

$214.00 U.S. Currency, 1995 

Chevrolet, and Firearm With 

Ammunition

v.

The State of Texas

§

§

§

§

From the 297th District Court

of Tarrant County (S-11299)

September 25, 2014

Per Curiam

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

the appeal should be dismissed. It is ordered that the appeal is dismissed for 

want of jurisdiction.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

PER CURIAM
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 20-20061

Summary Calendar

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Mayalo Chaparo-Osorio, 

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:19-CR-686-1

Before King, Costa, and Ho, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Mayalo 

Chaparo-Osorio 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). Chaparo-Osorio has not filed a 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

July 23, 2021

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 20-20061 Document: 00515949535 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/23/2021
No. 20-20061

2

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 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: 20-20061 Document: 00515949535 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/23/2021
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Defense Logistics Agency

# AGENCY:

Defense Logistics Agency, Department of Defense.

# ACTION:

Notice of membership—2005 DLA PRB. 

# SUMMARY:

This notice announces the appointment of members to the Defense Logistics Agency Senior Executive Service (SES) Performance Review Board (PRB). The publication of PRB composition is required by 5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(4). The PRB provides fair and impartial review of Senior Executive Service performance appraisals and makes recommendations to the Director, Defense Logistics Agency with respect to pay level adjustments and performance awards and other actions related to management of the SES cadre.

# EFFECTIVE DATE:

September 26, 2005.

# ADDRESSES:

Defense Logistics Agency, 8725 John J. Kingman Road, Suite 2533, Fort Belvoir, Virginia 22060-6221.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Shonna Eagleton, SES Program Manager, Human Resources (J-1), Defense Logistics Agency, Department of Defense, (703) 767-3122.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(4), the following are the names and titles of DLA career executives appointed to serve as members of the SES PRB. Members will serve a 12-month term which begins on September 26, 2005.

*PRB Chair:*                     Major General Loren M. Reno, USAF, Vice Director.                

*Members:*                     Mr. Larry Glasco, Director, Customer Operations and Readiness; Mr. Jeffrey Neal, Director, Human                           ( print page 59729)                        Resources; and Ms. Mae DeVincentis, Director, Information Operations.                

Keith W. Lippert,

Director, Defense Logistics Agency.

[FR Doc. 05-20499  Filed 10-13-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3620-01-M
EXHIBIT 32.01

CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

In connection with the Quarterly Report of The
Beacon Financial Futures Fund, L.P. (the Partnership), for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Mark S. Stratton, the Chief
Executive Officer of Beacon Management Corporation (USA) as General Partner of the Partnership, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: (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 Partnership.



THE BEACON FINANCIAL FUTURES FUND, L.P.By:

Beacon Management Corporation (USA), General Partner of the PartnershipBy:

/s/ Mark S. StrattonMark S. StrattonChief Executive OfficerAugust 14, 2007


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-Q or as a separate disclosure document for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the
Exchange Act), or otherwise subject to liability under that Section. This certification shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act except to the
extent that this Exhibit 32 is expressly and specifically incorporated by reference in any such filing.

A signed original of this written statement
required by Section 906 has been provided to the Partnership and will be retained by the Partnership and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Gary Julius PAIGE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 71-2255.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Feb. 7, 1972.

*1279Gary Julius Paige, in pro. per.

Robert L. Meyer, U. S. Atty., Eric A. Nokles, Chief, Crim. Div., Brian J. O’Neill, Ass’t Chief, Crim. Div., Los An-geles, Cal., for appellee.

Before MERRILL, KOELSCH and HUFSTEDLER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appealing from denial of relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, appellant assigns as error failure of the District Court to give consideration to various errors he asserts were committed in the course of his trial for bank robbery. One of these alleged errors was raised by appellant on direct appeal from judgment of conviction and was rejected by this court. United States v. Paige (9th Cir. 1971). The others relate to matters of evidence, the use of memoranda by a witness and remarks made by the government attorney. All could have been asserted on direct appeal but were not. None is of such dimensions as to present a question of due process. A sentence is not subject to collateral attack on the basis of such alleged error. Dodd v. United States, 321 F.2d 240 (9th Cir. 1963).

Judgment affirmed.
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 1**  **2 -**  **80 86** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , P laintiff

- Appell ee ,
v. BOBBY LEE RAWLINGS , Defendant

- Appell ant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at R aleigh
. Terr e nce W. Boyle , District Judge. ( 5:06

- cr - 00160

- BO

- 1; 5:11

- cv - 00338

- BO )

Submitted : April 1 8, 2013 Decided: April 22, 2013

Before WILKINSON, GREGORY , and DAVIS , Circuit Judges.

Dismiss ed by un published per curiam opinion
. Bobby Lee Rawlings , Appellant Pro Se. Matthew Fesak, Jane J. Jackson, Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr. , Assistant United States Attorney s , Seth Morgan Wood, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, R aleigh, North Carolina , for Appellee.
Unpubli shed opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Bobby Lee Rawlings seeks to appeal the district court’s order s dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2012) motion and denying his motions to compel discovery . The order s are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (B) (2006) . A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006)
. When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wron g. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, a nd that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Rawlings has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal3 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
EXHIBIT 32.01

CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

In connection with the Quarterly Report of The
Beacon Financial Futures Fund, L.P. (the Partnership), for the quarter ended September 30, 2007, as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Mark S. Stratton, the Chief
Executive Officer of Beacon Management Corporation (USA) as General Partner of the Partnership, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: (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 Partnership.



THE BEACON FINANCIAL FUTURES FUND, L.P.By:

Beacon Management Corporation (USA), General Partner of the PartnershipBy:

/s/ Mark S. StrattonMark S. StrattonChief Executive OfficerNovember 14, 2007


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-Q or as a separate disclosure document for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the
Exchange Act), or otherwise subject to liability under that Section. This certification shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act except to the
extent that this Exhibit 32 is expressly and specifically incorporated by reference in any such filing.

A signed original of this written statement
required by Section 906 has been provided to the Partnership and will be retained by the Partnership and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
**Exhibit 31.2****CERTIFICATIONS***I, Glen W. Fausset, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of First National Bancshares, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this annual report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, theperiods presented in this annual report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining 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 andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report isbeing prepared;  b) [This paragraph intentionally left blank]  c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  d) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’sboard of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which couldadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial data and have identified for the registrant’s auditors any material weaknesses ininternal controls; and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls.   Date: March 16, 2006 /s/ *Glen W. Fausset*  Title: Chief Financial Officer
DENY and Opinion Filed April 15, 2021 

# S

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-21-00198-CV IN RE PAUL A. PROP ES, JR., Relator Original Proceeding from the 199th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 199-82537-08 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Molberg, Reichek, and Smith Opinion by Justice Smith In this petition for writ of mandamus, Paul A. Propes, Jr., ask s this Court to compel the trial court to rule on his “bill of review under art icle 42.01” of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. We d eny relator’s requested relief

. A petition seeking mandamus relief must contain a certification stating that the relator “has reviewed the petition and concluded that every factual statement in the petition is supported by competent evidence included in the appendix or record.” T EX . R. A PP . P. 52.3(j). The Court requires relator’s certification to state su bstantially what is written in rule 52.3(j). See In re Butler , 270 S.W.3d 757, 758 (Tex. App.— Dallas 2008, orig. proceeding); see also In re Hughes , 607 S.W.3d 136, 137 (Tex.–2– App.—Houston [14th Dist.] orig. proceeding) (dismissing case fo r deficiencies in mandamus petition). Furthermore, to obtain mandamus relief, relator must file with his petition a sufficient record to establish his right to mandamus relief. Walker v. Packer , 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). Specifically, r ule 52.3(k)(1)(A) requires he file an appendix with his petition that contains “a certified or sworn copy of any order complained of, or a ny other document showing the m atter complained of.” T EX . R. A PP . P. 52.3(k)(1)(A). And rule 52.7( a)(1) requires the relator to f ile with the petition “a certified or sworn copy of every document that is material to the relator’s claim for relief that was filed in any underlying pro ceeding.” T EX . R. A PP . P. 52.7(a)(1). Relator’s statu s as an incarcerated person does not relieve him of the obligation to file a sufficient record. In re Gomez , 602 S.W.3d 71, 73 (Tex. App.— Houston [14th Dist.] 2020, orig. proceeding). As the party seeking mandamus relief, relator has the burden of filing a proper petition and providing this Court with a sufficient record to e stablish his right to mandamus relief. See id . Because he has not done so, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus.

210198F.P05 /Craig Smith/ CRAIG SMITH JUSTICE
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4919 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4919

       To repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 24, 2010

   Mr. Mack introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on 
Ways and Means, Education and Labor, the Judiciary, Natural Resources, 
  House Administration, Appropriations, and Rules, for a period to be 
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration 
  of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee 
                               concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
       To repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

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

SECTION 1. REPEAL OF PPACA.

    Effective as of the enactment of the Patient Protection and 
Affordable Care Act, such Act is repealed, and the provisions of law 
amended or repealed by such Act are restored or revived as if such Act 
had not been enacted.
                                 <all>
```
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4638 

To designate Union Station in Washington, DC, as the ‘‘Harry S. Truman 

Union Station’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 9, 2014 

Mr. CLEAVER (for himself, Mr. GRAVES of Missouri, Ms. NORTON, Mr. LONG, 

Mr. CLAY, Mr. LUETKEMEYER, Mr. SMITH of Missouri, Mrs. WAGNER, 

Mr. HUFFMAN, Mrs. HARTZLER, and Mr. YODER) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and 

Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To designate Union Station in Washington, DC, as the 

‘‘Harry S. Truman Union Station’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. HARRY S. TRUMAN UNION STATION. 

4 (a) DESIGNATION.—Union Station, located at 405 

5 Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Washington, DC, shall be 

6 known and designated as the ‘‘Harry S. Truman Union 

7 Station’’. 

8 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg9 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4638 IH

1 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

2 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Harry S. Truman 

3 Union Station’’. 

Æ 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### H. G. Feagan, plaintiff in error, *vs.*J. W. Aven, defendant in error.

(By two judges.) There was no appearance for plaintiff in error. Aven’s Counsel moved to dismiss the writ of error because it was filed in the Clerk’s office one day too late, and the motion was granted. Before the order was made, it was suggested that the last day was a day of thanksgiving proclaimed by the President of the United States. The Court said then it was safer to have the cause dismissed for want of prosecution. 24th February, 1872.

No appearance for plaintiff in error.

M. J. Crawford; J. L. Wimberly, for defendant.