alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
http://www.dol.gov/esa/owcp/dlhwc/lsforms.htm

http://www.dol.gov/esa/owcp/dlhwc/ls-206.pdf

/esa/owcp/dlhwc/lsforms.htm

http://www.dol.gov/esa/owcp/dlhwc/ls-207.pdf

http://www.dol.gov/esa/owcp/dlhwc/ls-208.pdf

/esa/owcp/dlhwc/lsforms.htm

/esa/owcp/dlhwc/lsforms.htm
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 this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Earle M. Jorgensen Company ("EMJ") for the period ended December 31, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Maurice S. Nelson, Jr., as Chief Executive Officer of EMJ, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)  This
Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)  Information
contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of EMJ.

Date:
February 7, 2003

|                                                                                                               |  | 
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|/s/MAURICE S. NELSON, JR.Maurice S. Nelson, Jr.
President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Operating Officer |  | 

---

QuickLinks
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the June 30,
1998 Financial Statements included in the Company's Form 10-Q and is qualified
in its entirety by reference to such Form 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                            6008
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    81603
<ALLOWANCES>                                      3531
<INVENTORY>                                     143081
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                237290
<PP&E>                                          299039
<DEPRECIATION>                                  186485
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  388331
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            57667
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         69674
<OTHER-SE>                                      213820
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    388331
<SALES>                                         222870
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                222870
<CGS>                                           141881
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   141881
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   875
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 889
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  20030
<INCOME-TAX>                                      7311
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              12719
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     12719
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .48
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .48
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7150
In Re: JOHNNY LEE GORE, Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-02-1894) Submitted: August 29, 2002 Decided: September 9, 2002 Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Johnny Lee Gore, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Johnny Lee Gore petitions this court for a writ of mandamus to compel the United States Attorney for the District of South Carolina to release him. Mandamus is a drastic remedy to be used only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States Dist. Court , 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976). Mandamus relief is only available when there are no other means by which the relief sought could be granted, see In re Beard , 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987), and it may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re United Steelworkers , 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir. 1979). The party seeking mandamus relief carries the heavy burden of showing that he has “no other adequate means to attain the relief he desires” and that his right to such relief is clear and indisputable. Allied Chem. Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc. , 449 U.S. 33, 35 (1980). Gore has not made such a showing. Accordingly, although we grant Gore’s request to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny his petition for a writ of mandamus. 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.

PETITION DENIED
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

In the Matter of S.E., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, HOBOKEN MAIN 

POST OFFICE, Hoboken, NJ, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 21-0699

Issued: October 27, 2023

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

James D. Muirhead, Esq., for the appellant

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER GRANTING FEE PETITION

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

Counsel for appellant has filed a fee petition in the amount of $945.00.1 The Board notes 

that all petitions for approval of fees for representatives’services are considered under the Board’s 

statutory authority found at section 8127 of the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act2(FECA) 

and under its Rules of Procedure found at 20 C.F.R. § 501.9(e).3

As required by the Board’s regulations, appellant has been afforded written notice of the 

fee requested and provided an opportunity to comment on the fee petition. 4 Attached to the fee 

petition is a signed acknowledgement by appellant consenting to the fee in the amount of $945.00. 

1 FECA (5 U.S.C. § 8127(b)) and its implementing regulations (20 C.F.R. § 501.9) require the Board to review each 

fee petition on its own merits and with regard to the unique facts and issues of each appeal.

2

5 U.S.C. § 8127.

3

20 C.F.R. § 501.9(e).

4

Id.
2

The Board has reviewed the fee petition and finds that it is in compliance with the Board’s

Rules of Procedure.

5

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the fee petition is granted in the amount of $945.00. 

Issued: October 27, 2023

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

5

Id.
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 Transportation

###### Office of the Secretary 

                    The following Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits were filed under Subpart B (formerly Subpart Q) of the Department of Transportation's Procedural Regulations (See 14 CFR 301.201*et. seq.*). The due date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motions to Modify Scope are set forth below for each application. Following the Answer period DOT may process the application by expedited procedures. Such procedures may consist of the adoption of a show-cause order, a tentative order, or in appropriate cases a final order without further proceedings.                 

*Docket Number:*                     OST-2005-22750.                 

*Date Filed:*                     October 17, 2005.                 

*Due Date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motion to Modify Scope:*                     November 7, 2005.                 

*Description:*                     Application of Capital Cargo International Airlines, Inc. requesting a permanent certificate of public convenience and necessity to authorize it to engage in foreign scheduled air transportation of property and mail between Toledo, OH, on the                           ( print page 67211)                        one hand, and Saltillo, Guadalajara, and Monterrey, Mexico, on the other.                 

Renee V. Wright,

Program Manager, Docket Operations, Federal Register Liaison. 

[FR Doc. 05-22022 Filed 11-3-05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910-62-P
#### THE STATE OF NEVADA, Appellant, v. JOY GRAFF, Respondent.

No. 10823

May 22, 1980

611 P.2d 196

*Richard Bryan,*Attorney General, and *David B. Small,*District Attorney, Carson City, for Appellant.

*Carl F. Martillaro,*Carson City, for Respondent.

OPINION

By the Court,

Gunderson, J.:

Respondent was tried by a jury on six counts of unlawful possession of drugs. She was convicted on four counts; acquitted on two counts. Ascertaining that the trial judge had communicated with jurors during deliberations, Judge McKib-ben ordered a new trial. The State appeals, arguing that no prejudice to respondent had been shown.

The communication by the trial judge was not upon an extraneous matter. The jurors agreed that because they were having difficulty applying an instruction, the trial judge entered the jury room and gave an example of “possession.” As the State acknowledges, this action contravened NRS 175.161.1 After *475the judge’s communication, two of the jurors changed their votes on two counts to “not guilty.”

In our view, if a trial judge enters a jury room and communicates with deliberating jurors on a subject relevant to the case, reversal is required. We decline to adopt the views expressed in cases cited by the State. *See, e.g.,*State v. Pokini, 526 P.2d 94 (Haw. 1974) and Wiseman v. People, 498 P.2d 930 (Colo. 1972). As the Arizona Supreme Court has written:

> . . . We find that in practically all of the reported cases appellate courts properly regard communications between the trial judge and jurors, relative to the trial, as of a more serious nature and more likely to have a prejudicial effect than communications between other court officials or attendants and jurors. This for the reason that the jurors look to the judge as their impartial authority and guide in their deliberations. In a criminal case there is a tendency to afford the defendant even greater protection than in civil cases. Under facts such as are shown here, where the communication concerned the case and not merely extraneous matters, we are of the opinion that the defendant is not required to show actual prejudice.

State v. Burnetts, 295 P.2d 377 at 379 (Ariz. 1956).

Affirmed.

Mowbray, C. J., and Thompson, Manoukian, and Batjer, JJ., concur.

1

 NRS 175.161 provides in material part:

> “1. Upon the close of the argument, the judge shall charge the jury. He may state the testimony and declare the law, but shall not charge the jury in *475respect to matters of fact; such charge shall be reduced to writing before it is given; and in no case shall any charge or instructions be given to the jury otherwise than in writing, unless by the mutual consent of the parties. ...”
SUPE

RSEDED

SUPE

RSEDED
#### Kevin B. SCHAB, Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, Respondent.

No. 05-3096.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

March 15, 2005.

ORDER

Petitioner having filed the required Statement Concerning Discrimination it is

ORDERED that the order of dismissal and the mandate be, and the same hereby are, VACATED and RECALLED, and the petition for review is REINSTATED.

Respondent should compute the due date for filing its brief of the date of filing of this order.
|     |                                                                                                                         |
|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of 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/   Abu M. Arif      |
| Name:                  | Abu M. Arif |
| Title:                 | Chief Executive Officer |
|                   | (Principal Executive Officer) |
| Date:                  | November 3, 2014 |
|                   |
|                   |
| /s/   Ross P. Palacios |
| Name:                  | Ross P. Palacios |
| Title:                 | Chief Financial Officer |
|                   | (Principal Financial Officer) |
| Date:                  | November 3, 2014 |
---

Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATIONPursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Strategic Internet
Investments, Incorporated (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending
September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"). I, Abbas Salih, Chief Financial Officer of the
company, certify, pursuant to 18 USC Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my 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 Company.





| | Date: | November 10, 2009 |  | /s/
      Abbas Salih     
| | ----- | ----------------- |  | --------------------------
| |       |                   |  | Abbas Salih, CFO, Director

---
<PAGE>   1


                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.3

                        Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 No. 33-99432 and No. 333-32157) of Intelligent Systems Corporation of
our report dated February 25, 1999, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements of PaySys International, Inc. and Subsidiaries as of December 31,
1997 and 1998 and for the three years in the period ended December 31, 1998
included in Intelligent Systems Corporation's Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 1998.


                                                   Ernst & Young LLP


April 16, 1999
Atlanta, Georgia
EXHIBIT 10.45



GROCERS CAPITAL COMPANY PROMISSORY NOTE



|$35,000.00 |  | Commerce, California |  | June 4, 1996
|---------- |  | -------------------- |  | ------------



Robert M. Ling, Borrower, promises to
pay in lawful money of the United States of America, to the order of the GROCERS CAPITAL COMPANY (GCC) at its office located at 5200 Sheila Street, Commerce, California 90040, the principal sum of thirty five thousand and 00/100
($35,000.00) with interest thereon from June 4, 1996 at the rate of seven percent (7.00%) per annum. Borrower shall pay quarterly interest payments due the 25thof the last month of each calendar quarter. The whole sum of principal then unpaid, together with accrued interest thereon, is due and payable at the option of the holder of this note.



The advance represented by this Note has been made to facilitate the
Borrowers relocation. This Note is not, however, and should not be construed as an employment contract between the Borrower and Unified Western Grocers, Inc. If the Borrower shall resign or be terminated for cause from employment at Unified
Western Grocers, this Note shall be due and payable sixty (60) days after such resignation or termination.



Should default be made in payment of interest, and the undersigned fail to cure such default within twenty (20) days after written notice of such default,
then the whole sum of principal and interest shall, at the option of the holder of this note, become immediately due and payable in lawful money of the United States.



Each maker will be jointly and severally liable and consents to renewals, replacements, and extensions of time for payment
hereof before, at or after maturity, and waives presentment, demand and protest and the right to assert any statute of limitations. A married person who signs this note agrees that recourse may be had against his/her separate property for any
obligation contained herein. If any action be instituted on this note, the undersigned promise(s) to pay such sum as the Court may fix as attorneys fees.



|                             |  | 
|---------------------------- |  | 
|/s/    ROBERT M. LING, JR.   |  | 
|                             |  | 
|Robert M. Ling, Jr. Borrower |  |
##### 



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. 1350
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
     
 (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 or 78o(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 as of the dates and for
the periods expressed in the Report.
  /s/ Kerry A. ShibaKerry A. ShibaChief Financial Officer
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

JUDGMENT

Billy Joe Smith, Appellant

No. 06

- 12

- 00073

- CR v.
The State of Texas, Appellee Appeal from the 8th District Court of Hopkins County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 0518110 ). Memorandum Opinion delivered by Just ice Moseley, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice Carter participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court

below

. We affirm the judgment of the trial court

. We n ote that the appellant, Billy Joe Smith, has adequately indicated his inability to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED JANUARY 23, 2013 BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
Secretary of Labor ‐ First 30, 60, 90 Days

Category First 30 Days (~February) First 60 Days (~March) First 90 days (~

Communications and Congressional

Set policy priorities and theme

for tenure as Secretary; Press

outreach; Participate in budget

rollout

Prepare to testify on the budget

before House Appropriations,House Ed & Workforce, and

Senate Appropriations

Ongoing meetinrelevant Comm

and press

Engagement (external and internal) Read out to key stakeholders Consider holding a DOL employee town hall

Begin preparati

Labor and Empl

Ministerial to ta

May in German

Operational and Personnel

Selection of BLS Commissioner

will need to occur during this

time

Be briefed on important ongoing

OIG and GAO issues

Engage on IT iss

building move
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 the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Area 4 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be conducted (via teleconference). The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comment, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Tuesday, November 22, 2005, at 11 a.m., eastern time.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mary Ann Delzer at 1-888-912-1227, or (414) 297-1604.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that a meeting of the Area 4 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be held Tuesday, November 22, 2005, at 11 a.m., eastern time via a telephone conference call. You can submit written comments to                           ( print page 67783)                        the panel by faxing the comments to (414) 297-1623, or by mail to Taxpayer Advocacy Panel, Stop 1006MIL, 310 West Wisconsin Avenue, Milwaukee, WI 53203-2221, or you can contact us at                     *http://www.improveirs.org.*                     This meeting is not required to be open to the public, but because we are always interested in community input, we will accept public comments. Please contact Mary Ann Delzer at 1-888-912-1227 or (414) 297-1604 for dial-in information.                

The agenda will include the following: Various IRS issues.

Dated: November 1, 2005.

Martha Curry,

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

[FR Doc. 05-22282 Filed 11-7-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-M
#### STATE v. WALL

No. 86 PC.

Case below: 6 N.C. App. 422.

Petition for writ of *certiorañ*to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 2 December 1969.