alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS

We hereby consent to the references to our firm, in the context in which they appear; to the use of our estimates of proved reserves
and future cash flows of Pinnacle Gas Resources, Inc. as of December 31, 2007, 2008, and 2009; and to the incorporation of our report dated February 10, 2010, included in the Annual
Report on Form 10-K of Pinnacle Gas Resources, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2009.

NETHERLAND, SEWELL & ASSOCIATES, INC.By:

/s/ C.H. (SCOTT) REES III, P.E. C.H. (Scott) Rees III, P.E. Chairman and Chief Executive Officer


Dallas,
Texas
March 31, 2010

---
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

        Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18
                            of the United States Code

     I, E. James Ferland, Chief Executive Officer of Public Service Enterprise
Group Incorporated, to the best of my knowledge, certify that (i) the Quarterly
Report of Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated on Form 10-Q for the
quarter ended September 30, 2004 (the "Periodic 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 Periodic Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated.


                                    /s/ E. James Ferland
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                    E. James Ferland
                                    Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated
                                    Chief Executive Officer
                                    October 29, 2004
Case 1:05-cv-00175-SM Document 6 Filed 06/09/05 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

 DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America,

Plaintiff

 

v.

 Case No. 04-cr-211-02-SM

Jose Peralta,

Defendant

O R D E R

Defendant Peralta’s motion to continue the final pretrial conference and trial

for sixty (60) days is granted (document no. 63). Trial has been rescheduled for 

the month of June 2012. Defendant Peralta shall file a waiver of speedy trial 

rights not later than April 12, 2012. On the filing of such waiver, his continuance 

shall be effective. 

The Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance 

outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial,

18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), in that failure to grant a continuance would 

unreasonably deny the defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective 

preparation taking into account the exercise of due diligence under the 

circumstances. 

Case 1:04-cr-00211-SM Document 64 Filed 04/02/12 Page 1 of 2
Final Pretrial Conference is rescheduled for June 8, 2012 at 10:30 a.m.

Jury selection will take place on June 19, 2012 at 9:30 a.m. 

SO ORDERED.

_________________________

 Steven J. McAuliffe

U.S. District Judge

April 2, 2012

cc: Patrick Richard, Esq.

Robert Kinsella, AUSA

U.S. Marshal

U.S. Probation

Case 1:04-cr-00211-SM Document 64 Filed 04/02/12 Page 2 of 2
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 08-8159

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee, 

 v. 

CHAUNCEY FLOYD, 

 Defendant - Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry F. Floyd, District Judge. 

(7:04-cr-01125-HFF-1; 7:06-cv-01084-HFF) 

Submitted: April 16, 2009 Decided: April 23, 2009 

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, SHEDD, Circuit Judges. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Chauncey Floyd, Appellant Pro Se. Regan Alexandra Pendleton, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, 

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

Chauncey Floyd seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2008) 

motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or 

judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1) (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). A 

prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that 

reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the 

constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or 

wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district 

court is likewise debatable. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 

U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We 

have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Floyd 

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 legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the 

court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed October 18 , 2018.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14- 18 -00727- CV

SONIA BARBOZA, Appellant

V. MORRELL MASONRY SUPPLY, INC., Appellee

On Appeal from the 129th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2017-20565

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

This appeal is from a judgment signed May 9, 2018. No clerk’s record has been filed. The clerk responsible for preparing the record in this appeal informed the court appellant did not make arrangements to pay for the record.

On September 19, 2018, notification was transmitted to all parties of the court’s intention to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless, within fifteen2

days, appellant paid or made arrangements to pay for the record and provided this court with proof of payment. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b).
Appellant has not provided this court with proof of payment for the record. Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Donovan, Wise, and Jewell.
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350 OF CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Rewards Network Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Ronald L. Blake, President and Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



August 9, 2005



|                                                     
|-----------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Ronald S. Blake                                  
|Ronald L. Blake President and Chief Executive
Officer
Exhibit 21.1



SUBSIDIARIES OF MONROE CAPITAL INCOME PLUS CORPORATION



|Name                             |  | Jurisdiction
|-------------------------------- |  | ------------
|MC Income Plus Financing SPV LLC |  | Delaware    
|MCIP Holding Company I, LLC      |  | Delaware    
|MCIP Holding Company II, LLC     |  | Delaware    
|MCIP Holding Company III, LLC    |  | Delaware    
|MCIP Holding Company IV, LLC     |  | Delaware    
|MCIP Holding Company V, LLC      |  | Delaware    
|MCIP Holding Company VI, LLC     |  | Delaware    
|MCIP Holding Company VII, LLC    |  | Delaware    
|MCIP Holding Company VIII, LLC   |  | Delaware    
|MCIP Holding Company IX, LLC     |  | Delaware    
|MCIP Holding Company X, LLC      |  | Delaware    
|MCIP Holding Company XI, LLC     |  | Delaware    
|MCIP Holding Company XII, LLC    |  | Delaware    
|MCIP Holding Company XIII, LLC   |  | Delaware    
|MCIP Holding Company XIV, LLC    |  | Delaware    
|MCIP Holding Company XVI, LLC    |  | Delaware    
|MCIP Holding Company XVII, LLC   |  | Delaware
EXHIBIT 32.1





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 Annual Report of All American Pet Company, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Barry Schwartz, Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





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





2.
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








/S/ Barry SchwartzBarry SchwartzChief Executive Officer andPrincipal Financial OfficerDecember 23, 2009
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.                  

###### Securities and Exchange Commission

          - [File No. 500-1]

It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of Markland Technologies, Inc. (“Markland”) because it has not filed any periodic reports since the period ended September 30, 2005. Markland is quoted on the Pink Sheets OTC Markets, Inc. under the ticker symbol MRKL.

The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the securities of the above-listed company.

Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of the above-listed company is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EDT on August 27, 2008, through 11:59 p.m. EDT on September 10, 2008.

By the Commission.

Jill M. Peterson,

Assistant Secretary.

[FR Doc. E8-20220 Filed 8-27-08; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P
1 TheHonorable Susan Webber Wright, Chief Judge, United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Arkansas.



## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 01-1759

___________ Anthony C. Kenney, * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Harbor Distributing Company; Nick * Eastern District of Arkansas. Pierce, Director, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellees. *

___________ Submitted: August 30, 2001 Filed: September 5, 2001

___________ Before WOLLMAN, Chief Judge, MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, and BYE, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. AnthonyKenney appeals the district court’s 1 dismissal of one defendant, and its grant of summary judgment to the other defendant, in his race discrimination lawsuit. Hav ing carefully reviewed the record and the parties’ submissions on appeal, we co nclude that the district court’s rulings were correct. See Ring v. First Interstate-2-

Mortgag e, Inc. , 984 F.2d 924, 926 (8th Cir. 1993) (standard of review for Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) dismissal); Lynn v. Deaconess Med. Center-W. Campus , 160 F.3d 484, 486 (8th Cir. 1998) (standard of review for grant of summary judgment). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-Q
FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                          15,926
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   92,658
<ALLOWANCES>                                       545
<INVENTORY>                                     21,814
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               191,040
<PP&E>                                         131,082
<DEPRECIATION>                                  74,218
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 263,191
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           80,366
<BONDS>                                         32,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        33,549
<OTHER-SE>                                     109,175
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   263,191
<SALES>                                        418,335
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               418,335
<CGS>                                          356,666
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  356,666
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,227
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 22,124
<INCOME-TAX>                                     8,633
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             13,491
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    13,491
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.91<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.82<F1>
<FN>
<F1>A 2-for-1 stock split occurred during the prior quarter effective June 26,
1998. Prior Financial Data Schedules (excluding the schedules for the quarters
ended March 31, 1998 and 1997) have not been restated for the recapitalization.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.3


        Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18
                            of the United States Code


     I, Robert E. Busch, Chief Financial Officer of Public Service Electric and
Gas Company, to the best of my knowledge, certify that (i) the Quarterly Report
of Public Service Electric and Gas Company on Form 10-Q for the period ended
March 31, 2005 (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 Public Service Electric and Gas Company.




                                        /s/ Robert E. Busch
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Robert E. Busch
                                        Public Service Electric and Gas Company
                                        Chief Financial Officer
                                        May 5, 2005
Pratt v. NH Department of Corrections, Commissioner et al Doc. 3

Dockets.Justia.com
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States

v. Case No. 05-cr-55-01-SM

Amalia Bracero

ORDER

Re: Document No. 26, Motion to Reduce Sentence - Cocaine

Amendment 

Ruling: Granted, in part. For the reasons articulated by

the government in its response, the court’s ability to amend a

previously imposed sentence is derived from statutory provisions

which permit resentencing based upon guideline provisions made

retroactive to defendant’s case. The guideline made retroactive to

defendant’s case is not actually retroactive until March 3, 2008,

so, as of today, no authority exists to modify defendant’s

previously imposed sentence. Given the nature of the arrow of

time, the power to act will not arise until March 3rd with respect

to this sentence, but then retroactive application will reach back

to today to affect the sentence as it currently stands, which, as

a practical matter, will mean that, a new sentence will be

substituted, retroactively, that imposes less time in prison than

defendant will have already served, at the time it is imposed. The

best that can be done under these circumstances is to anticipate

the retroactive application (assuming retroactivity will go into

effect on March 3rd), and order the new sentence imposed as of

that date. An amended judgment shall be entered, effective on

March 3, 2008, amending the sentence to imprisonment from 24

months to 18 months. Defendant will apparently be entitled to

release on that date, assuming her good time credit and other

factors are properly calculated. The Bureau of Prisons is

perfectly capable of processing defendant for release on that

date, if she is so entitled, given that a week remains to

accomplish that processing. So Ordered. 

 

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief Judge

Date: February 25, 2008

cc: Jonathan Saxe, Esq. 

Aixa Maldonado-Quinones, AUSA

Helen Fitzgibbon, AUSA 

U.S. Probation Office

U.S. Marshal 

Case 1:05-cr-00055-SM Document 32 Filed 02/25/08 Page 1 of 1
#### Carmen F. Palmer EDWARDS v. ROYAL INDEMNITY COMPANY.

No. 1374.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

June 30, 1934.

Burns & Pierson, of Ponchatoula, for appellant.

Rownd & Warner, of Hammond, for appel-lee.

MOUTON, Judge.

After her marriage to Mr. W. Rigley Edwards, Jr., plaintiff instituted this suit against defendant company on an insurance policy issued in favor of Mr. Rigley, prior to their marriage, and on the same cause oi action, alleged in her suit against Mr. W. Rig-ley Edwards, Jr.

This suit was also dismissed on an exception of no cause or right of action.

In this case, the defendant insurance company is urging the same defenses made by Mr. W. Rigley Edwards, Jr., in the suit against him by Carmen E. Palmer.

The defendant insurance company had, under the last paragraph of Act No. 55, 1930, p. 122, the right to plead the same defenses as were urged by Mr. W. Rigley Edwards, Jr., in the suit filed herein by plaintiff against him.

For the reasons stated by us, plaintiff had no right of action against the insured, Mr. W. Rigley Edwards, Jr., and likewise has no such right against the insurance company, defendant herein.

Her suit was correctly dismissed.

Judgment affirmed.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 05-cr-114-01-PB

Angela Hearn

O R D E R

The defendant has moved to continue the September 7, 2005

trial in the above case. Defendant cites the need for additional

time to complete and drug treatment program and engage in plea

negotiations. The government does not object to a continuance of

the trial date.

Accordingly, for the above reason and to allow the parties

additional time to properly prepare for trial, the court will

continue the trial from September 7, 2005 to December 6, 2005. 

In agreeing to continue the trial, the court finds pursuant to 18

U.S.C.A. § 3161(h)(8)(A) that for the above-stated reasons, the

ends of justice served in granting a continuance outweigh the

best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

Case 1:05-cr-00114-PB Document 9 Filed 08/18/05 Page 1 of 2
2

The August 31, 2005 final pretrial conference is continued

until November 21, 2005 at 3:30 p.m.

SO ORDERED.

 /s/Paul Barbadoro 

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

August 18, 2005

cc: Jonathan R. Saxe, Esq.

Robert Kinsella, AUSA

United States Probation

United States Marshal

Case 1:05-cr-00114-PB Document 9 Filed 08/18/05 Page 2 of 2
****EXHIBIT 32.1****

 

****Certificationof Periodic Financial Report****

****Pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350****

 

Forpurposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, John Saunders the ChiefExecutive Officer of Integrated Management Information, Inc. (the “Company”),hereby certifies that, to his knowledge:

 

(i)             the Annual Report on Form 10-Kof the Company for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”)fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(ii)          the information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company.

 
| Date:  March 31, 2010              |   |
|-----------------------------------------|--------|
| /s/  John Saunders                      |   |
| John  Saunders, Chief Executive Officer |   |

 

----
EXHIBIT
      32.1






CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In
      connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Porta Systems Corp. (the
      “Company”) for the period ended March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Edward B. Kornfeld,
      Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, do hereby
      certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief that:




(1) the
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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:
                  May 13, 2008
              By/s/
                  Edward B. Kornfeld
                Edward
                  B. Kornfeld
                Chief
                  Executive Officer
                and
                  Chief Financial Officer
  This
      certification accompanies each Report pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
      of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act
      of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.




*A
      signed original of this written statement required by §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company
      and furnished upon request.*