alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32(b)

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

187 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 United Rentals, Inc. and United Rentals (North America),
Inc. (the Companies) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Martin E. Welch III, Chief Financial Officer of the Companies, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. section 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 section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (15 U.S.C. 78m); and
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Companies.
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/    MARTIN E. WELCH IIIMartin E. Welch III Chief Financial
Officer


April 12, 2006

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Companies and will be retained by the Companies and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE COMBINED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF U.S. TIMBERLANDS KLAMATH FALLS, L.L.C. FOR THE THREE
MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1998 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>                             Dec-31-1998 
<PERIOD-START>                                Jan-01-1998 
<PERIOD-END>                                  Mar-31-1998 
<CASH>                                             11,501 
<SECURITIES>                                            0 
<RECEIVABLES>                                       1,651 
<ALLOWANCES>                                          100 
<INVENTORY>                                             0 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   13,452 
<PP&E>                                              1,464 
<DEPRECIATION>                                        210 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    380,902 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              15,499 
<BONDS>                                           225,000 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0 
<PREFERRED>                                             0 
<COMMON>                                                0 
<OTHER-SE>                                        138,999 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      380,902 
<SALES>                                             7,757 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    7,757 
<CGS>                                               2,654 
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       9,040 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                      144 
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  5,463 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    (6,714)
<INCOME-TAX>                                            0 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                (6,714)
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0 
<CHANGES>                                               0 
<NET-INCOME>                                       (6,714)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                           0 
<EPS-DILUTED>                                           0 
                                               

</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

David McEachin,

Plaintiff,

v.

Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. and C. R. 

Bard, Inc., et al.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC

Civil Action No. CV-17-03855-PHX-DGC

APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL

To: The clerk of court and all parties of record

I am admitted or otherwise authorized to practice in this court, and I appear in this case as counsel for:

Defendants C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc.

Date: October 26, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Attorney's signature

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599)

Printed name and bar number

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363

Address

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com

E-mail Address

(404) 322-6000

Telephone number

(404 322-6050

FAX number

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8430 Filed 10/27/17 Page 1 of 1
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 576 Introduced in House (IH)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 576

  To direct the Secretary of the Interior to undertake the necessary 
feasibility studies regarding the establishment of certain new units of 
            the National Park System in the State of Hawaii.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 4, 1997

 Mrs. Mink of Hawaii introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                     to the Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To direct the Secretary of the Interior to undertake the necessary 
feasibility studies regarding the establishment of certain new units of 
            the National Park System in the State of Hawaii.

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

SECTION 1. STUDIES OF POTENTIAL NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM UNITS IN HAWAII.

    (a) In General.--The Secretary of the Interior, acting through the 
Director of the National Park Service, shall undertake feasibility 
studies regarding the establishment of National Park System units in 
the following areas in the State of Hawaii:
            (1) Island of Maui: The shoreline area known as ``North 
        Beach'', immediately north of the present resort hotels at 
        Kaanapali Beach, in the Lahaina district in the area extending 
        from the beach inland to the main highway.
            (2) Island of Lanai: The mountaintop area known as ``Hale'' 
        in the central part of the island.
            (3) Island of Kauai: The shoreline area from ``Anini 
        Beach'' to ``Makua Tunnels'' on the north coast of this island.
            (4) Island of Molokai: The ``Halawa Valley'' on the eastern 
        end of the island, including its shoreline, cove and lookout/
        access roadway.
    (b) Kalaupapa Settlement Boundaries.--The studies conducted under 
this section shall include a study of the feasibility of extending the 
present National Historic Park boundaries at Kalaupapa Settlement 
eastward to Halawa Valley along the island's north shore.
    (c) Report.--A report containing the results of the studies under 
this section shall be submitted to the Congress promptly upon 
completion.
                                 <all>
```
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Monika Luabeya","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/mluabeya\/","title":"Verdant Farmlands of Simsbury, Connecticut","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"mXGh3UT59B\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/simsbury-oli2-2022258-lrg\/\">Verdant Farmlands of Simsbury, Connecticut<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/simsbury-oli2-2022258-lrg\/embed\/#?secret=mXGh3UT59B\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Verdant Farmlands of Simsbury, Connecticut” — NASA\" data-secret=\"mXGh3UT59B\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/simsbury-oli2-2022258-lrg.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":600}
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

United States of America, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Baudel Madrid-Erives, 

Defendant.

No. CR-15-1393-PHX-SPL

DETENTION ORDER 

 In accordance with the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f), the issue of 

detention was addressed at a hearing on February 22, 2017. The Court was informed that 

the defendant is subject to other custody and is not eligible for release at this time. 

 The Court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant is subject to 

other custody and should be similarly detained in this case. If circumstances change such 

that defendant is no longer in custody in the other matter, defendant shall have leave to 

request that the matter of detention be reopened in this case. 

 IT IS ORDERED that the defendant be detained pending further proceedings. The 

defendant is committed to the custody of the Attorney General or his designated 

representative for confinement in a corrections facility separate, to the extent practicable, 

from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody pending appeal. The 

defendant shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity for private consultation with defense 

counsel. On order of the Court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the 

government, the person in charge of the corrections facility shall deliver the defendant to 

Case 2:15-cr-01393-SPL Document 34 Filed 02/23/17 Page 1 of 2
- 2 - 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

the United States Marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection with a Court 

proceeding. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that should a motion for review/reconsideration of 

this detention order be filed, it is counsel's responsibility to deliver a copy of the motion 

for review/reconsideration to Pretrial Services at least one day prior to the hearing. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if a release to a third party is to be considered, it 

is counsel's responsibility to notify Pretrial Services sufficiently in advance of the hearing 

to allow Pretrial Services an opportunity to interview and investigate the potential third 

party custodian. 

 Dated this 23rd day of February, 2017. 

Case 2:15-cr-01393-SPL Document 34 Filed 02/23/17 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                       5,946,399
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,473,108
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (75,000)
<INVENTORY>                                    214,401
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             7,733,811
<PP&E>                                         380,437
<DEPRECIATION>                                 175,861
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,555,454
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          940,344
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        66,581
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,368,529
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,555,454
<SALES>                                      1,854,940
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,854,940
<CGS>                                          698,540
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,998,953
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                14,633
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                12,930
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,263
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (827,920)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (827,920)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (827,920)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.19)
        

</TABLE>
[J

- 126

- 2016]

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

,

Appellee

v.

DAVID EDWARD RICKER

,

Appellant :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: 41 MAP 2016

Appeal from the Superior Court dated 7/17/15 at No. 1693 MDA 2014 affirming the order of the Dauphin County Court of

Common Pleas dated 10/1/14 at No. CP

22

- CR

- 0003601

- 2014

ARGUED: December 6, 2016

ORDER

PER CURIAM DECIDED: September 28, 2017

AND NOW, this 28th day of September , 201 7 , this appeal is dismissed as having

been improvidently granted.

Chief Justice Saylor files a concurring statement.

Justice Wecht files a dissenting statement.

Justice Donohue did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.
EX-10.16 Lease Termination and Surrender Agreement



 



Exhibit 10.16


LEASE TERMINATION AND SURRENDER AGREEMENT


     This Lease Termination and Surrender Agreement (“Agreement”) between
FAIRFAX BOCA ’92, L.P. (“Landlord”) and TRADESTATION TECHNOLOGIES, INC., f/k/a
OMEGA RESEARCH, INC. (“Tenant”) is made as of December 11, 2002.


WITNESSETH: That;


     WHEREAS, Landlord and Tenant entered into that certain lease agreement
(the “Lease”) dated November 16, 1999, whereby Tenant leases from Landlord
approximately 5,996 rentable square feet (“Premises”) located on the first
(1st) floor of Pod D in Building 235, 901 Yamato Road, Boca Raton, Florida
33431.


     WHEREAS, Landlord and Tenant desire to terminate the Lease on the terms
and conditions set forth herein.


     NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants contained
herein, the parties hereto, intending to be legally bound, do hereby agree as
follows:


Termination & Surrender:


     The Lease is terminated as of December 31, 2002 and Tenant has vacated and
surrendered the Premises effective immediately. Any personal property
remaining in the Premises has become the property of the Landlord. Tenant is
hereby fully and unconditionally released from all obligations, liabilities,
costs and expenses that in any manner relate to the Lease, its tenancy under
the Lease, the Premises, or its use or occupation of the Premises.


     Tenant agrees to pay to Landlord (along with this Agreement) the sum of Sixty
Five Thousand Dollars ($65,000.00) as further consideration of Landlord
agreeing to allow early termination of the Lease.


     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Lease Termination and Surrender Agreement has
been executed by the duly authorized representatives of the parties hereto and
is effective as of the execution date referenced in Paragraph 1 above.



	 	 	 
	
WITNESS:
	 	LANDLORD:
	 	 	 
	
/s/ [not legible]
	 	FAIRFAX BOCA ’92, L.P.
	

	 	 
	 	 	 
	
/s/ Renee Whittington


	 	By: Fairfax Properties, Inc.

By: T. Gordy Germany — Its President
	 	 	 
	 	 	/s/ T. Gordy Germany
	 	 	

	 	 	Date: 12/16/02
	 	 	











 




	 	 	 
	WITNESS:	 	
TENANT:
	 	 	 
	/s/ Darla D. Tuttle	 	
TRADESTATION TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
	
	 	 
	 	 	 
	/s/ Loren Costantino	 	
By: /s/ David H. Fleischman
	
	 	


	 	 	 
	 	 	
Print Name: David H. Fleischman
	 	 	


	 	 	 
	 	 	
Title: CFO
	 	 	


	 	 	 
	 	 	
Date: 12/11/02
	 	 	






2
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 22 - 0403 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. WILLIAM HOMER MCCLELLAN,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including February 6, 202 3 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

December 27 2022

12/27/2022

Case Number: DA 22-0403
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>           5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information on extracted from SEC
Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 1998, and is qualified
in its entirety by reference to such statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>        1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                          10,058
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   34,787
<ALLOWANCES>                                    10,261
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                38,436
<PP&E>                                          13,454
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,497
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 173,024
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           20,213
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             2
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            1,122
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                     134,632
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   173,024
<SALES>                                         43,749
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                43,749
<CGS>                                           45,047
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   45,047
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  (157)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 558
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (1,699)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       456
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (2,155)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (2,155)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.12)


</TABLE>
NOT RECOMMENDED F OR F ULL-TEXT PUBLICATION F ile Nam e: 12a0099n.06 Nos. 10-2006 / 10-2022 UNITED STAT ES COURT OF AP P EALS F OR THE S IXTH CIRCUIT
UNI TED STATES OF AMERI CA, Plaintiff-Appellee , v. DAVI D SERRATO-CHAVEZ and JOS E MADRI GAL -NEGRETE, Def endants-A

ppellants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ON APPEALFROM THE U NI TED STATES DI STRI CT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DI STRI CT OF MI CHI GAN

Be fore : MARTI

N, SUTTON a

nd BA L DOCK, Circuit J udg es. *
PER CURI AM. David Serr ato-Chave z and J ose Madr iga l-Neg rete eac h pled g uilty to one count of possession with intent to distribute 100 kilogr ams or mo re o f marijuana
. See 21 U.S.C. § 841(a) (1). T h ei r plea ag ree ments eac h contained identical clauses labeled “Waiver of Appea l,” which waived their rig hts to appea l their convictions or sentenc es as long as “the sentenc e imposed does not exceed the maxi mum allowed by Part 3 of this ag ree ment.” R.81 at 6; R.82 at 6. Part 3, i n t u rn , say s that the sentenc e “may not exceed the top of the sentenc ing guideline ra n ge
rec ommended by

the g overnme nt,” which in both case s was 60 months (the statutory minimum ). R.81 at 3–4; R.82 at 3–4. Both defe ndants rec eived a 60-month sentence
.

The Honor able B obby

R. Baldoc k, United States Court of Appea ls for the Te nth Circuit, * sitti ng by desig nation.Nos. 10-2006 / 10-2022

United States v. Se rrato-Chavez, et al. A defendant may waive any righ t , i n cluding the right to appea l a conviction and sentence,
as long as the waiver is knowing and voluntary
. United States v. Coker , 514 F.3d 562, 573 (6th Cir. 2008); United States v. Bradley , 400 F.3d 459, 465–66 (6th Cir. 2005). Both of these waiver s meet that standard. At their respe ctive plea hear ings, the district court told both defe ndants that they wer e g iving up their right t o app eal any sentenc e of 60 months or l ess. Both defenda nts, though native Spanish speake rs, wer e acc ompanied by interpre ters, and throug h their interpre ters both men ag ree d to that condition. Neither one offers any rea son to believe that their interpre ters mistranslated the district court’s wor ds or their re sponses.
The appea l-waive r provisions are unambig uous and Serrato-Chavez and Madrig al-Ne g rete knowing ly an d voluntarily waived their rig hts to appea l a sentenc e of 60 months or less. We there fore g rant the g overnme nt’s motion to di smiss t hese two a ppeals.

- 2 -