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

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000835759
<NAME> ASTROTECH INTERNATIONAL
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   23,236
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      5,435
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                38,015
<PP&E>                                          37,078
<DEPRECIATION>                                  10,892
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  83,410
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           29,294
<BONDS>                                         12,092
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            99
<OTHER-SE>                                      38,239
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    83,410
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                33,804
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   25,279
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,343
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 298
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,957
<INCOME-TAX>                                       775
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,182
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,182
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .12
        

</TABLE>
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  Quarterly  Report  of B&G  Foods,  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the period  ending March 29, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Robert
C. Cantwell,  Chief Financial  Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.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/ Robert C. Cantwell
-----------------------
Robert C. Cantwell
Chief Financial Officer
April 25, 2003
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

                PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
         OF 2002 (SUBSECTION (A) AND (B) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF
                          TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE)

     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the undersigned officer of Vornado
Operating Company (the "Company"), hereby certifies, to such officer's
knowledge, that the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended June 30, 2004 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

August 5, 2004                           /s/ STEVEN ROTH
                                         ---------------
                                         Name:  Steven Roth
                                         Title: Chief Executive Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3997 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3997

   To direct the Secretary of Agriculture to convey to the New Hope 
 Cemetery Association a small parcel of National Forest System land in 
              the State of Arkansas for use as a cemetery.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 18, 2004

 Mr. Boozman introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                        Committee on Agriculture

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To direct the Secretary of Agriculture to convey to the New Hope 
 Cemetery Association a small parcel of National Forest System land in 
              the State of Arkansas for use as a cemetery.

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

SECTION 1. CONVEYANCE OF SMALL PARCEL OF NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM LAND, 
              POPE COUNTY, ARKANSAS.

    (a) Conveyance on Condition Subsequent.--Not later than 90 days 
after the date of enactment of this Act, subject to valid existing 
rights and the condition stated in subsection (c), the Secretary of 
Agriculture, acting through the Chief of the Forest Service (referred 
to in this section as the ``Secretary''), shall convey to the New Hope 
Cemetery Association (referred to in this section as the 
``association''), for no consideration, all right, title, and interest 
of the United States in and to the parcel of land described in 
subsection (b).
    (b) Description of Land.--The parcel of land referred to in 
subsection (a) is the parcel of National Forest System land (including 
any improvements on the land) that--
            (1) is known as ``New Hope Cemetery Tract 6686c'';
            (2) consists of approximately 1.1 acres; and
            (3) is more particularly described as a portion of the SE 
        \1/4\ of the NW \1/4\ of section 30, T. 11, R. 17W, Pope 
        County, Arkansas.
    (c) Condition on Use of Land.--
            (1) In general.--The association shall use the parcel 
        conveyed under subsection (a) as a cemetery.
            (2) Reversion.--If the Secretary, after notice to the 
        association and an opportunity for a hearing, makes a finding 
        that the association has used or permitted the use of the 
        parcel for any purpose other than the purpose specified in 
        paragraph (1), and the association fails to discontinue that 
        use, title to the parcel shall, at the option of the Secretary, 
        revert to the United States, to be administered by the 
        Secretary.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 4 

Case: 1:20-cv-04806 Document #: 354-4 Filed: 08/09/21 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:8201
	

	
	
  !"#$

%&'(&'( )*+,-.'	,/01
	

2345665789:;/;<=>



?@AB,C#



@

0,	DE
	,/;F&,D0,G,&0		,CAH'D6&:
,
I&

,G,&8'
,&?	&J&&
,	:,&0		,CAH'D6&



AFC',/,CK'
D
:
,
&
	,,



8	C:



	

	




LMNOPQRSMTNUOVVP

WXXYZ[\]WX^_`

abcdefghijkljmnjopqfgrnpstscb

uONTvQuOwxyzsz{bt|{bzsam}w~yb{ab{stcmwOxykkqj{q RPVTxTPmTRNmLMOvwRmwPMOxxTmwPMOVQRVuLwV}NwVvOPvRUTOOVmRVRVmxRTvR

 ¡¢£¤¡¥¦¡¤§¤¡£ ̈¤©a«¬­® ̄a°±2 ̄3«®a««a ́3μ ̄3¶ ̄3·¶ ́ ̧1®¬3±«μoa°¬« ́2»2¬1⁄4a ́1«¬­® ̄a°®¬«« ̄1⁄2¬« ̄±± ̄ ̧©¬¶± ́a±® ̄·

 ̧ ́3± ̄a3 ̧ ́3oa¶¬3±a ̄°a3o ́2® ̄±a ́3±© ̄±a«°¬1⁄2 ̄°°·»2a1⁄4a°¬1⁄2¬¶3⁄4¡o· ́1 ̄2¬3 ́±±©¬a3±¬3¶¬¶2¬ ̧a»a¬3±μ ́2 ̄»¬2« ́32¬«» ́3«a¿°¬o ́2¶¬°a1⁄4¬2a31⁄2

a±± ́±©¬a3±¬3¶¬¶2¬ ̧a»a¬3±μ· ́1 ̄2¬©¬2¬¿·3 ́±aoa¬¶±© ̄± ̄3·¶a« ̧° ́«12¬μ ̧ ́»·a31⁄2μ¶a«±2a¿1±a ́3 ́21«¬ ́o ̄3· ́o±©¬a3o ́2® ̄±a ́3

 ̧ ́3± ̄a3¬¶a3 ́2 ̄±± ̄ ̧©¬¶± ́±©a«±2 ̄3«®a««a ́3a«À¤Á¡¤¦§ÂÁÃ¡Ä¡¤£¢3⁄4¡o· ́1© ̄1⁄4¬2¬ ̧¬a1⁄4¬¶±©a«±2 ̄3«®a««a ́3a3¬22 ́2μ»°¬ ̄«¬

a®®¬¶a ̄±¬°·3 ́±ao·±©¬«¬3¶¬23⁄4Â°¬ ̄«¬¶¬«±2 ́·±©¬ ́2a1⁄2a3 ̄°±2 ̄3«®a««a ́3 ̄3¶a±« ̄±± ̄ ̧©®¬3±«Åa±© ́1±2¬ ̄¶a31⁄2 ́2« ̄1⁄4a31⁄2a3 ̄3·

® ̄33¬23⁄4¤© ̄3Æ· ́1μ¦ ́¬¿Ç¦ ́¬¿¦¦Â3⁄4

Case: 1:20-cv-04806 Document #: 354-4 Filed: 08/09/21 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:8202
No. 87-6506.

#### Mittleider, aka Wyman *v.*United States.

C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### Charlotte Montross, adm’x v. Roger Williams Insurance Company.

*Insurance*— Promise *to renew policy*— Plea—Penial *of execution.*

An insurance company that has ceased to do business is not liable on a policy which persons who have ceased to he its agents have promised to renew. But if the person to whom the promise is made did not know of the revocation of their authority, he may, perhaps, have a cause of action against them.

“Where a declaration upon an insurance policy which plaintiff alleges has been renewed, does not purport to set up a written renewal, the plea of the general issue is sufficient

Denial of the execution of an instrument cannot be required if the instrument is not set up in the declaration.

Error to St. Clair.

Submitted Oct. 18.

Decided Oct. 31.

Assumpsit. Plaintiff brings error.

Affirmed.

*Atkmson & Stevenson*for appellant.

*JB. O. Fa/rra/nd*and *William T. Mitchell*for appellee.

Mabston, J.

There are two very serious difficulties in tbe way of tbe plaintiff’s right of recovery in this case. At tbe time at which it is claimed tbe policy of insurance was renewed, tbe defendant company bad ceased to do business and had revoked tbe authority of their agents, and tbe persons who bad acted as agents did not renew -or attempt to renew tbe policy, even could they have «done so.

*478The most that could possibly be claimed in this case would be that the persons who had acted as agents for the-defendant had promised or agreed to renew the policy, and that plaintiff did not know of any revocation of their' authority. This might give a cause of action against them, but not against the company they had ceased to represent. This case does not come within the class where payment made in good faith to one who had been an agent, might be held good in the absence of knowledge of a revocation of authority. In this case no payment was made to or received by any one, nor was any receipt given or other act done with a view to bind the company.

The declaration did not set up or purport to set up a written renewal of the policy, and no denial of the execution of an instrument not declared upon could be required. The plea of the general issue was sufficient.

The judgment must be affirmed with costs.

The other Justices concurred.
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, Dale B. Smith,certify that:

1.                 I have reviewedthis Annual Report on Form 10-K of Mueller Water Products, LLC;

2.                 Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period(s) covered by this report;

3.                 Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

4.                 The registrant’sother certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a)          Designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

(b)         [Reserved]

(c)          Evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

(d)         Disclosed in this reportany change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurredduring the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected,or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and

5.                 The registrant’sother certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)          All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

(b)         Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.

Date: December 19,2005

|        | /s/ DALE B.  SMITH          |
|--------|----------------------------------|
|   | Name: Dale B. Smith              |
|   | Title: *Chief Executive Officer* |

 

----
---

---

Exhibit 13.(a).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 Syneron Medical Ltd. (the Company) on
Form 20-F for the period ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned hereby
certify that to the best of our knowledge:

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: August 21, 2008

| |  | /s/ Doron Gerstel
Doron GerstelChief Executive Officer
| |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: August 21, 2008

| |  | /s/ Fabian Tenenbaum
Fabian TenenbaumChief Financial Officer
| |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------



---

---
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.
 Small Business Administration [Disaster Declaration #14184]
 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.
 ACTION: Notice.
 SUMMARY: This is a notice of an Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) declaration for the State of Washington, dated 11/07/2014. *Incident:*
                         Mercer Island E. Coli Water Contamination. *Incident Period:*
                         09/27/2014 through 10/11/2014.
 DATES: *Effective Date:*
                         11/07/2014. *EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         08/07/2015.
 ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of the Administrator's EIDL declaration, applications for economic injury disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations. The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster: *Primary Counties:*
                     King. *Contiguous Counties:* Washington: Chelan, Kitsap, Kittitas, Pierce, Snohomish, Yakima. The Interest Rates are: PercentBusinesses and small agricultural cooperatives without credit available elsewhere
4.000Non-profit organizations without credit available elsewhere
2.625
 The number assigned to this disaster for economic injury is 141840. The State which received an EIDL Declaration # is Washington. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59002) Dated: November 7, 2014. Maria Contreras-Sweet, Administrator.


[FR Doc. 2014-27179 Filed 11-14-14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
May 2002 

Contract Post Offices

By: Juana Williams 

State weights and measures officials search for enforcement guidelines and contacts 

when they encounter United States Postal Service (USPS) contract post offices operating 

in retail businesses. The USPS Government Relations Office headquartered in 

Washington, D.C. reports that Community Post Offices (CPO) or Contract Postal Units 

(CPU) have operated for over 200 years throughout the United States. 

USPS contract post offices provide mail service that is commercial, but falls outside of 

weights and measures authority. USPS scales supplied to contract post offices are 

intended for USPS business only, although the operator may use other devices to provide 

commercial shipping services for various private carriers. 

USPS contract post offices use postage meters and/or scales that fall under the 

jurisdiction of the local postmaster. The local postmaster maintains records on contract 

post offices (contract, operator, equipment, etc.) in their area. Information on 

postmasters for approximately 12,000 post offices is available on the USPS web site at 

www.usps.com/postmasterfinder.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 6.3.3

Eastern Division

ABC Corporation I, et al.

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.:

1:20−cv−04806

Honorable Thomas M.

Durkin

The Partnership and Unincorporated Associations

Identified on Schedule "A", et al.

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Tuesday, August 24, 2021:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin: Telephone hearing on

Defendant Gyroor−US's Emergency Motion to Dissolve the Preliminary Injunctions and

the Modified Preliminary Injunction [353] held on 8/24/2021. For the reasons stated on

the record, the motion is denied. A telephone status hearing is set for 10/8/2021 at 9:00

a.m. To join the telephone conference, dial 877−402−9757, Access Code 4410831.

Members of the public and media will be able to call in to listen to this hearing. Please be

sure to keep your phone on mute when you are not speaking. Persons granted remote

access to proceedings are reminded of the general prohibition against photographing,

recording, and rebroadcasting of court proceedings. Violation of these prohibitions may

result in sanctions, including removal of court issued media credentials, restricted entry to

future hearings, denial of entry to future hearings, or any other sanctions deemed

necessary by the Court. Defendant's oral motion to further increase the bond amount is

denied. Plaintiff's oral motion to replace the document at dkt [317−1] is granted. Mailed

notice. (ecw, )

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:20-cv-04806 Document #: 380 Filed: 08/24/21 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:8574
#### UNITED STATES of America, v. Shawn PEARCE, Appellant.

No. 03-2892.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) Nov. 16, 2004.

Decided Dec. 1, 2004.

*184Robert E. Goldman, Office of United States Attorney, Allentown, PA, for Appellee.

Albert V.F. Nelthropp, Allentown, PA, for Appellant.

Before ROTH, SMITH and WEIS, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

WEIS, Circuit Judge.

Defendant pleaded guilty to five counts of an indictment arising from two instances of armed robbery of a jewelry store. The prosecution and the defendant entered into a written plea agreement that called for a specific sentence of 30 years incarceration and 5 years of supervised release.

On appeal, defendant contends that the delay between his indictment and the date of trial was unreasonable under the Constitution and violated the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161*et seq.*In addition, he asserts that his sentence of 360 months was cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment.

Defendant was first indicted on November 30, 2000 and was the subject of a second superseding indictment on April 26, 2001. Contrary to the defendant’s assertions, the District Court did not err when it excluded that time period against the Speedy Trial Act’s limitations. *See*18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7). Moreover, the District Court properly considered the time required for disposition of motions, a continuance granted so that new counsel could prepare for trial and other matters when it denied a motion alleging a violation of the Speedy Trial Act. *See, e.g., United States v. Arbelaez,*7 F.3d 344 (3d Cir.1993).

In addition, defendant waived his Speedy Trial Act defense because he did not reserve the right to challenge those rulings when he pleaded guilty.

Accordingly, we conclude that the defendant’s challenge to the District Court’s ruling on the Speedy Trial Act must be rejected.

*185Additionally, the defendant’s complaint about the length of his sentence lacks merit. The statutory maximum on certain counts of the indictment was life imprisonment with a mandatory minimum of 32 years incarceration. Defendant now contends that he would have received a lesser sentence in the Pennsylvania state courts for the same offenses. Even if that claim were valid, it is irrelevant to the federal sentence imposed.

A defendant who enters into a plea agreement may not disavow its provisions on appeal. *See, e.g., United States v. Khattak,*273 F.3d 557, 563 (3d Cir.2001); *United States v. Rodia,*194 F.3d 465, 469 (3d Cir.1999). The crimes for which defendant was sentenced were particularly brutal and amounted to conduct consistent with an earlier conviction for a violent offense. The sentence imposed here was not so draconian as to amount to cruel and unusual punishment.

The judgement of the District Court will be affirmed.