alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States Court of Appeals

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

October 23, 2015

ERRATA

______________________ 

Appeal No. 2014-5127

LOUIS J. BALESTRA, JR., PHYLLIS BALESTRA, 

Plaintiffs-Appellants

v.

UNITED STATES, 

Defendant-Appellee

Decided: October 13, 2015

Precedential Opinion

______________________ 

Please make the following changes: 

Page 6, lines 21–22, change “The trial court also denied as 

moot the Balestras’ motion to amend their complaint to 

add a defense.” to “The trial court also denied the Government’s motion to amend the answer to add a defense.”

Page 18, line 33 to page 19, line 2, change “With regard to 

the trial court’s denial of the Balestras’ motion to amend 

their complaint, we agree with the trial court that, in 

light of the disposition of their case, the motion is moot.” 

to “With regard to the trial court’s denial of the Government’s motion to amend the answer, we agree with the 
trial court that, in light of the disposition of the case, the 

motion is moot.”
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2215 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Related Agencies, 

Executive Office of the President: Council on Environmental Quality 

and Office of Environmental Quality for fiscal year 2024. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2023 

Mr. BIGGS (for himself, Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. GOOD of Virginia, 

Mr. ROY, and Mr. CRANE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Related Agencies, Executive Office of the President: Council 

on Environmental Quality and Office of Environmental 

Quality for fiscal year 2024. 

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


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 2215 IH

1 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

2 RELATED AGENCIES, EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF 

3 THE PRESIDENT: COUNCIL ON ENVIRON4 MENTAL QUALITY AND OFFICE OF ENVIRON5 MENTAL QUALITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. 

6 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

7 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise avail8 able for Related Agencies, Executive Office of the Presi9 dent: Council on Environmental Quality and Office of En10 vironmental Quality for fiscal year 2024 may not exceed 

11 $2,994,000. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
### ApP«a\ Wo- OZ-[l-OO^QS-C^ 

## ,^e° ' . & 3% «A 

# KM\.a -f. flU <=* £*fly ftr»«-f *^ *L*£A$i:. -f„ f,i^ K*<h** •+- T^r* •* ^~rW kn«f ^^

## 3^^^ -<jv^t


## ^^ f\A>j*+i*Jl +"*-S^y *LsL*y

## \4 V>wiJ t)^^ ^U^Jt ?^<Sr ka^A %^ JV*<- £vi-A i^-f Af^'t •i.-j,*^\j ^ i*-^ *,+ -^A <^v **-? 7'*w. 

### 1Sn*-f 2^» «u^ Ww /Vpai ^i/*^/

-S*_ «_/lK^pysJ^fc—<-S * 

### ?* p-wA Pvr*A 4m«-A ^f^^ —4 4c^iw.-v-Oui«-UV^*-Sre^-fv>i^y vSU-k^c^J <L*jC fi-t\(ww 4~ sS^^^ /• 0-^"A bvrr*-A ^er^-As^j p ^_a^.\"^*# r^r i^i«r^.*/i ^=> J-^fi. y x^^x t><\ (m.-w

^ / 2-s>( ^, 'T^1r "t- <^\i<-ric-r <-^( w, ^ *( C^-^r Pb-^^^K, tx ?ui«\ fc*f lu. 4r-^^ P^4-*-. /U >^ •u^^>l^M^-Xf^ :^3r fli<s 

### <3> f>AS^ / i*-
Exhibit 32 

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

The undersigned officer of FieldPoint Petroleum Corporation (the"Company") hereby certifies that:

     i.     theaccompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the fiscalquarter ended September 30, 2003 (the "Report") fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

     ii.     theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated: November 20, 2003

/s/ RayReaves                              Ray ReavesChief Executive Officer andChief Financial Officer
#### In the Matter of Terrence Jones, Appellant, v Brian Fischer, Commissioner, New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, Respondent.

[974 NYS2d 220]

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Wyoming County (Mark H. Dadd, A.J.), entered July 5, 2012 in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78. The judgment, inter alia, denied the amended petition.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 *1363proceeding seeking to annul the determination, following a tier III disciplinary hearing, that he violated various inmate rules. We conclude that Supreme Court properly denied the amended petition. Contrary to the contention of petitioner, the inmate misbehavior reports provided him with adequate notice of the charges as required by 7 NYCRR 251-3.1 (c). The misbehavior reports contained a written specification of the particulars of the alleged incidents of misbehavior; a reference to the inmate rule numbers allegedly violated by petitioner and a description of those rules; and the date, time, and place of the alleged incidents *(see id,.).*The misbehavior reports were therefore sufficiently specific to enable petitioner to prepare a defense *(see Matter of Gray v Kirkpatrick,*59 AD3d 1092, 1093 [2009]; *Matter of Dingle v Goord,*244 AD2d 938, 938 [1997]).

Petitioner failed to preserve for our review his contention that the Hearing Officer improperly took unrecorded testimony from a correction officer outside of petitioner’s presence inasmuch as he “failed to object at the hearing to the Hearing Officer’s alleged off-the-record investigation” *(Matter of Martinez v Johnson,*255 AD2d 967, 967 [1998]; *see Matter of Britt v Evans,*100 AD3d 1408, 1409 [2012]). In any event, that contention is without merit *(see generally Matter of Abdur-Raheem v Mann,*85 NY2d 113, 124 [1995]). Contrary to petitioner’s further contention, even assuming, arguendo, that there was a violation of 7 NYCRR 251-4.2 based on the failure of petitioner’s employee assistant to obtain requested evidence and to interview a certain witness, we conclude that the Hearing Officer remedied any alleged defect in the prehearing assistance by obtaining a copy of the evidence and taking the testimony of the witness at the hearing *(see Matter of Melendez v Berbary,*89 AD3d 1524, 1525 [2011], *lv denied*19 NY3d 804 [2012]; *Gray,*59 AD3d at 1092-1093).

Finally, contrary to petitioner’s further contention, due process does not require that the Hearing Officer obtain testimony from the correction officers who wrote the misbehavior reports *(see People ex rel. Vega v Smith,*66 NY2d 130, 141 [1985]; *Matter of Johnson v Jones,*119 AD2d 906, 906 [1986]). Present— Scudder, PJ., Fahey, Peradotto, Lindley and Valentino, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000316884
<NAME> HCC INDUSTRIES INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-04-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-01-2000
<CASH>                                          11,038
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,664
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (74)
<INVENTORY>                                      4,146
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                27,164
<PP&E>                                          30,946
<DEPRECIATION>                                (10,215)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  66,283
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,450
<BONDS>                                        102,771
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            14
<OTHER-SE>                                    (52,231)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    66,283
<SALES>                                         40,183
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                40,183
<CGS>                                           28,982
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   28,982
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,659
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    28
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,485
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,393)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (548)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (845)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (845)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (6.236)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (6.236)


</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2


            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Numbers
333-93933, 333-111037, 333-105425, and 333-105424 on Form S-8 and Registration
Statement Number 333-107352 on Form S-3 of Civitas BankGroup, Inc. of our report
dated April 26, 2005 with respect to Civitas BankGroup, Inc. management's
assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and
the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which report
appears in this Amended Annual Report on Form 10-K of Civitas BankGroup, Inc.
for the year ended December 31, 2004.


                                     /s/ Crowe Chizek and Company LLC

Brentwood, Tennessee
April 29, 2005
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Michael Vasquez, Appellant.

[973 NYS2d 558]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles H. Solomon, J.), rendered on or about September 7, 2010, unanimously affirmed.

Application by appellant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see Anders v California,*386 US 738 [1967]; *People v Saunders,*52 AD2d 833 [1976]). We have reviewed this record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous points which could be raised on this appeal.

Pursuant to Criminal Procedure Law § 460.20, defendant may apply for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals by making application to the Chief Judge of that Court and by submitting such application to the Clerk of that Court or to a Justice of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of this Department on reasonable notice to the respondent within 30 days after service of a copy of this order.

*565Denial of the application for permission to appeal by the judge or justice first applied to is final and no new application may thereafter be made to any other judge or justice. Concur— Andrias, J.P., Friedman, Acosta, DeGrasse and Freedman, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS AND STATEMENTS OF CONSOLIDATED INCOME AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       3,065,683
<SECURITIES>                                   100,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,991,535
<ALLOWANCES>                                   128,811
<INVENTORY>                                  3,781,476
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            11,494,348
<PP&E>                                      12,583,150
<DEPRECIATION>                               6,219,744
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              20,490,781
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,328,874
<BONDS>                                        501,372
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       476,311
<OTHER-SE>                                  17,594,424
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                20,490,781
<SALES>                                      9,439,492
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,439,492
<CGS>                                        4,189,900
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,273,513
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,203,726
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                31,857
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              18,882
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                978,355
<INCOME-TAX>                                   348,346
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            630,009
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   630,009
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .14
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .14
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                   EXHIBIT 11


                                CLX ENERGY, INC.
                   Computation of Net Income (Loss) Per Share
                                   (Unaudited)


                                                           Three months
                                                        ended December 31,
                                                     ------------------------
                                                        2003          2002
                                                     ----------  ------------
<S>                                                  <C>         <C>

Net income (loss)                                    $    3,145  $(   30,574)
                                                     ==========  ============

Weighted average number of common
  shares outstanding                                  2,631,936    2,631,936

Common equivalent shares
  representing shares issuable
  upon exercise of outstanding
  options                                                     -            -
                                                     ----------  ------------

                                                      2,631,936    2,631,936
                                                     ==========  ============

 Net income (loss) per share:
    Basic                                            $     0.00  $(     0.01)
                                                     ==========  ============

    Diluted                                          $     0.00  $(     0.01)
                                                     ==========  ============
</TABLE>



Basic income (loss) per share of common stock is computed based on the average
number of common shares outstanding during the period.  Diluted EPS includes the
potential conversion of stock options that are dilutive (no stock options were
dilutive for the period ending December 31, 2003).  Stock options are not
considered in the diluted EPS calculation for those periods with net losses, as
the impact of the potential common shares (250,000 shares at December 31, 2002)
would be to decrease loss per share.





<PAGE>
Exhibit 31.2








I, Stephen C. Forsyth, certify that:





1.  I have reviewed this amended annual report on Form 10-K/A of Chemtura Corporation;





2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.








Date:     April 5, 2017








By: /s/ Stephen C. Forsyth


Stephen C. Forsyth


Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-02-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           9,813
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,415
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (82)
<INVENTORY>                                      4,500
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                26,537
<PP&E>                                          35,952
<DEPRECIATION>                                (11,588)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  68,306
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           20,379
<BONDS>                                         87,111
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            14
<OTHER-SE>                                    (48,058)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    68,306
<SALES>                                         20,211
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                20,211
<CGS>                                           12,959
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   12,959
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,357
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    31
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,666
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,391
<INCOME-TAX>                                       956
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,435
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  3,187
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,622
<EPS-BASIC>                                     33.506
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   33.506


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
company's interim consolidated financial statements and is qualified in 
its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    2-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-03-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-10-1998
<CASH>                                          65,318
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   28,033
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    146,124
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               245,184
<PP&E>                                         812,808
<DEPRECIATION>                                 481,018
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,155,769
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          187,814
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           300
<OTHER-SE>                                     365,376 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,155,769
<SALES>                                        342,471
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               342,471
<CGS>                                          239,657
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  239,657
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               115,795
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,619
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (19,600)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       176
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (19,424)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0 
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (19,424) 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.65)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.65)
        


</TABLE>
##### 



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 AdStar, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the
fiscal year ending December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
on the date hereof (the Report), I, Leslie Bernhard, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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. A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be
retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request. /s/ Leslie BernhardLeslie BernhardChief Executive Officer March 31, 2005
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

GALEN BROOKS

, §

§ No. 185 , 2015

Defendant Below

- Appellant, §

§ Court Below: Superior Court

v. § of the State of Delaware

§

STATE OF DELAWARE

, §

§

Plaintiff Below

- Appellee. §

Submitted: January 20 , 2016

Decided: January 20 , 2016

Before STRINE , Chief Justice; HOLLAND and VA LIHURA , Justices.

O R D E R

This 20th day of January 2016 , upon consideration of the parties’ briefs and

the record below, it appears to the Court that:

(1) The appe llant, who was convicted of forty drug

- related charges

,

appeals the Superior Court’s decisions denying his motion to suppress

incriminating wiretap evidence 1 and denying his motion for a new trial based on

newly discovered evidence at the Offi ce of the Chief Medical Examiner

(“OCME”)

. 2 We find that the judgment of the Superior Court should be affirmed

on the basis of and for the reasons assigned in the Superior Court’s decision s of

July 30, 2013 and March 10, 2015

.

1 State v. Brooks , I.D. No. 1206011471, 2013 WL 4051049 (Del. Super. July 30, 2013).

2 State v. Brooks , I.D. No. 1206011471 (Del. Super. Mar. 10, 2015).2

(2) As to Brooks’s motion for a new trial, Brooks acknowledges that the

Superior Court had to find that “[t]he new evidence is of such a nature that it

would have probably changed the result if presented to the jury.” 3 But Brooks

ignores that: (i) the OCME misconduct did not invo lve evidence planting; (ii) the

only drug evidence in Brooks’s trial was coca ine found on his co

- conspirator; (iii)

this evidence was a very small part of the prosecution’s case; and (iv ) the evidence

seized from Brooks’s co

- conspirator was retested after the OCME misconduct was

discovered and its contents were confirmed to be cocaine . Thus, the Superior

Court correctly concluded that the new evidence did not undermine the trial’s

outcome.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS O RDERED that the Superior Court’s judgm ent s

of July 30, 2013 and March 10, 2015 are AFFIRMED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Leo E. Strine, Jr.

Chief Justice

3 Hicks v. State , 913 A.2d 1189, 1194 (Del. 2006); Opening Br. at 21.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

GLEN TAYLOR, #127254, :

Plaintiff, :

vs. : CIVIL ACTION 14-558-CB-C

C. PEARSON, et al., :

Defendants. :

ORDER

After due and proper consideration of all portions of this file deemed 

relevant to the issue raised, and there having been no objections filed, the Report 

and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(1)(B) is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court. It is ORDERED that this 

action be and is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 

1915(g).

DONE this 11th day of March, 2015.

s/Charles R. Butler, Jr.

Senior United States District Judge

Case 1:14-cv-00558-CB-C Document 6 Filed 03/11/15 Page 1 of 1