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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     (Replace this text with the legend)
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000820750
<NAME>                        Enex Income & Retirement Fund Series 1, L.P.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              dec-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 jan-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   mar-31-1996
<CASH>                                         14277
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  136
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               36194
<PP&E>                                         1148114
<DEPRECIATION>                                 851336
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 332972
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          117554
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     215418
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   332972
<SALES>                                        26662
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               26662
<CGS>                                          1163
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  9014
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               5716
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                0
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   9606
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
        


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 13.2

                 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
      AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the filing of the Annual Report of LanOptics Ltd. (the
"Company") on Form 20-F for the period ending December 31, 2006 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Dror Israel, 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 result of operations of the Company.


                                                         Date: March 29, 2007

                                                         By: /S/ DROR ISRAEL
                                                         -------------------
                                                         Dror Israel
                                                         Chief Financial Officer

* The originally executed copy of this Certification will be maintained at the
Company's offices and will be made available for inspection upon request.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2691 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2691

          To reduce temporarily the duty on AE 0172747 Ether.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            November 2, 2009

   Mr. Burr introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
          To reduce temporarily the duty on AE 0172747 Ether.

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

SECTION 1. AE 0172747 ETHER.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.01.00       2-Chloro-4-mesyl-3- 3.3%         No change        No change        On or before 12/ ''.
                          [(2,2,2-                                                           31/2011.......
                          trifluoroethoxy)m
                          ethyl]benzoic
                          acid (CAS No.
                          120100-77-8)
                          (provided for in
                          subheading
                          2930.90.29)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### In the Matter of the Estate of Carolyn H. Renzi, Deceased. Phyllis Campanile Nicolella, as Executor of Carolyn H. Renzi, Deceased, Respondent; Thomas F. Campanile Jr., Appellant.

Submitted June 14, 2010;

decided August 31, 2010

Motion for reargument of motion for leave to appeal denied *[see*14 NY3d 708 (2010)]. Motion for poor person relief dismissed as academic.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002

 

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of InternationalPackaging and Logistics Group, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10Q for the period ending June 30, 2014 as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Steve Westlund, Chief Executive Officerof the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that,to the best of the undersigned’s knowledge and belief:

 

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

 

(2) The information containedin the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

 

 

/s/ OwenNaccarato 

Owen Naccarato

Chief Executive Officer,

and Director

 

August 20, 2014
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2980 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2980

 To protect the democratic process and the right of the people of the 
                District of Columbia to define marriage.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            February 2, 2010

Mr. Bennett (for himself, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. Wicker, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Enzi, 
 Mr. Brownback, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Roberts, and Mr. Hatch) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
               Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To protect the democratic process and the right of the people of the 
                District of Columbia to define marriage.

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

SECTION 1. FINDINGS.

    Congress finds that--
            (1) a broad coalition of residents of the District of 
        Columbia petitioned for an initiative in accordance with the 
        District of Columbia Home Rule Act to establish that ``only 
        marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in 
        the District of Columbia'';
            (2) this petition anticipated the Council of the District 
        of Columbia's passage of an Act legalizing same-sex marriage;
            (3) the unelected District of Columbia Board of Elections 
        and Ethics and the unelected District of Columbia Superior 
        Court thwarted the residents' initiative effort to define 
        marriage democratically, holding that the initiative amounted 
        to discrimination prohibited by the District of Columbia Human 
        Rights Act; and
            (4) the definition of marriage affects every person and 
        should be debated openly and democratically.

SEC. 2. REFERENDUM OR INITIATIVE REQUIREMENT.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, including the District 
of Columbia Human Rights Act, the government of the District of 
Columbia shall not issue a marriage license to any couple of the same 
sex until the people of the District of Columbia have the opportunity 
to hold a referendum or initiative on the question of whether the 
District of Columbia should issue same-sex marriage licenses.
                                 <all>
```
**EXHIBIT      **
**32**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

| (1) | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                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:                March 15, 2007 | By:    | /s/                Michael J. LaVelle                        |
|--------------------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                 |   | Michael                J. LaVelle                            |
|                                 |   | Interim                President and Chief Executive Officer |
|                                 |   |                                                         |
| Dated:                March 15, 2007 | By:    | /s/                David J. Steichen                         |
|                                 |   | David                J. Steichen                             |
|                                 |   | Chief                Financial Officer                       |
#### In the Matter of New Creek Bluebelt, Phase 4. City of New York, Respondent; Gaetano Demetrio, Appellant.

Submitted January 31, 2011;

decided March 31, 2011

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution.
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

NIGC employees or applicants for employment who believe that they have been 

discriminated against or subjected to harassment by an NIGC official or employee on the 

basis of their race, ethnicity, color, religion, national origin, sex (including gender 

identity, transgender status, sexual orientation, and pregnancy), age, disability (actual or 

perceived), genetic information, or retaliated against for participating in an EEOprotected activity, have the right to initiate the federal discrimination complaint process 

with the NIGC EEO office. 

However, the individual must contact the EEO office or an EEO Counselor within 45 

calendar days of the matter alleged to be discriminatory, or within 45 calendar days of the 

effective date of a discrete personnel action. Regarding allegations of a hostile work 

environment due to harassment, employees must contact the EEO office or EEO 

Counselor within 45 days from the most recent incident of harassment. 

The first stage of this process (informal stage) is designed to attempt to informally 

resolve the matter through counseling or mediation. If the matter cannot be resolved at 

this stage, then the person raising the allegation (the aggrieved individual) will have the 

option to proceed to the formal complaint stage within 15 calendar days of receiving a 

notification of the right to file a formal complaint. 

Contact Information

Leslie D. Fisher, EEO Director 

Office of Diversity, EEO, and Inclusion 

leslie_fisher@nigc.gov 

(202) 641-1798

National Indian Gaming Commission 

1849 C Street, NW Mail Stop #1621 

Washington, DC 20240 

Angela Stroope, EEO Counselor 

angela_stroope@nigc.gov 

(405) 609-8626

Or send an email to:

harassment_prevention@nigc.gov
Exhibit 32

                            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 Synergx  Systems  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Daniel
S. Tamkin,  Chief  Executive  Officer of the Company,  and I, John A.  Poserina,
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,  to my
knowledge, 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/ DANIEL S. TAMKIN
                                          -------------------------
                                          Daniel S. Tamkin
                                          Chief Executive Officer
                                          Synergx Systems Inc.
                                          August 13, 2003



                                          /s/ JOHN A. POSERINA
                                          -------------------------
                                          John A, Poserina
                                          Chief Financial  Officer
                                          Synergx Systems Inc.
                                          August 13, 2003
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jermaine Maurice PADGETT, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 06-6695.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: June 15, 2006.

Decided: June 21, 2006.

Jermaine Maurice Padgett, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Office of the United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before KING, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Jermaine Maurice Padgett seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). 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) (2000). 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. *Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Padgett has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and *336dismiss 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.*
EXHIBIT
23








CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM










We
consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
333-137446, 333-36188, and 33-118663 on Form S-8 of our reports dated March 4,
2008, relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement
schedule of Analysts International Corporation and subsidiaries (which report
expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating
to the change in accounting for stock-based compensation in 2006 described in
Note A), and the effectiveness of Analysts International Corporation and
subsidiaries internal control over financial reporting, appearing in or
incorporated by reference in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Analysts
International Corporation and subsidiaries for the year ended December 29,
2007.
















/s/
      Deloitte & Touche LLPMinneapolis,
      MinnesotaMarch
      4, 2008
#### Charles A. URREGO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Office of the Attorney General of the United States, United States Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, United States Attorney for the Eastern District, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 05-3751-cv.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

June 20, 2006.

Edward G. Bailey, Bailey & Sherman, P.C., Douglaston, New York, for Appellant.

Kevin P. Mulry, Assistant United States Attorney (Roslynn R. Mauskopf, United States Attorney, on the brief), United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York, Brooklyn, New York, for Appellee.

PRESENT: THOMAS J. MESKILL, JOSÉ A. CABRANES, RICHARD C. WESLEY, Circuit Judges.

SUMMARY ORDER

Plaintiff-appellant Charles Urrego appeals from two Memoranda and Orders of the District Court, *see Urrego v. United States,*00 Civ. 1203 (E.D.N.Y. March 31, 2003); *Urrego v. United States,*00 Civ. 1203, 2005 WL 1263291 (E.D.N.Y. May 27, 2005), which dismissed his complaints seeking to recover damages under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2671*et seq.,*and *Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents,*403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971). Plaintiff alleged government misconduct arising out of his criminal prosecution and conviction for conspiracy to commit loansharking.

Upon reviewing the record, we conclude that plaintiffs claims on appeal are without merit. Accordingly, substantially for the reasons set forth in Judge Amon’s careful and comprehensive decisions, we AFFIRM the judgment of the District Court.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 107 (Friday, June 5, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27057-27058]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-13156]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 6652]


Advisory Committee for the Study of Eastern Europe and the 
Independent States of the Former Soviet Union (Title VIII)

    The Advisory Committee for the Study of Eastern Europe and the 
Independent States of the Former Soviet Union (Title VIII) will convene 
on Friday, June 19, 2009 beginning at 1:30 p.m. in Room 1406 of the 
U.S. Department of State, Harry S Truman Building, 2201 C Street, NW., 
Washington, DC, and lasting until approximately 2:30 p.m.
    The Advisory Committee will recommend grant recipients for the FY 
2009 competition of the Program for the Study of Eastern Europe and the 
Independent States of the Former Soviet Union in accordance with the 
Research and Training for Eastern Europe and the Independent States of 
the Former Soviet Union Act of 1983, Public Law 98-164, as amended. The 
agenda will include opening statements by the Chairman and members of 
the committee, and, within the committee, discussion, approval and 
recommendation that the Department of State negotiate grant agreements 
with certain ``national organizations with an interest and expertise in 
conducting research and

[[Page 27058]]

training concerning the countries of Eastern Europe and the Independent 
States of the Former Soviet Union,'' based on the guidelines contained 
in the call for applications published in Grants.gov on February 9, 
2009. Following committee deliberation, interested members of the 
public may make oral statements concerning the Title VIII program in 
general.
    This meeting will be open to the public; however, attendance will 
be limited to the seating available. Entry into the Harry S Truman 
building is controlled and must be arranged in advance of the meeting. 
Those planning to attend should notify the Title VIII Program Office at 
the U.S. Department of State on (202) 736-4661 by Wednesday, June 17, 
providing the following information: Full Name, Date of Birth, Driver's 
License Number, Country of Citizenship, and any requirements for 
special accommodation. All attendees must use the 2201 C Street 
entrance and must arrive no later than 1:15 p.m. to pass through 
security before entering the building. Visitors who arrive without 
prior notification and without photo identification will not be 
admitted.

    Dated: June 1, 2009.
Susan Nelson,
Executive Director, Advisory Committee for Study of Eastern Europe and 
Eurasia (the Independent States of the Former Soviet Union), Department 
of State.
[FR Doc. E9-13156 Filed 6-4-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-32-P
##### 



EXHIBIT 99.1
 CALCULATION OF THE MAXIMUM NOTES BALANCE AT JUNE 30, 2005
UNDER THE SENIOR SECURED NOTES FACILITY DATED JANUARY 13, 2005
(dollars in thousands)
 I. Lesser of:A. the product of:1. the Free Cash Flow Multiple
    
    
    9.0xMultiplied by
2. Services Business Free Cash Flow
    
    $
    7,003$
    63,027Or
B. the product of:x. 2.0 times
    
    
    2.0xmultiplied by
y. Services Business Revenue
    
    $
    18,698$
    37,396II. Lesser of1. 50% of the results of the immediately preceding clause (I)
    
    
    
    
    
    $
    18,698Or
2. 30% of the Companys After-tax PV10
    
    
    
    
    
    $
    11,141III. 10% of the Companys After-tax PV10
    
    
    
    
    
    $
    3,714Maximum Notes Balance = (I) + (II) + (III)
    
    
    
    
    
    $
    52,251Aggregate Notes Outstanding at Determination Date
    
    
    
    
    
    $
    30,000Companys After-tax PV10 as of June 30, 2005
    
    
    
    
    
    $
    37,135Services Business Revenue {Section 2(a)(xxxx)}
    
    
    
    
    
    $
    18,698Services Business operating income
    
    $
    5,709Services Business depreciation and amortization expense
    
    
    1,294Less: Any net operating income from affiliates
    
    
    (A) Services Business net operating income before interest, taxes,
depreciation and amortization
    
    
    
    
    
    $
    7,003(B) Aggregate interest paid on permitted indebtedness
    
    
    
    
    
    
    280Services Business capital expenditures
    
    $
    2,827Less: Issuances of stock by Infinity, less costs
    
    
    (9,478
    )Less: Aggregate interest expense
    
    
    (280
    )Services Business capital expenditures, not funded
    
    
    (280
    )
    
    
    (280
    )Services Business Free Cash Flow {Section 2(a)(xxxix)}
    
    
    
    
    
    $
    7,003