alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-1914
HELEN JACKSON, Petitioner, versus DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR; PATSY TRUCKING, INCORPORATED; WEST VIRGINIA COAL WORKERS' PNEUMOCONIOSIS FUND, INCORPORATED, Respondents.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (95-1898-BLA, 000-00 -0016) Submitted: October 15, 1996 Decided: November 18, 1996 Before MICHAEL and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Helen Jackson, Petitioner Pro Se. Christian P. Barber, Jill M. Otte, UNITED STATES DEPART MENT OF LABOR, Washington, D.C.; Konstantine Keian Weld, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WEST VIRGINIA, Charleston, West Virginia, for Respondents. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks review of the Benefits Review Board's decision and order affirming the administrative law judge's denial of black lung benefits pursuant to 30 U.S.C.A. §§ 901-945 (West 1986 & Supp. 1996). Our review of the record discloses that the Board's decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. Jackson v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs , No. 95-1898- BLA; 000
- 0 0-0016 (B.R.B. May 30, 1996). 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.

AFFIRMED
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>  5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM WORLDTEX,
INC.  FORM 10-K FOR THE PERIOD  ENDED  DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>  1,000

<S>                                                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                 YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                                  DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                                             14,872
<SECURITIES>                                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                      46,320
<ALLOWANCES>                                                        2,085
<INVENTORY>                                                        54,200
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                  118,418
<PP&E>                                                            136,075
<DEPRECIATION>                                                     36,915
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                    312,439
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                              30,675
<BONDS>                                                           185,780
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                                             0
<COMMON>                                                              147
<OTHER-SE>                                                         77,355
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                      312,439
<SALES>                                                           203,256
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                  203,256
<CGS>                                                             167,272
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                     167,272
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                      305
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                  7,043
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                    11,869
<INCOME-TAX>                                                        5,377
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                 6,492
<DISCONTINUED>                                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                     1,344
<CHANGES>                                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                                        5,148
<EPS-BASIC>                                                           .36
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                         .35



</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

 

 

Inconnection with the Annual Report of Anacomp, Inc. (the “Company”) onForm 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2004, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Jeffrey R. Cramer, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of TheSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“Section 906”), that, to the best of myknowledge:

 

(1)                                  TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or Section 15(d)of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and

 

(2)                                  Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Dated: December 15,  2004 |
|--------------------------------|
|                           |
|                           | /s/ Jeffrey R.  Cramer |   |
|                           | Jeffrey R.  Cramer |
|                           | Chief Executive  Officer |

 

 

*A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, orotherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within theelectronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, hasbeen provided to Anacomp, Inc. and will be retained by Anacomp, Inc. andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.*

 

----
Gaming Revenues by Range

Number of Revenues Percentage of Mean Median

Gaming Revenue Range Operations (in thousands) Operations Revenues (in thousands) (in thousands)

Gaming operations with fiscal years ending in 2015

$250 million and over 31 13,438,296 6.5% 45.0% $433,493 $364,412

$100 million to $250 million 48 7,912,634 10.1% 26.5% $164,847 $171,114

$50 million to $100 million 54 3,880,101 11.4% 13.0% $71,854 $69,112

$25 million to $50 million 69 2,466,214 14.6% 8.3% $35,742 $33,948

$10 million to $25 million 98 1,590,194 20.7% 5.3% $16,226 $15,676

$3 million to $10 million 79 495,275 16.7% 1.7% $6,269 $6,434

Under $3 million 95 99,031 20.0% 0.3% $1,042 $771

Total 474 $29,881,744

Gaming operations with fiscal years ending in 2014

$250 million and over 26 $11,476,930 5.7% 40.3% $441,420 $352,632

$100 million to $250 million 53 $8,879,425 11.5% 31.2% $167,536 $166,669

$50 million to $100 million 50 $3,497,403 10.9% 12.3% $69,948 $66,707

$25 million to $50 million 70 $2,495,929 15.3% 8.8% $35,656 $32,415

$10 million to $25 million 96 $1,533,912 20.9% 5.4% $15,978 $15,605

$3 million to $10 million 76 $479,275 16.6% 1.7% $6,306 $6,425

Under $3 million 88 $96,437 19.2% 0.3% $1,096 $888

Total 459 $28,459,310

Gaming operations with fiscal years ending in 2013

$250 million and over 26 $11,339,225 5.8% 40.5% $436,124 $374,214

$100 million to $250 million 52 $8,581,295 11.6% 30.6% $165,025 $163,382

$50 million to $100 million 51 $3,633,364 11.4% 13.0% $71,242 $69,459

$25 million to $50 million 68 $2,416,657 15.1% 8.6% $35,539 $33,501

$10 million to $25 million 95 $1,511,162 21.2% 5.4% $15,907 $15,605

$3 million to $10 million 79 $462,919 17.6% 1.7% $5,860 $5,368

Under $3 million 78 $86,974 17.4% 0.3% $1,115 $847

Total 449 $28,031,595

Gaming operations with fiscal years ending in 2012

$250 million and over 24 $10,815,771 5.6% 38.8% $450,657 $387,724

$100 million to $250 million 56 $9,384,248 13.2% 33.6% $167,576 $165,306

$50 million to $100 million 51 $3,547,829 12.0% 12.7% $69,565 $65,829

$25 million to $50 million 57 $2,011,824 13.4% 7.2% $35,295 $33,043

$10 million to $25 million 98 $1,639,971 23.1% 5.9% $16,734 $16,180

$3 million to $10 million 70 $414,112 16.5% 1.5% $5,916 $5,598

Under $3 million 69 $86,249 16.2% 0.3% $1,250 $1,019

Total 425 $27,900,004

Gaming operations with fiscal years ending in 2011

$250 million and over 23 $10,421,992 5.5% 38.4% $453,130 $378,397

$100 million to $250 million 55 $9,065,678 13.1% 33.4% $164,831 $156,252

$50 million to $100 million 52 $3,639,595 12.4% 13.4% $69,992 $66,151

$25 million to $50 million 55 $1,902,860 13.1% 7.0% $34,597 $32,784

$10 million to $25 million 98 $1,629,551 23.3% 6.0% $16,628 $15,753

$3 million to $10 million 70 $413,441 16.6% 1.5% $5,906 $5,525

Under $3 million 68 $80,691 16.2% 0.3% $1,187 $1,010

Total 421 $27,153,807

Source: Compiled from gaming operation audit reports received and entered by the NIGC through 6/30/2016.

NIGC Tribal Gaming Revenues
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. C. J. NEWHARD, Michael Karolcik, *G.*Emerson Work, J. Lewis Williams, William J. Graham, John Hoye, County of Fayette, Pennsylvania, Defendants.

Civ. A. No. 11738.

United States District Court, W. D. Pennsylvania.

March 22, 1955.

' John W. Mcllvaine, U. S. Atty., Leonard Paletta, Asst. U. S. Atty., Edward Rothe, Pittsburgh, Pa., for the United States.

E. H. Bane, Uniontown, Pa., for defendant Michael Karolcik and others.

Anthony Cavalcante, Uniontown, Pa., for defendant C. J. Newhard.

MARSH, District Judge.

In this action to enforce a tax lien against wages of C. J. Newhard, the delinquent taxpayer, summary judgment was entered in favor of plaintiff and against the defendants on the issue of liability pursuant to Rule 56(c) and (d), Fed.R.Civ.P., 28 U.S.C. The precise amount of the judgment was left to be determined at the trial. United States v. Newhard, D.C.W.D.Pa.1955, 128 F.Supp. 805.

At the trial held March 3, 1955, plaintiff appeared by counsel; none of the defendants appeared either by counsel or in person.

The plaintiff offered in evidence a document entitled “Plaintiff’s Request for Admission of Facts”, service of which was accepted by counsel for garnishee on August 10, 1954, and to which no response was made. Rule 36, Fed.R. Civ.P. Request No. 2 states as follows:

> “2. After certain deductions, such as for withholding tax, retirement fund, and hospital insurance, the County of Fayette, Pennsylvania is presently indebted to C. J. New-hard for a total sum of $359.54.”

This evidence, we think, is sufficient to find as a fact that the County of Fayette was on October 13, 1953, the day when the complaint was served upon it, indebted to C. J. Newhard in the sum of $359.54.

If Newhard or the County authorities had appeared at the trial, it might have developed that Newhard’s wages for the October 1st to 15th, 1953, period did not accrue until the end of the pay period, *286in which event our conclusion may have been that the wages for that pay period had not been legally attached on October 13, 1953 and could not be recovered by the plaintiff in this action. By their failure to produce evidence contradicting or explaining the admission above referred to, I think it can fairly be found that Newhard was entitled to the full amount of his wages for the October period aforesaid as of the date of service of the complaint.

Plaintiff also contends that the amended complaint which was served on March 26, 1954 is effective to attach the wages due Newhard up to that time: cf. Rule 15, Fed.R.Civ.P.; although there is considerable merit in this contention, in view of the above evidence, we do not think it necessary to decide it.1

We conclude that judgment should be entered against the garnishee in the sum of $359.54.

1

. On March 3, 1953, plaintiff’s counsel adyiged that a brief on this point would be furnished, but same has not been forthcoming as of the date of this adjudication.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2916 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2916

 To provide that Internal Revenue Service Notice 2010-2 shall have no 
  force and effect and to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to 
 restrict the authority of the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe 
              regulations under section 382 of such Code.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           December 18, 2009

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide that Internal Revenue Service Notice 2010-2 shall have no 
  force and effect and to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to 
 restrict the authority of the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe 
              regulations under section 382 of such Code.

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

SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON REGULATORY AUTHORITY RELATING TO LIMITATION ON 
              LOSSES FOLLOWING OWNERSHIP CHANGE.

    (a) Repeal of Notice 2010-2.--Internal Revenue Service Notice 2010-
2 shall have no force and effect.
    (b) Modification of Regulatory Authority Under Section 382.--
Section 382(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by 
adding at the end the following flush sentence:
``Notwithstanding the preceding sentence or any other provision of law, 
the Secretary may not prescribe any regulation after December 18, 2009, 
which provides an exemption or special rule under this section which is 
restricted to dispositions of instruments acquired by the Secretary 
unless such exemption or special rule is specifically authorized by 
Congress.''.
    (c) No Inference.--Nothing in subsection (a) or in the amendment 
made by subsection (b) shall be construed to create any inference with 
respect to the authority of the Secretary of the Treasury on or before 
December 18, 2009, to provide exceptions to the application of the 
rules of section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 with respect 
to certain classes of taxpayers.
                                 <all>
```
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 11-1376

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Western

* District of Missouri.

Timothy Kemner, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: September 28, 2011

Filed: October 3, 2011

___________

Before MURPHY, ARNOLD, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Timothy Kemner appeals the sentence the district court imposed after he 1

pleaded guilty to sexual exploitation of a minor, in violation of 18 U.S.C.

§ 2251(a), (e). On appeal, his counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief

under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging Kemner’s sentence. 

We conclude, upon careful review, that the district court properly sentenced Kemner

and imposed a reasonable sentence. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461

(8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (appellate court reviews sentencing decision for abuse of

The Honorable Richard E. Dorr, United States District Judge for the Western 1

District of Missouri.
discretion, first ensuring that district court committed no significant procedural error,

and then considering substantive reasonableness of sentence); United States v. Peck,

496 F.3d 885, 891 (8th Cir. 2007) (appellate court applies presumption of

reasonableness to sentence that reflects proper application of Guidelines, but

presumption may be rebutted by reference to factors listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a);

defendant must show that district court failed to consider relevant factor, gave

significant weight to improper or irrelevant factor, or considered only appropriate

factors but nevertheless committed clear error of judgment).

After reviewing the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75,

80 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly we affirm the

judgment of the district court, and we grant counsel leave to withdraw, subject to

counsel informing Kemner about the proceduresfor seeking rehearing and petitioning

for a writ of certiorari.

______________________________

-2-
##### 



Exhibit 99.1

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 quarterly report of HearUSA, 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, Stephen J.
Hansbrough, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, to the best of my
knowledge, 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. of the Company.

| |                                                                                                   
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | /s/ Stephen J. Hansbrough
Stephen J. Hansbrough
Chief Executive Officer
HearUSA, Inc.
May 13, 2003
---

---

Exhibit 13.2

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 amendment no. 1 to
the annual report on form 20 F/A of American Israeli Paper Mills Limited
(theCompany) for the year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the
undersigned, Shaul Gliksberg, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifies, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, to the best of his knowledge and belief, that:

| | (1)        The
Amendment 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: January 8, 2009 |  | By: /s/ Shaul Gliksberg
Shaul GliksbergChief  Financial Officer
|--------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------



---

---
No. 979.

#### Williams et al. *v.*North Carolina.

March 30, 1942.

*Mr. W. H. Strickland*for petitioners. *Messrs. Harry McMullan,*Attorney General of North Carolina, and *T. W. Bruton,*Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of North Carolina granted.
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of Andrea Electronics Corporation and Subsidiaries (the“Company”) on Form S-3 (333-69248, 333-51424, 33-83173, 333-61115), and Form S-8 (333-82738, 333-31946, 333-82375, 333-52129, 333-45421, 333-38609, 333-35687, 033-84092, 333-14385) of our report dated February 13, 2003, except for notes 18and 9 which are dated February 23, 2004 and March 26, 2004, respectively on our audit of the consolidated financial statements of the Company as of December 31, 2003 and 2002 and for the years then ended which report is included in this AnnualReport on Form 10-KSB. 

 

/s/ Marcum and Kliegman LLP 

 

Marcum and Kliegman LLP 

Woodbury, New York 

 

March 30, 2004****
##### 



Exhibit 31.1
 Certification of Principal Executive Officer
Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Hemagen Diagnostics, Inc.;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;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented
in this report;4.
    
    The small business issuers other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing
and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e) for the small business issuer and we have:
 a.
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by
others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;b.
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuers disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report
based on such evaluation; andc.
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuers internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuers most recent
fiscal year that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
small business issuers internal control over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the small business issuers auditors and the audit committee of small business
issuers board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 a.
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect
the small business issuers ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; andb.
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the small business issuers internal control over financial
reporting; and
 Date: January 18, 2007
    /s/ William P. HalesWilliam P. HalesPresident and Chief Executive Officer