alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 24
                                POWER OF ATTORNEY


         We,  the  undersigned  Directors  and  Officers  of The  Black & Decker
Corporation  (the  "Corporation"),   hereby  constitute  and  appoint  Nolan  D.
Archibald, Michael D. Mangan and Charles E. Fenton, and each of them, with power
of substitution,  our true and lawful  attorneys-in-fact with full power to sign
for us, in our names and in the capacities  indicated below,  the  Corporation's
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2000, and any and all
amendments thereto.


/s/  Norman D. Archibald         Director, Chairman,            February 8, 2001
--------------------------              President and Chief
Nolan D. Archibald                      Executive Officer
                                        (Principal Executive
                                        (Officer)



                                 Director                       February 8, 2001
--------------------------
Norman R. Augustine


/s/  Barbara L. Bowles           Director                       February 8, 2001
--------------------------
Barbara L. Bowles


/s/  M. Anthony Burns            Director                       February 8, 2001
--------------------------
M. Anthony Burns


/s/  Malcolm Candlish            Director                       February 8, 2001
--------------------------
Malcolm Candlish


/s/  Manuel A. Fernandez         Director                       February 8, 2001
--------------------------
Manuel A. Fernandez


/s/  Anthony Luiso               Director                       February 8, 2001
--------------------------
Anthony Luiso


/s/  Mark H. Willes              Director                       February 8, 2001
--------------------------
Mark H. Willes


/s/  Michael D. Mangan           Senior Vice President          February 8, 2001
--------------------------              and Chief Financial
Michael D. Mangan                       Officer (Principal
                                        Financial Officer)


/s/  Christina M. McMullen       Vice President and Controller  February 8, 2001
--------------------------              (Principal Accounting
Christina M. McMullen                    Officer)
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 The Black & Decker Corporation (the
“Corporation”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2009, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
I, Nolan D. Archibald, Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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
Corporation.







/s/ NOLAN D.
ARCHIBALD


Nolan D.
Archibald


Chief
Executive Officer


February
19, 2010
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 113 (Monday, June 15, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 28281]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-13905]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-65,817]


BAE Systems Controls, Inc., Irving, TX; Notice of Termination of 
Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an 
investigation was initiated on April 20, 2009 in response to a petition 
filed by a company official on behalf of workers of BAE Systems 
Controls, Inc., Irving, Texas.
    The petitioner requested that the petition be withdrawn. 
Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 15th day of May 2009.
Richard Church,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-13905 Filed 6-12-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
Presidential Documents

29391 

Federal Register 

Vol. 74, No. 117 

Friday, June 19, 2009 

Title 3— 

The President 

Notice of June 18, 2009 

Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect to the 

Risk of Nuclear Proliferation Created by the Accumulation 

of Weapons-Useable Fissile Material in the Territory of the 

Russian Federation 

On June 21, 2000, the President issued Executive Order 13159 (the ‘‘order’’) 

blocking property and interests in property of the Government of the Russian 

Federation that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the 

United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control 

of United States persons that are directly related to the implementation 

of the Agreement Between the Government of the United States of America 

and the Government of the Russian Federation Concerning the Disposition 

of Highly Enriched Uranium Extracted from Nuclear Weapons, dated February 18, 1993, and related contracts and agreements (collectively, the ‘‘HEU 

Agreements’’). The HEU Agreements allow for the downblending of highly 

enriched uranium derived from nuclear weapons to low enriched uranium 

for peaceful commercial purposes. The order invoked the authority, inter 

alia, of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 

et seq.) and declared a national emergency to deal with the unusual and 

extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United 

States posed by the risk of nuclear proliferation created by the accumulation 

of a large volume of weapons-usable fissile material in the territory of 

the Russian Federation. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
29392 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 117 / Friday, June 19, 2009 / Presidential Documents 

The national emergency declared on June 21, 2000, must continue beyond 

June 21, 2009, to provide continued protection from attachment, judgment, 

decree, lien, execution, garnishment, or other judicial process for the property 

and interests in property of the Government of the Russian Federation that 

are directly related to the implementation of the HEU Agreements and 

subject to U.S. jurisdiction. Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) 

of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 

1 year the national emergency with respect to the risk of nuclear proliferation 

created by the accumulation of weapons-usable fissile material in the territory 

of the Russian Federation. This notice shall be published in the Federal 

Register and transmitted to the Congress. 

THE WHITE HOUSE, 

June 18, 2009. [FR Doc. E9–14675 

Filed 6–18–09; 11:15 am] 

Billing code 3195–W9–P 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULESOB#1.EPS</GPH>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000824894
<NAME> GEODYNE ENERGY INCOME LIMITED PARTENRSHIP II-A
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                         831,101
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  888,222
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,719,323
<PP&E>                                      32,200,871
<DEPRECIATION>                              27,035,802
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,832,609
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          231,484
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,442,442
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,832,609
<SALES>                                      3,023,880
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,097,931
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,307,704
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                790,227
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            790,227
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   790,227
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.46
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 31(a)

CONSTELLATION ENERGY GROUP, INC.        CERTIFICATION

I,
Mayo A. Shattuck III, certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this report on Form 10-K of Constellation Energy Group, 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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.     The
registrant's other certifying officer(s) 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a15(f) and 15d15(f))
for the registrant and have:



5.     The
registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's
auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's Board of Directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



Date:
February 27, 2008

|/s/MAYO A. SHATTUCK III                                      |  | 
|------------------------------------------------------------ |  | 
|Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer |  | 

---



QuickLinks
#### Ogdensburgh & Lake Champlain R. Co. *v.*The Nashua & Lowell R. Co.

*(Circuit Court, D. New Hampshire.*

February 24, 1881.)

In Equity. Demurrer.

*Sidney Bartlett*and *Wallace Hachett,*for plaintiff.

*F. A. Brooks,*for defendants.

The bill in this case- is like that passed upon in Ogdens*burgh & Lake Champlain R. Co.*v. *Boston & Lowell R. Corp., 4*Fed. Rep. 64, and has not been amended to meet the objections sustained in that case.

The order must therefore must be: Demurrer sustained.
WILLIAM BRADLEY

EDMONSON

,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Respondent.

___________________________/ IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 15

- 3111

Opinion filed December 30, 2015.

Petition for Belated Appeal

-- Original Jurisdiction

.

William Bradley Edmonson, pro se

, P etitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee , for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for belated appeal is denied on the merits.

THOMAS, SWANSON, and MAKAR, JJ., CONCUR.
Exhibit 31.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

      I, Thomas K. Langbein, certify that:

      1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A, Amendment No. 1 of
Medicore, Inc;

      2. Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual
report;

      3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

      4. The registrant'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 registrant 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 annual report is being prepared;

            (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this annual report our conclusions
about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end
of the period covered by this annual report based on such evaluation; and

            (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most
recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of any
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;

      5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant'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 registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and

            (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
controls.


                                     /s/ Thomas K. Langbein
Date: August 9, 2005                 -------------------------------------------
                                     THOMAS K. LANGBEIN, Chief Executive Officer
                                     and President
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13**  **- 7876** 

CHRISTOPHER L. HARRIS , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v. KAREN F. HOGSTEN, Warden , Respondent

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia , at Bluefield

. David A. Faber , Senior District Judge. ( 1:13

- cv - 11595 )

Submitted : March 27 , 2014 Decided: April 1, 2014

Before MOTZ , Circuit Judge , and HAMILTON and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judges

.
Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

. Christopher L. Harris, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Christopher L. Harris , a federal prisoner, appeals the district court ’ s order accepting the recommen dation of the magistrate judge a nd denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by
th e district court. Harris v. Hogsten , No. 1:13

- cv - 11595 (S.D.W. Va. Nov. 13, 2013)
. We deny Harris’ motion for an injunction in which he seeks immediate release from prison

. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequ ately presented in the materials before
th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-2000
<CASH>                                       2,218,511
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  833,103
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  1,668,648
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,720,871
<PP&E>                                       2,557,478
<DEPRECIATION>                               (670,131)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,843,329
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,185,276
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       324,228
<OTHER-SE>                                  78,697,360
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,842,329
<SALES>                                      7,096,371
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             7,133,046
<CGS>                                        3,650,881
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               17,201,226
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (10,068,180)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (10,068,180)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (10,068,180)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.32)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-60334

Summary Calendar

RETHA J. HARRELL,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, COMMISSIONER

OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

Defendant-Appellee.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

(4:99-CV-135-LG)

-------------------- December 17, 2001

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, AND BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Plaintiff-Appellant Retha J. Harrell appeals the district

court’s dismissal of her 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) lawsuit seeking review

of the denial of disability benefits and supplemental security

income. Harrell argues that the decision issued by the

Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) was contrary to the weight of the

law and evidence and that the ALJ applied the wrong legal standards

in determining that Harrell was not fully credible regarding her

subjective complaints.2

Our review of the ALJ’s decision “is limite d to determining

whether that decision is supported by substantial e vidence and

whether the proper legal standards were applied.” R i pley v.

Chate r , 67 F.3d 552, 555 (5th Cir. 1995). A finding of no

substantial evidence is appropriate only if no credible evidentiary

choices or medical findings support the decision. J ohnson v.

Bowen , 864 F.2d 340, 343-44 (5th Cir. 1988).

The ALJ consi dered all of the evidence presented at the

administrative hearing as well as all of Harrell’s medical records

and subjective complaints. The ALJ determined that although

Harrell had severe impairments, she was still capable of performing

substantial gainful activity. These findings are supported by

substantial evidence. See Johnson , 864 F.2d at 343-44.

Furthermore, the ALJ has primary responsibility for assessing

the credibility of the claimant’s subjective complaints. S ee

Harrell v. Bowen

, 862 F.2d 471, 480 (5th Cir. 1988). In this

matter, the ALJ properly considered Harrell’s subjective complaints

and determine d that the objective medical evidence and her

testimony regarding her daily activities were inconsistent with her

subjective complaints. I t was within the ALJ’s discretion to make

such determination. S ee Griego v. Sullivan

, 940 F.2d 942, 945 (5th

Cir. 1991).

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is

AFFIRMED.
NUMBER 13-22-00258-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG

 

IN RE THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT

OF FAMILY AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES

 

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

 

ORDER

Before Justices Benavides, Hinojosa, and Silva

Order Per Curiam

On June 2, 2022, relator The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services 

(the Department) filed a petition for writ of mandamus and a motion for temporary 

emergency relief. By petition for writ of mandamus, the Department asserts that the trial 

court “abused its discretion in entering an order requiring the Department to take 

possession and conservatorship of a child in a suit to which the Department was not a 

party.” By motion for temporary emergency relief, the Department seeks to stay the trial 
2

court’s order of May 18, 2022, and any contempt proceedings, sanctions, or enforcement 

actions based on that order, pending resolution of this original proceeding.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the Department’s motion for 

temporary emergency relief, is of the opinion that it should be granted as stated herein. 

Accordingly, we grant the motion for temporary emergency relief, and we order the 

provisions of the trial court’s May 18, 2022 order requiring the Department to take 

possession and custody of the minor child, along with any enforcement of those 

provisions, to be stayed pending further order of this Court, or until this case is finally 

decided. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.10(b). The trial court proceedings are otherwise not 

stayed.

The Court requests that the real party in interest, DeWitt County, Texas, or any 

others whose interest would be directly affected by the relief sought, file a response to 

the petition for writ of mandamus on or before the expiration of ten days from the date of 

this order. See id. R. 52.2, 52.4, 52.8.

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed on the

3rd day of June, 2022.
ELECTRONIC RECORD

13¥ '15

COA # 01-14-00697-CR

David Sendejo v. The State of

STYLE: Texas

COA DISPOSITION: AFFIRM

OFFENSE: 22.02(Aggravated Assault)

COUNTY: Harris

TRIAL COURT: 262nd District Court

DATE: 06/18/15 Publish: NO TC CASE #: 1408625

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

STYLE: David Sendejo v. The State of Texas

PRO SE Petition

FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS:

DATE: ///iPy/^/X

JUDGE: Ufa UvLl4>*~

CCA#:

CCA Disposition:

DATE:

JUDGE:

SIGNED:

PUBLISH:

REHEARING IN CCA IS:

JUDGE:

PC:

DNP:

MOTION FOR

ELECTRONIC RECORD