alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**AlphaPro Tech, Ltd.**

**EXHIBIT 32.1**

Alpha Pro Tech, Ltd

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C.SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACTS OF 2002

Inconnection with the quarterly report of Alpha Pro Tech, Ltd on Form 10-Q forthe quarter ending June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Sheldon Hoffman ChiefExecutive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 10 U.S.C. ss. 1350, asadopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)             TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934: and

(2)             Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| DATE:    | August 9, 2006 | BY:      | /s/  SHELDON  HOFFMAN             |
|----------|----------------|----------|----------------------------------------|
|     |           |     | Sheldon Hoffman                        |
| * * | * *       | * * | *Chief Executive Officer and Director* |

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
                                  MEDQUIST INC.
                             FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE
               AS OF AND FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1997
                  (AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA)
</LEGEND>
<CURRENCY>                                U.S. Dollars
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                  1.000
<CASH>                                          10,070
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   15,543
<ALLOWANCES>                                       317
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                25,836
<PP&E>                                          13,285
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,035
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  76,569
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,169
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        56,101
<OTHER-SE>                                      10,893
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    76,569
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                18,621
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   13,714
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,163
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  63
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,681
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,046
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,635
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,635
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.22
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.22
        


</TABLE>
EX-10.24Q



 EXHIBIT 10.24Q 

FOURTH AMENDMENT TO AFFILIATE ADDENDUM 
 CAROLINA REGION 
 A. CSG Systems, Inc., successor in interest to
ComTec Incorporated (“CSG”) and Time Warner Cable Inc. (“TWC”) entered into that certain Processing and Production Services Agreement, dated as of June 18, 2003, Document #2294504 (as amended from time to time, the
“Agreement”). 
 B. Pursuant to the Agreement, CSG and the Time Warner Entertainment—Advance/Newhouse
Partnership d/b/a Time Warner Cable through its Carolina Region (“Carolina Region” or “Affiliate”) also entered into an Affiliate Addendum as of November 3, 2008, as amended (CSG Document #2295355) (“Carolina
Addendum”). 
 C. CSG and the Carolina Region desire to amend the Carolina Addendum as set forth in this Fourth Amendment
(the “Amendment”). Upon execution of this Amendment, any subsequent references to the Carolina Addendum between the parties shall mean the Carolina Addendum as amended by this Amendment. Except as amended by this Amendment, the terms and
conditions set forth in the Carolina Addendum shall continue in full force and effect according to their terms. 
 AMENDMENT

 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual premises and covenants set forth herein and in the Agreement, and for other
good and valuable consideration, the receipt, adequacy and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, CSG and the Carolina Division mutually agree as follows as of the date of last signature below (the “Amendment Effective Date”):

 1. Term. The Term set forth in Section 3 of the Carolina Addendum is hereby modified to continue until
December 31, 2013. 
 2. Conflict with Agreement. To the extent that the terms and conditions of this Amendment are
in conflict with the Carolina Addendum or the Agreement, the terms of this Amendment shall control. 
 3. Counterparts.
This Fourth Amendment to the Carolina Addendum may be executed in more than one counterpart, each of which shall be deemed to be an original and all of which together shall be deemed a single document. 







 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CSG and Affiliate cause this Fourth Amendment to be executed effective
as of the Amendment Effective Date. 
  

			
	TIME WARNER ENTERTAINMENT—	  	CSG SYSTEMS, INC. (“CSG”)
	 ADVANCE/NEWHOUSE PARTNERSHIP
 D/B/A TIME WARNER CABLE
 THROUGH ITS CAROLINA REGION

(“AFFILIATE”)
	  	

  

							
	By:	  	/s/ Carol Hevey	 	By:	  	/s/ Peter E. Kalan
		
	Name: Carol Hevey	 	Name: Peter E. Kalan
		
	Title: Executive Vice President, East	 	Title: President
		
	Date: December 18, 2012	 	Date: 12/31/12
1

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

District of Missouri.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 06-1338

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

Western District of Missouri.

Rusty Eugene McCoy, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: February 5, 2007

 Filed: February 5, 2007

___________

Before RILEY, MAGILL, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Rusty McCoy pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm, in

violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2). Finding that McCoy was an armed

career criminal, the district court1

 sentenced him to the statutory minimum of 15 years

in prison. See 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1); U.S.S.G. § 4B1.4. On appeal, McCoy

challenges one of the predicate offenses underlying his armed-career-criminal status,

arguing that aiding and abetting felony theft of a vehicle in violation of Kansas law

should not automatically be deemed a “violent felony.” See 18 U.S.C.
-2-

§ 924(e)(2)(B)(ii) (defining “violent felony” as a crime that is punishable by more

than one year in prison and “otherwise involves conduct that presents a serious

potential risk of physical injury to another”). Reviewing de novo, see United States

v. Mincks, 409 F.3d 898, 900 (8th Cir. 2005), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 1345 (2006), we

conclude that McCoy’s challenge is unavailing. See United States v. Barbour, 395

F.3d 826, 827-28 (8th Cir.) (under controlling precedent, Kansas vehicle theft is

violent felony within meaning of § 924(e)), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 133 (2005).

Accordingly, we affirm.

______________________________
#### Jose Catalino QUINTEROS RAMOS, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 11-72907.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 19, 2012.*

Filed Dec. 21, 2012.

Mike Singh Sethi, Esquire, Orange, CA, for Petitioner.

Palin Riley Holyoak, Esquire, Trial, Oil, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Jose Catalino Quinteros Ramos, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings based on ineffective assistance of counsel. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen and review de novo questions of law. *Mohammed v. Gonzales,*400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir.2005). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Quinteros Ramos’s motion to reopen where Quinteros Ramos has not established prejudice from his prior counsel’s alleged ineffective assistance. *See id.*at 793-94 (prejudice results when “the performance of counsel was so inadequate that it may have affected the outcome of the proceedings”).

We lack jurisdiction over Quinteros Ramos’s contention that the immigration judge failed to advise Quinteros Ramos properly about the fingerprinting requirement because this is not a timely challenge to the agency’s prior order. *See Singh v. INS,*315 F.3d 1186, 1188 (9th Cir.2003).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
July 23, 2013



### JUDGMENT


## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NEFTALI ARROYO , Appellant

NO. 14

- 13

- 00226

- CV V.

CHASE HOME FINANCE L LC , Appellee

___________ _____________________ Today the Court heard its own motion to dismiss the appeal from the judgment signed by the court below on February 26, 2013. Having considered the motion and found it meritorious, we order the appeal DISMISSED

.

We further order that all costs incurred by reason of this appeal be paid by appellant, Neftali Arroyo.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
## Taft /

Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP  One Indiana Square, Suite 3500 / Indianapolis, Indiana 46204-2023 / Tel: 317.713.3500 / Fax: 317.713.3699 / www.taftlaw.com  Cincinnati / Cleveland / Columbus / Dayton / Indianapolis / Northern Kentucky / Phoenix

 

March 30, 2012

 

Saturna Investment Trust  c/o Saturna Capital  1300 North State Street  Bellingham, Washington 98225-4730

Re: Amendment to Form N-1A

Gentlemen:

 In accordance with the registration of an indefinite number of units ("Units") registered by Saturna Investment Trust (the "Trust") for its Funds, we have been asked to provide the opinion of our counsel required to be filed as an exhibit to the Trust's registration statement on Form N-1A (the "Registration Statement"). In rendering this opinion, we have examined such documents, records and questions of law as we deemed it necessary to examine for the purpose of this opinion. Based on that examination and investigation, it is our opinion that the Units will be, upon issuance, validly issued, fully paid and not assessable.

We have reviewed Post Effective No. 38, and determined that it does not contain disclosures that would render it ineligible to become effective under Rule 485(b) promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933.

We consent to the filing of this letter as an exhibit to Post Effective Amendment No. 38 to the Registration Statement.

 Sincerely,

TAFT STETTINIUS & HOLLISTER LLP*/s/Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP***
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________ No. 16

- 17492 Non

- Argument Calendar

________________________ D.C. Docket No. 5:08

- cr - 00005

- MW

- GRJ

- 1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff

- Appellee,

versus KARRIECE QUONTR EL DAVIS, Defendant

- Appellant.

________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida

________________________ (F ebruary 5, 2018) Before TJOFLAT, WILSON, and NEWSOM , Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:

Case: 16-17492 Date Filed: 02/05/2018 Page: 1 of 22 Karriece Davis, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se , appeals th e district court’s denial of his motion for credit for time served and denial of his motion for
reconsiderat ion. Davis’s notice of appeal in this case states that he wishes to appeal the order denying his motion for reconsideration, but his appellate brief in this case discuss es the district court’s denial of his Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) motion for relief from judgment from which Davis has filed a separate notice of appeal. An appellant’s brief must contain a statement of all of the issues presented for review. Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(5). We liberally construe pro se pleadings. Tannenba um v. United States , 148 F.3d 1262, 1263 (11th Cir. 1998) (per curiam).
A pro se appellant nonetheless still abandons an issue when he fails to offer argument on the issue in his brief. Timson v. Sampson , 518 F.3d 870, 874 (11th Cir. 2008) (per curiam). Davis has not raised any argument in his brief challenging the district court’s denials of his motion for credit for time served and his motion for reconsideration. He thus has abandoned any challenge to those denials. See id. Accordingly, we must affirm because Davis has not shown that the district court erred by denying his motion for credit for time served or his motion for reconsideration. AFFIRMED. Case: 16-17492 Date Filed: 02/05/2018 Page: 2 of 2
HOUSEHOLD DATA

ANNUAL AVERAGES

28. Unemployed persons by reason for unemployment, race, and Hispanic origin

(Numbers in thousands)

Reason for unemployment

Total White Black Hispanic origin

1998 1999 1998 1999 1998 1999 1998 1999

NUMBER OF UNEMPLOYED

 Total, 16 years and over ........................................................ 6,210 5,880 4,484 4,273 1,426 1,309 1,026 945

Job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs .......... 2,822 2,622 2,116 1,968 585 529 471 444

 On temporary layoff ................................................................ 866 848 716 702 116 111 146 155

 Not on temporary layoff .......................................................... 1,957 1,774 1,399 1,266 469 418 325 289

 Permanent job losers ............................................................ 1,353 1,225 988 892 300 269 206 185

 Persons who completed temporary jobs .............................. 603 549 412 374 170 149 119 104

Job leavers ............................................................................... 734 783 568 617 133 134 95 91

Reentrants ................................................................................ 2,132 2,005 1,467 1,385 558 516 346 317

New entrants ............................................................................ 520 469 333 303 151 131 113 93

PERCENT DISTRIBUTION

 Job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs ......... 45.5 44.6 47.2 46.1 41.0 40.4 46.0 47.0

 On temporary layoff ............................................................... 13.9 14.4 16.0 16.4 8.1 8.5 14.3 16.4

 Not on temporary layoff ......................................................... 31.5 30.2 31.2 29.6 32.9 31.9 31.7 30.6

 Job leavers .............................................................................. 11.8 13.3 12.7 14.4 9.3 10.2 9.3 9.7

 Reentrants ............................................................................... 34.3 34.1 32.7 32.4 39.1 39.4 33.7 33.5

 New entrants ........................................................................... 8.4 8.0 7.4 7.1 10.6 10.0 11.0 9.8

UNEMPLOYED AS A PERCENT OF THE

 CIVILIAN LABOR FORCE

 Job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs ......... 2.1 1.9 1.8 1.7 3.7 3.2 3.3 3.0

 Job leavers .............................................................................. .5 .6 .5 .5 .8 .8 .7 .6

 Reentrants ............................................................................... 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 3.5 3.2 2.4 2.2

 New entrants ........................................................................... .4 .3 .3 .3 .9 .8 .8 .6

 NOTE: Detail for the above race and Hispanic-origin groups will not sum to

totals because data for the "other races" group are not presented and

Hispanics are included in both the white and black population groups. 

Beginning in January 1999, data reflect revised population controls used in the

household survey.

204
* 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. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-10351 Summary Calendar

PEGGY SUE YBARRA, Petitioner-Appellant,

versus GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION, Respondent-Appellee.

__________________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:99-CV-230-Y

___________________________________________

March 1, 2001 Before POLITZ, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Peggy Sue Ybarra, Texas prisoner # 569925, appeals the denial of her 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for writ of habeas corpus. She contends that the state court erred when it denied her claims that: (1) the State violated the confrontation clause by failing to produce an adverse witness at her parole-revocation hearing, and1 Williams v. Johnson , 171 F.3d 300, 307 (5th Cir.) (internal quotation marks, footnote,

and citations omitted), cert. denied , 528 U.S. 882 (1999).

2 Spann v. Wainwright , 431 F.2d 482 (5th Cir. 1970); United States v. McCormick , 54 F.3d 214 (5th Cir. 1995). (2) her parole revocation ruling violated the due process clause because the evidence supporting the revocation lacked sufficient reliability. Ybarra’s contentions do not warrant habeas relief. It is well settled that we “may not grant habeas relief unless the error at issue had substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the proceeding’s outcome.” 1 Ybarra challenges only the determination that she violated the conditions of her parole by committing aggravated robbery. Any error made in reaching this conclusion is harmless, however, because the order revoking Ybarra’s parole also relied on the unchallenged finding that she violated the conditions of her parole by failing to report to her parole officer. 2 Either finding is sufficient to support a revocation of parole. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the audited
financial statements of Elgin Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries as at and for
the year ended March 31, 2000 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                         144,839
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,194,315
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  1,603,391
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,020,292
<PP&E>                                         317,300
<DEPRECIATION>                                 263,500
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,222,213
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       14,292,362
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        14,653
<OTHER-SE>                                (11,084,802)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,222,213
<SALES>                                      7,423,771
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             7,423,771
<CGS>                                        6,956,921
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               10,494,628
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                89,091
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,116,646
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (4,276,594)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (4,276,594)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.25)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.25)


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

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          34,443
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   99,379
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  4,694,973
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,828,795
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,828,795
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          302,538
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,526,257
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,828,795
<SALES>                                          1,965
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,965
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,965
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,965
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>