alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* District Judge of the Eastern District of Missouri,

sitting by designtation.

** Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 5TH CIR. R.

47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________________

No. 00-31316

Civil Docket #99-CV-549-D

_______________________

MARK D. COMPTON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

TORCH, INC.,

Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

_________________________________________________________________

November 12, 2001

Before JONES and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges and LIMBAUGH*, District

Judge:

PER CURIAM:**

The court has carefully considered this appeal in light

of the oral argument, briefs and pertinent portions of the record.

Having done so, we find no reversible error of fact or law. The

plaintiff waived his objection to the jury charge, and the charge
2

in any event was not erroneous. There was sufficient evidence in

the record to enable the jury to allocate fault between the parties

in the ratio that it chose. Finally, the district court did not

abuse his discretion in allowing Torch’s witness to testify under

the relevant Federal Rules of Evidence.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATION**I, Billy F. Mitcham, Jr., certify that:1*.*I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K/A of Mitcham Industries, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report isbeing prepared;(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors andthe audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe 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 whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting./s/ BILLY F. MITCHAM, JR. Billy F. Mitcham, Jr.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Preston Garries, Also Known as Marcus Theoc, Appellant.

[666 NYS2d 194]

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Rohl, J.), rendered August 25, 1995, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish that he sold 20 dollars worth of crack cocaine to two undercover officers is unpreserved for appellate review *(see,*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Udzinski,*146 AD2d 245). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution *(see, People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, the resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the jury, which saw and heard the witnesses *(see, People v Gaimari,*176 NY 84, 94). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record *(see, People v Garafolo,*44 AD2d 86, 88). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence *(see,*CPL 470.15 [5]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive *(see, People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review, without merit, or do not require reversal. Miller, J. P., Pizzuto, Goldstein and Florio, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OFTHE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Intelligroup, Inc, (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Alok Bajpai, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

|(1) | The Report fully complies   with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of   the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act); and
|--- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|    |                                                                                                                                                                           
|(2) | The information contained   in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial   condition and results of operations of the Company.                  

|DATE:  November   __, 2006 | By: | /s/ Alok Bajpai        
|-------------------------- | --- | -----------------------
|                           |     |                        
|                           |     | Alok Bajpai            
|                           |     | Chief Financial Officer
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel NIAID Peer Review Meeting.                    

*Date:*                         October 26-27, 2017.                    

*Time:*                         12:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate contract proposals.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Susana Mendez, DVM, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, Room 3G53B, National Institutes of Health, NIAID, 5601 Fishers Lane Dr., MSC 9823, Bethesda, MD 20892-9823, (240) 669-5077,                         *mendezs@niaid.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: September 27, 2017.

Natasha M. Copeland,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2017-21138 Filed 10-2-17; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### The Broadcasting Board of Governors

# AGENCY:

The Broadcasting Board of Governors.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

                        In accordance with Section 743 of Division C of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2010, the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) is publishing this notice to advise the public of the availability of its FY-2015 Service Contract Analysis and FY 2016 Service Contract Inventory. They are available on the BBG Web site, through the following link:                         *https://www.bbg.gov/​strategy-and-performance/​research-reports/​bbg-service-contract-inventory/​.*                         The service contract inventory provides information on service contract actions over $25,000 made in FY-2016. The information is organized by function to show how contracted resources are distributed throughout the Agency. The inventory has been developed in accordance with guidance on service contract inventories issued on November 5, 2010 and on December 19, 2011 by the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP).                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        James McGuirk, Senior Procurement Analyst, IBB Office of Contracts via email at                         *jmcguirk@bbg.gov*                         or at telephone number (202) 382-7840.                    

Dated: September 27, 2017.

Chris Luer,

Chief, IBB Office of Administration.

[FR Doc. 2017-21102 Filed 9-29-17; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 8610-01-P
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 SRS Labs, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Thomas C.K. Yuen, Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief Financial 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:

|Date: August 7, 2002 |  | By: |  | /s/THOMAS C.K. YUENThomas C.K. Yuen Chief Executive
Officer and Acting
Chief Financial Officer
|-------------------- |  | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

QuickLinks
UN PUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19

- 2321

In re: PHILIP JAY FETNER ,
Debtor

.

--------------------------------------
PHILIP JAY FETNER ,
Debtor

- Appellant ,

v.
RONALD J. AIANI; ROBERT M. MARINO ,
Defendants

- Appellees,

and
KEVIN R. MCCARTHY, Trustee,

Plaintiff

- Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Alexandria

. Anthony John Trenga , District Judge. ( 1:19

- cv

- 00838

- AJT

- JFA )

Sub mitted : October 20, 2020 Decided: October 23, 2020

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, DIAZ , Circuit Judge, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.2 Philip Jay Fetner, Appellant Pro Se. Bradford Frost Englander, WHITEFORD, TAYLOR & PRESTON, LLP, Falls Church, Virginia; Matthew W. Lee, WILSON ELSER MOSKOWITZ EDELMAN & DICKER LLP, McLean, Virginia; Jeffrey Hamilton Geiger, SANDS ANDERSON, PC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee s

.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.3 PER CURIAM:
Philip Jay Fetner appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his bankruptcy appeal
for lack of jurisdiction and denying reconsideration. We have r eviewed the record and find

no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See

Fetner v. Marino , No. 1:19

- cv

- 838

- AJT

- JFA (E.D. Va. Sept. 27, 2019 ; Oct. 18, 2019). We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

AFFIRMED
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 17

- 2445

_____________________________ S TEVE S TEPHENS , Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for G adsden County

. Barbara K. Hobbs , Judge

. June 19, 2018

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

. W OLF , B ILBREY , and K ELSEY , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

__ ___________________________2 Steve Stephens, pro se
, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Heather Flanagan Ross, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
---

**Exhibit 4**

|                  |                                        |                                                                                                                                                                
|----------------- | -------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|[exhibit4001.jpg] | BDO Dunwoody LLP
Chartered Accountants | 600 Cathedral Place
925 West Georgia Street
Vancouver, BC, Canada V6C 3L2
Telephone: (604) 688-5421
Telefax: (604) 688-5132
E-mail: Vancouver@bdo.ca
www.bdo.ca



|                            
|----------------------------
|                            
|Independent Auditors Report
|                            



To The Shareholders of

Minefinders Corporation Ltd.



We have audited the Consolidated Balance Sheet of Minefinders Corporation Ltd as at December 31, 2007 and the Consolidated Statements of Operations, Changes in Shareholders Equity and Cash Flows for each of the years in the two-year period ended December 31, 2007.  These financial statements are the responsibility of the Companys management.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.

With respect to the consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2007 we conducted our audits in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards and with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States).  With respect to the consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2006 we conducted our audits in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform an audit to obtain reasonable assurance whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement.  An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements.  An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, these consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as at December 31, 2007 and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the years in the two year period ended December 31, 2007 in accordance with Canadian generally accepted accounting principles.

As discussed in note 2 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company changed its method of accounting for functional currency, exploration expenditures and financial instruments effectively January 1, 2007.

(signed) BDO Dunwoody LLP

Chartered Accountants

Vancouver, Canada

March 5, 2008





---
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-20533

Conference Calendar

 

STAN HUNT, of himself as an individual and on 

behalf of himself and all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

GARY JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL 

JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION; JANIE COCKRELL,

Defendants-Appellees.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-01-CV-3443

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

February 19, 2003

Before WIENER, EMILIO M. GARZA, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Stan Hunt, Texas prisoner number 363715, has filed this

interlocutory appeal to challenge the district court’s denial of

his motion for a preliminary injunction in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983

case. Hunt first argues that the district court erred by

declining to hold a hearing prior to denying his motion and by

giving insufficient factual findings and legal conclusions in its

order denying Hunt’s motion. Hunt has not shown reversible error
No. 02-20533

-2-

in connection with either of these issues, as there is no dispute

concerning the basic facts underlying the case, and the district

court’s order denying the motion is sufficient to permit us to

review it. See Kaepa v. Achilles Corp., 76 F.3d 624, 628 (5th

Cir. 1996); see also FED. R. CIV. P. 52(a). 

Hunt also argues that the district court erred in relying on

Hay v. Waldron, 834 F.2d 481, 484 (5th Cir. 1987), in its order

denying his motion. Because this case gives the standard for

analyzing whether a preliminary injunction should issue, the

district court did not err in relying upon it. Finally, Hunt

contends that the district court abused its discretion in denying

his motion because he has made a satisfactory showing as to all

of the required factors. Hunt has not shown that the district

court abused its discretion in denying his motion, as he has not

shown that he has a substantial likelihood of success on the

merits of his suit. See Lakedreams v. Taylor, 932 F.2d 1103,

1107 (5th Cir. 1991). The judgment of the district court is

AFFIRMED.
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We  consent  to  the  incorporation  by  reference   in (a)  the    Registration
Statement  on  Form  S-8  (No.  333-82959)  of  Vizacom,  Inc.  (the  "Company")
pertaining to the Company's  1994 Long Term  Incentive  Plan,  (b) the Company's
Registration  Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-82951)  pertaining to the Company's
Outside  Director and Advisor Stock Option Plan, (c) the Company's  Registration
Statement on Form S-3 (No.  333-55677)  pertaining  to  2,107,712  shares of the
Company's  Common Stock and 29,267  options to purchase  shares of the Company's
Common  Stock,  (d)  the  Company's  Registration  Statement  on Form  S-3  (No.
333-80181)  pertaining  to 3,375,877  shares of the  Company's  Common Stock and
167,052  warrants to purchase  shares of the  Company's  Common  Stock,  (e) the
Company's  Registration  Statement  on Form S-3 (No.  333-93087)  pertaining  to
1,938,191 shares of the Company's  Common Stock, (f) the Company's  Registration
Statement on Form S-3 (No.  333-34950)  pertaining  to  5,413,231  shares of the
Company's  Common Stock,  (g) the Company's  Registration  Statement on Form S-3
(No. 333- 47148)  pertaining to 6,200,800  shares of the Company's Common Stock,
and  (h) the  Company's  Registration  Statement  on Form  S-8  (No.  333-46994)
pertaining  to the  Company's  2000 Equity  Incentive  Plan, of our report dated
March 23,  2001, except with respect to Notes 2  and  17,  the  date of which is
March 31, 2001  with  respect to our audit of the  financial  statements  of the
Company  included  in the  Company's  Annual  Report on Form 10-KSB for the year
ended December 31, 2000, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.  Our
report  contains  an  explanatory  paragraph  that  states  that the Company has
suffered recurring losses from operations and has a working  capital deficiency,
which raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going  concern.
The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that  might
result from the  outcome of  that  uncertainty.  Our  report  also  contains  an
explanatory paragraph regarding a federal income tax matter.





/s/ Richard A. Eisner & Company, LLP
Richard A. Eisner & Company, LLP

New York, New York
April 2, 2001