alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Federal Maritime Commission","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov","author_name":"Catie-Megan Moran","author_url":"https:\/\/www.fmc.gov\/author\/cmoranfmc-gov\/","title":"SEPTEMBER 2020 ACTIVITY REPORT","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"xSvmofMmJb\"><a href=\"\/september-2020-activity-report\/\">SEPTEMBER 2020 ACTIVITY REPORT<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"\/september-2020-activity-report\/embed\/#?secret=xSvmofMmJb\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“SEPTEMBER 2020 ACTIVITY REPORT” — Federal Maritime Commission\" data-secret=\"xSvmofMmJb\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script type=\"text\/javascript\">\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(c,l){\"use strict\";var e=!1,o=!1;if(l.querySelector)if(c.addEventListener)e=!0;if(c.wp=c.wp||{},c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage);else if(c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if(!t);else if(!(t.secret||t.message||t.value));else if(\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret));else{for(var r,s,a,i=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),n=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=0;o<n.length;o++)n[o].style.display=\"none\";for(o=0;o<i.length;o++)if(r=i[o],e.source!==r.contentWindow);else{if(r.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message){if(1e3<(s=parseInt(t.value,10)))s=1e3;else if(~~s<200)s=200;r.height=s}if(\"link\"===t.message)if(s=l.createElement(\"a\"),a=l.createElement(\"a\"),s.href=r.getAttribute(\"src\"),a.href=t.value,a.host===s.host)if(l.activeElement===r)c.top.location.href=t.value}}},e)c.addEventListener(\"message\",c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",t,!1),c.addEventListener(\"load\",t,!1);function t(){if(o);else{o=!0;for(var e,t,r,s=-1!==navigator.appVersion.indexOf(\"MSIE 10\"),a=!!navigator.userAgent.match(\/Trident.*rv:11\\.\/),i=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),n=0;n<i.length;n++){if(!(r=(t=i[n]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\")))r=Math.random().toString(36).substr(2,10),t.src+=\"#?secret=\"+r,t.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",r);if(s||a)(e=t.cloneNode(!0)).removeAttribute(\"security\"),t.parentNode.replaceChild(e,t);t.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:r},\"*\")}}}}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n"}
Exhibit 23.1









Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm




We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the following Registration
Statements:




(1)
Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-146719) pertaining to the PGT Savings
Plan, and




(2)
Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-135616) pertaining to the PGT, Inc.
2004 Stock Incentive Plan and the PGT, Inc. 2006 Equity Incentive
Plan;




of our reports dated March
18, 2010, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of PGT, Inc.,
and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of PGT, Inc.,
included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended January 2,
2010.














Certified
Public Accountants


Tampa,
Florida


March 18,
2010
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 319 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 319

   To authorize an additional district judgeship for the district of 
                                 Idaho.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 13, 2021

  Mr. Simpson (for himself and Mr. Fulcher) introduced the following 
       bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To authorize an additional district judgeship for the district of 
                                 Idaho.

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

SECTION 1. DISTRICT JUDGESHIP FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO.

    (a) In General.--The President shall appoint, by and with the 
advice and consent of the Senate, 1 additional district judge for the 
district of Idaho.
    (b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--In order that the table 
contained in section 133(a) of title 28, United States Code, will 
reflect the change in the number of judgeships authorized by subsection 
(a), such table is amended by striking the item relating to Idaho and 
inserting the following:

``Idaho....................................................         3''.
 

                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 4.1



THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON


NEW YORK’S FIRST BANK-FOUNDED 1784 BY ALEXANDER HAMILTON


 


 


240 Greenwich
Street, 22W Floor, New York, NY 10286


 


 


 


May 17, 2022


 


Hennion & Walsh, Inc.


2001 Route 46, Waterview Plaza


Parsippany, New Jersey 07054


 


SmartTrust 570 (the “Fund”)


 


Dear Sirs:


The Bank of New York Mellon is acting as trustee for the Fund, consisting
of the unit investment trust (the “Trust”) included in the Registration Statement relating to the Fund. We enclosed
a list of the securities to be deposited in the Trust on the date hereof. The prices indicated therein reflect our evaluation of such
securities as of close of business on May 16, 2022, in accordance with the valuation method set forth in the applicable Standard Terms
and Conditions of Trust and Trust Agreement. We consent to the reference to The Bank of New York Mellon as the party performing the evaluations
of the Trust securities in the Registration Statement (No. 333-262741) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission with respect
to the registration of the sale of the Units of the Trust and to the filing of this consent as an exhibit thereto.


 


Very truly yours,


 


/s/ MARGARITA KALANTAROVA


Margarita Kalantarova


Vice President
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.                  

###### Federal Maritime Commission

# AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING:

Federal Maritime Commission.

# TIME AND DATE:

November 8, 2017; 10:00 a.m.

# PLACE:

800 N. Capitol Street NW., First Floor Hearing Room, Washington, DC.

# STATUS:

This meeting will be open to the public.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

## Open Session

1. Update from Commissioner Dye on Supply Chain Innovation Teams Initiative.

2. Staff Briefing on Economic Analysis and Statutory Issues in Review Process for Carrier and Marine Terminal Operator Agreements.

3. Commission Action on Petition P2-15, Petition of the National Customs Brokers and Forwarders Association of America, Inc. for Initiation of Rulemaking.

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Rachel E. Dickon, Assistant Secretary, (202) 523 5725.

Rachel E. Dickon,

Assistant Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2017-24100 Filed 11-1-17; 4:15 pm]

 BILLING CODE 6731-AA-P
Exhibit 32.2





CERTIFICATION OF THE PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Ness Technologies, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Ofer Segev, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:





1.
The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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: May 5, 2011
By:
/s/ Ofer SegevName:
Ofer SegevTitle:
Chief Financial Officer

(Principal Financial Officer)
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Kevin LANAGAN, Appellant.

No. 07-3112.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: May 7, 2008.

Filed: May 15, 2008.

Matthew Jeremy Cole I, Martin Joseph McLaughlin, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, argued, Cedar Rapids, IA, for Appellee.

John P. Messina, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, argued, Des Moines, IA, for Appellant.

Kevin Lanagan, Cedar Rapids, IA, pro se.

Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Kevin Lanagan challenges the 151-month prison sentence the district court1 imposed following his guilty plea to maintaining a building for storing and distributing cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 856; three counts of distributing cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C); and being a cocaine-base user in possession of firearms and ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(3) and 924(a)(2). For reversal, Lanagan argues that the district court erred in applying a dangerous-weapon enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2Dl.l(b)(l).

After careful review, we find that the district court’s application of the section 2Dl.l(b)(l) enhancement is not clearly erroneous, because a shotgun and ammunition were found in the house from which Lanagan had sold cocaine and kept drug paraphernalia. *See United States v. Harris,*493 F.3d 928, 931-32 (8th Cir.2007) (standard of review), *cert.*denied,-U.S. -, 128 S.Ct. 1263, 170 L.Ed.2d 111 (2008); U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1), comment. (n.3) (enhancement should be applied if weapon was present unless it is clearly improbable that weapon was connected with, offense); *United States v. Annis,*446 F.3d 852, 856 (8th Cir.2006) (generally enhancement applies if gun is found in same location where drugs or drug paraphernalia were stored, or where part of conspiracy took place), *cert. denied,*— U.S.-, 127 S.Ct. 3044, 168 L.Ed.2d 759 (2007).

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

1

. The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
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 Golden Telecom, Inc. (the Company)
on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Alexander Vinogradov, President, Chief Executive Officer and Director 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, that:  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;
and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of the Company. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
5th day November of 2004. /s/ ALEXANDER VINOGRADOV Alexander Vinogradov
President, Chief Executive Officer and
Director
Exhibit 32.1








CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Annual Report of Mexus Gold US, a Nevada Corporation, (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned certify the following pursuant to Section 18, U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002:





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





2.
The information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








/s/ Paul D. Thompson


Paul D. Thompson


Chief Executive Officer


Chief Financial Officer


Principal Accounting Officer





July 13, 2011
EXHIBIT 32.02

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Kana Software, Inc. (the Registrant) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2007 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John M. Thompson, Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, certify, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, that to the best of my knowledge:

(1) The Report, to which this certification
is attached as Exhibit 32.02, 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 Registrant.



|                         |  |  |  |                                                     
|------------------------ |  |  |  | ----------------------------------------------------
|Dated: November 14, 2007 |  |  |  | /s/ John M. Thompson                                
|                         |  |  |  | John M. Thompson                                    
|                         |  |  |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|                         |  |  |  | (Principal Financial Officer)
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gaylon THIEFAULT, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 07-30249.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 8, 2008.*

Filed May 16, 2008.

*453Helen J. Brunner, Esq., Douglas B. Whalley, Esq., USSE — Office of the U.S. Attorney, Seattle, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Michael Craig Nance, Esq., Law Office of Michael Nance, Seattle, WA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: THOMPSON, BEA, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Gaylon Thiefault (“Thiefault”) appeals the sentence imposed by the district court for his violation of his supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing. Because the facts are known to the parties, we revisit them only as necessary.

“Congress did not vest federal courts with the authority to impose a federal sentence to run consecutive to a state sentence that has not yet been imposed.” *United States v. Clayton,*927 F.2d 491, 492 (9th Cir.1991) (citing 18 U.S.C. § 3584(a)). The district court sentenced Thiefault to 37 months’ imprisonment for his federal supervised release violation. At the time of his sentencing in district court, Thiefault was scheduled to be resentenced in Washington state court for an attempted rape conviction. The district court ordered Thiefault’s 37-month sentence to run consecutively to the yet-to-be-imposed Washington state sentence. Under *Clayton,*the district court erred in so doing.

The government asserts the district court’s sentencing error was harmless because, during the sentencing hearing, the district court orally stated the federal sentence should “run consecutive, *if possible,*to any state sentence.” (emphasis added). We disagree. The district court’s written sentencing order, which the district court verified as accurate, does not include the “if possible” condition relied on by the government to claim harmless error. Rather, the written sentencing order unconditionally directs the federal sentence to run consecutively to the yet-to-be-imposed state sentence. Thus, the district court’s sentencing error was not harmless.

In light of the foregoing, we vacate the district court’s sentence and remand for resentencing. *See Clayton,*927 F.2d at 493.

VACATED AND REMANDED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
EX-10.19




 Exhibit 10.19 

Sonim Technologies, Inc. 
 April 13, 2022 

Mr. Peter Liu 
  

	Re:	 Amendment of Offer Letter 



Dear Peter: 
 You are a party to an offer letter with Sonim
Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”) dated July 31, 2013 (the “Original Offer Letter”), as amended by a letter agreement between you and the Company dated February 1, 2016 (the “First Amendment” and together with the
Original Offer Letter, the “Offer Letter”). Reference is made to that certain Subscription Agreement, dated on or around the date hereof, by and between the Company and AJP Holding Company, LLC (the “Subscription Agreement”).
This letter agreement amends the Offer Letter as set forth below: 
  

	 	1.	 Effective as of the execution of the Subscription Agreement by the Company and AJP Holding Company, LLC, you
will serve the Company as its Chief Executive Officer, reporting to the Company’s Board of Directors. 


  

	 	2.	 For clarity, your place of employment is the Company’s principal executive offices and your current annual
salary and target annual bonus shall remain unchanged. 


  

	 	3.	 If the Subscription Agreement is terminated in accordance with its terms prior to the First Closing (as defined
in the Subscription Agreement) (the “Termination Event”), effective on the date of such Termination Event (if ever), you will automatically cease to serve the Company as its Chief Executive Officer and shall revert back to serving the
Company in your title as Executive Vice President of Global Operations (the “Title Change”). If a Termination Event occurs, you hereby acknowledge and agree that you shall not be entitled to any severance or other similar benefits in
connection with the Termination Event, including, without limitation, any such benefits provided in Section 6 of the Offer Letter (as amended by the First Amendment), and the Title Change shall not constitute a termination of your employment by
or with the Company and shall not be a basis for you to claim that you are resigning from your employment with the Company for Good Reason (as defined in the Offer Letter). 



The Offer Letter, as amended by this letter agreement, continues in full force and effect. 

[Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank] 











 Please acknowledge your agreement with the foregoing by signing this letter agreement where indicated below.

  

	
	 Sincerely,
  

	Sonim Technologies, Inc.
	
	 /s/ Robert Tirva

	Robert Tirva
	President, Chief Financial Officer and Chief
	Operating Officer


  

	
	ACKNOWLEDGED AND AGREED:
	
	 /s/ Peter Liu

	Peter Liu
#### Penny ALLEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DOLGENCORP, INC., Dollar General Partners, Dolgencorp Of New York, Inc., Dolgencorp of Texas, Inc., Defendants-Appellees. Beryl Dauzat, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Dolgencorp, Inc., Dollar General Partners, Dolgencorp of New York, Inc., Dolgencorp of Texas, Inc., Defendants-Appellees. Deborah Francis, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Dolgencorp, Inc., Dollar General Partners, Dolgencorp of New York, Inc., Dolgencorp of Texas, Inc., Defendants-Appellees. Regina Franklin, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Dolgencorp, Inc., Dollar General Partners, Dolgencorp of New York, Inc., Dolgencorp of Texas, Inc., Defendants-Appellees. Michael Hadaway, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Dolgencorp, Inc., Dollar General Partners, Dolgencorp of New York, Inc., Dolgencorp of Texas, Inc., Defendants-Appellees. Cathy Thomas, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Dolgencorp, Inc., Dollar General Partners, Dolgencorp of New York, Inc., Dolgencorp of Texas, Inc., Defendants-Appellees. Wanda Womack, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Dolgencorp, Inc., Dollar General Partners, Dolgencorp of New York, Inc., Dolgencorp of Texas, Inc., Defendants-Appellees.

Nos. 07-14569, 07-14570, 07-14571, 07-14572, 07-14573, 07-14574, 07-14575.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

May 23, 2008.

*783Allen J. Schreiber, Mark P. Petro, Schreiber & Petro PC, Birmingham AL, Jere L. Beasley, Roman A. Shaul, Daniel W. Miles III, Beasley Allen Crow Methvin Portis & Miles PC, Montgomery AL, for Plaintiffs.

Trent J. Scofield, Ogletree Deakins Nash Smoak & Stewart PC, Birmingham AL, Melissa M. Hensley, Joel S. Allen, Ronald E. Manthey, Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP, Dallas TX, Keith D. Frazier, Ogletree Deakins Nash Smoak & Stewart, Nashville TN, for Defendants.

Before DUBINA and BARKETT, Circuit Judges, and SCHLESINGER *, District Judge.

*

 Honorable Harvey E. Schlesinger, United States District Judge for the Middle District of Florida, sitting by designation.

PER CURIAM:

Appellants are store managers of a number of Dollar General stores in Alabama. They appeal the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Appellee Dolgencorp, Inc. (“Dollar General”), on Appellants’ claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 2001-2019.

The question before us is whether there is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the Appellants’ primary duty was management. At the time the district court granted summary judgment in this case, the court did not have the benefit of our recent decision in *Rodriguez v. Farm Stores Grocery, Inc.,*518 F.3d 1259, 1264-65 (11th Cir.2008). Our holding in *Rodriguez*could affect the outcome of the present case. Accordingly, we vacate the district court’s grant of summary judgment and remand this case to the district court to reconsider its decision in light of *Rodriguez.**1*

VACATED AND REMANDED.

1

. We express no opinion as to whether summary judgment is appropriate in this case. On remand, the district court should reexamine whether any genuine issue of material fact exists under the *Rodriguez*analysis.
**CERTIFICATION
        PURSUANT TO 18 USC, SECTION 1350,**
 **AS
        ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906**
 **OF
        THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
 
 
 In
        connection with the Quarterly Report of Trinity3 Corporation (the "Company")
        on
        Form 10-QSB/A for the quarter ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities
        and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Shannon
        T. Squyres, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
        18
        U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
        of
        2002, that:
 
 (1)  The
        Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of
        the
        Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 (2)  Information
        contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
        condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 
 Dated:
                  June 24, 2005
              /s/
                Shannon T. SquyresBy:
                  Shannon T. SquyresIts:
                  Chief Executive Officer
 
 
 A
        signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
        provided to Trinity3 Corporation and will be retained by Trinity3 Corporation
        and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
        request.