alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

DEARBORN BANCORP, INC.
FORM 10-Q (continued)

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

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



         This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, and accompanies the quarterly
report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 (the "Form 10-Q") of
Dearborn Bancorp, Inc. (the "Issuer").

         I, Jeffrey L. Karafa, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer of the
Issuer, certify that:

         (i)      The Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section
                  13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
                  (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

         (ii)     The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in
                  all material respects, the financial condition and results of
                  operations of the Issuer.



Dated: August 10, 2003
                                               /s/ Jeffrey L. Karafa
                                       ---------------------------------------
                                                   Jeffrey L. Karafa
                                        Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer,
                                                  Dearborn Bancorp, Inc.
Editorial Note on Part 10
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93010, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 10.3026 Verification and justification of claim for preferential tariff treatment. ( a ) *Verification.* A claim for preferential tariff treatment made under § 10.3003(b) or § 10.3011, including any statements or other information submitted to CBP in support of the claim, will be subject to such verification as the Center director deems necessary. In the event that the Center director is provided with insufficient information to verify or substantiate the claim, or the Center director finds a pattern of conduct, indicating that an importer, exporter, or producer has provided false or unsupported declarations or certifications, or the exporter or producer fails to consent to a verification visit, the Center director may deny the claim for preferential treatment. A verification of a claim for preferential tariff treatment under CTPA for goods imported into the United States may be conducted by means of one or more of the following: ( 1 ) Written requests for information from the importer, exporter, or producer;
( 2 ) Written questionnaires to the importer, exporter, or producer;
( 3 ) Visits to the premises of the exporter or producer in the territory of Colombia, to review the records of the type referred to in § 10.3009(c)(1) or to observe the facilities used in the production of the good, in accordance with the framework that the Parties develop for conducting verifications; and
( 4 ) Such other procedures to which the Parties may agree.
( b ) *Applicable accounting principles.* When conducting a verification of origin to which Generally Accepted Accounting Principles may be relevant, CBP will apply and accept the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles applicable in the country of production.
### §36a. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 36a was editorially reclassified as section 4592 of this title.
#### § 11.10 Scope of regulation.

This regulation applies to claims asserted under the Federal Tort Claims Act against the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). It does not include any contractor with FEMA.
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**





Ener1,
      Inc.


500
      West Cypress Creek Road-Suite 100


Ft.
      Lauderdale, Florida, 33309





March
      3, 2006





Securities
      and Exchange Commission


100
      F Street, NE


Washington,
      DC 20549





Re:
            Certification
                Of Principal Executive Officer Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. Sec.
                1350





Dear
      Ladies and Gentlemen:





In
      connection with the accompanying Amendment No. 1 to Quarterly Report on Form
      10-QSB of Ener1, Inc., for the quarter ended September 30, 2005 as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission, I, Kevin P. Fitzgerald, Chief Executive
      Officer of Ener1, Inc., hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
      as
      adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      that:





1)
            such
                Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Ener1, Inc., for the quarter ended
                September 30, 2005, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of
                Ener1,
                Inc., for the quarter ended September 30, 2005, fairly presents,
                in all
                material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
                of
                Ener1, Inc.








/s/
                Ronald Stewart
              Ronald
                Stewart
              Chief
                Executive Officer
              (Principal
                Executive Officer and
              Duly
                Authorized Officer)




A
      signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
      document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature
      that
      appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
      required by Section 906, has been provided to Ener1, Inc. and will be
      retained by Ener1, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
      or its staff upon request.





This
      certification is being “furnished” as Exhibit 32.1 to Ener1, Inc.`s
      quarterly report and shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18
      of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) or otherwise subject
      to the liabilities of that section, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by
      reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act,
      except as expressly set forth by specific reference in such a
      filing.
### §5347. Delivery of bills and resolutions

(a) None of the funds made available in any fiscal year may be used to deliver a printed copy of a bill, joint resolution, or resolution to the office of a Member of the House of Representatives (including a Delegate or Resident Commissioner to the Congress) unless the Member requests a copy.

(b) This section shall apply with respect to fiscal year 2019 and each succeeding fiscal year.

(Pub. L. 115–244, div. B, title I, §111, Sept. 21, 2018, 132 Stat. 2929.)
§ 208.51 General. ( a ) *Purpose.* This subpart identifies the procedures that Sponsoring Agencies must use to request reimbursement from DHS for costs incurred under Response Cooperative Agreements.
( b ) *Policy.* It is DHS policy to reimburse Sponsoring Agencies as expeditiously as possible consistent with Federal laws and regulations.
§ 12.37 Restricted importations. ( a ) The basic permit requirements prescribed by the act of August 29, 1935 (27 U.S.C. 203), shall not be deemed applicable when the port director is satisfied that the liquor is for personal use or for experimental purposes in the making of analyses, tests, or comparisons.
( b ) The production of a basic permit shall not be required when spirits are withdrawn from warehouse under any form of withdrawal entry.
( c ) Blending or rectifying of wines or distilled spirits in class 6 manufacturing warehouses, or the bottling of imported distilled spirits in class 8 manipulation warehouses, shall not be permitted unless the proprietor has obtained an appropriate permit from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.
[28 FR 14710, Dec. 31, 1963, as amended by T.D. 78-329, 43 FR 43454, Sept. 26, 1978; T.D. 82-145, 47 FR 35477, Aug. 16, 1982; T.D. 89-1, 53 FR 51253, Dec. 21, 1988]
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION

HOWARD COHAN,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO.: 9:20-cv-81230-WPD

vs.

BRAMAN PALM BEACH, INC.

a Florida Profit Corporation

d/b/a BRAMAN HONDA OF PALM BEACH

Defendant(s).

____________________________________/

JOINT STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

The Plaintiff, HOWARD COHAN and the Defendant, BRAMAN PALM BEACH, INC., 

a Florida Profit Corporation, d/b/a BRAMAN HONDA OF PALM BEACH, (the Parties) hereby 

stipulate that (1) the Parties have settled this action; (2) Plaintiff voluntarily dismisses this action 

with prejudice against BRAMAN PALM BEACH, INC., a Florida Profit Corporation, d/b/a 

BRAMAN HONDA OF PALM BEACH; (3) the Parties shall bear their own costs and fees except 

as provided for in the Parties’ Settlement Agreement; and (4) the Parties condition the stipulation 

upon this Court entering an order retaining jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the Parties’ 

Settlement Agreement. See Anago Franchising, Inc. v. Shaz, LLC, 677 F.3d 1272 (11th Cir. 2012).

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED October 9, 2020.

By: /s/ Gregory S. Sconzo

Gregory S. Sconzo, Esq.

Florida Bar No.: 0105553

Sconzo Law Office, P.A.

3825 PGA Boulevard, Suite 207

Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410

Telephone: (561) 729-0940

Facsimile: (561) 491-9459

Email: greg@sconzolawoffice.com 

Attorney for Plaintiff

By: /s/ Glenn M. Rissman 

Glenn M. Rissman, Esq.

Florida Bar No.: 899526

STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER 

ALHADEFF & SITTERSON, P.A.

200 East Las Olas Blvd, Suite 2100

Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301

Telephone: (954) 462-9500

Email: grissman@stearnsweaver.com

Attorney for Defendant

Case 9:20-cv-81230-WPD Document 10 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/09/2020 Page 1 of 2
2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on October 9, 2020, I electronically filed the foregoing 

document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document 

is being served this day on counsel of record in this action via transmission of Notices of Electronic 

Filing generated by CM/ECF.

_ /s/ Gregory S. Sconzo

Gregory S. Sconzo, Esq.

Case 9:20-cv-81230-WPD Document 10 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/09/2020 Page 2 of 2
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6777

MICHAEL BAXTER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus THOMAS R. CORCORAN, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-97- 3564-L) Submitted: July 22, 1998 Decided: August 10, 1998 Before ERVIN, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.Michael Baxter, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, David Jonathan Taube, Assistant Attorney General, AnnNorman Bosse, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’sopinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Baxter v. Corcoran , No. CA-97-3564-L (D. Md. May 15, 1998). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Exhibit No. 32.1


Truewest Corporation


File No.  33-56574


Form 10-Q


Quarter ended March 31, 2011




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 Truewest Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Glenn A. Little, Chief Executive and 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, that:




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





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








Date: April 19, 2011
By:
/s/ Glenn A. LittleGlenn A. LittleChief Executive Officerand Chief Financial Officer








A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Truewest Corporation and will be retained by Truewest Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
### §145a. Periodical binding of printed hearings of committee testimony

The Librarian of the Library of Congress is authorized and directed to have bound at the end of each session of Congress the printed hearings of testimony taken by each committee of the Congress at the preceding session.

(Aug. 2, 1946, ch. 753, title I, §141, 60 Stat. 834.)

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Section effective Aug. 2, 1946, see section 142 of act Aug. 2, 1946, ch. 753, title I, 60 Stat. 834.
#### Solomon S. Goldsmith, Respondent, v. Philip Handelman et al., Individually and as Copartners Doing Business under the Name of Handelman & Ives, Appellants.

Present — Peek, P, J., Glennon, Dore, Cohn and Shientag, JJ,
#### § 7.911 What is the purpose of FEMA's age discrimination regulation?

The purpose of this regulation is to set out FEMA's policies and procedures under the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 and the general governmentwide regulations, 45 CFR part 90. The Act and the general regulations prohibit discrimination on the basis of age in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance. The Act and the general regulations permit federally-assisted programs or activities, and recipients of Federal funds, to continue to use age distinctions and factors other than age which meet the requirements of the Act and its implementing regulations.

[55 FR 23078, June 6, 1990, as amended at 68 FR 51380, Aug. 26, 2003]
#### § 122.2 Other Customs laws and regulations.

Except as otherwise provided for in this chapter, and insofar as such laws and regulations are applicable, aircraft arriving or having arrived from or departing for any foreign port or place, and the persons and merchandise, including baggage, carried thereon, shall be subject to the laws and regulations applicable to vessels to the extent that such laws and regulations are administered or enforced by Customs, as provided in 19 U.S.C. 1644 and 1644a.

[T.D. 88-12, 53 FR 9292, Mar. 22, 1988, as amended by T.D. 98-74, 63 FR 51288, Sept. 25, 1998]
§ 130.465 Restricted and prohibited costs. ( a ) SBA prohibitions are consistent with those outlined in 2 CFR part 200.
( b ) An SBDC must not use project funds as collateral for a loan or other such monetary purpose.
( c ) An SBDC must not use project funds for memorabilia, gifts, prizes, souvenirs, entertainment, alcoholic beverages, amusement, social activities, or any other such costs.
( d ) Prior written approval from the AA/SBDC is need for SBDC project funds to be used for the purpose of fundraising activities and costs. SBDCs may include in initial applications and renewal applications proposed fundraising activities. After issuance of an approved cooperative agreement, an SBDC wishing to seek prior approval for new fundraising activities not already approved should follow the prior approval guidance in the cooperative agreement. Prohibited fundraising activities include, but are not limited to: ( 1 ) Costs of organized fundraising, endowment drives;
( 2 ) Financial or capital campaigns; or
( 3 ) Solicitation of gifts and bequests.
( e ) Project funds found to be used in violation of the restrictions in this section may be cause for termination, suspension, or non-renewal of the cooperative agreement.
[88 FR 76647, Nov. 7, 2023]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                            DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                 SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                        39,841,221
<SECURITIES>                                 147,362,020
<RECEIVABLES>                                 28,806,056
<ALLOWANCES>                                           0
<INVENTORY>                                            0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             222,227,292
<PP&E>                                        70,726,775
<DEPRECIATION>                                13,235,681
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               309,034,596
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         17,069,220
<BONDS>                                      166,509,459
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                            0
<COMMON>                                         235,280
<OTHER-SE>                                   116,939,878
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 309,034,596
<SALES>                                                0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              55,303,411
<CGS>                                                  0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 42,061,565
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              26,357,947
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             4,375,814
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (5,566,010)
<INCOME-TAX>                                           0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (5,566,010)
<DISCONTINUED>                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                        0
<CHANGES>                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (5,566,010)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       (.24)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       (.24)
        

</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 20-61557-CIV-DIMITROULEAS

ANTHONY JEROME WALKER, 

MERISIER MODELET, RENEE JAN

HARRIS, TERRY BROWN-MONDESIR, 

MARK MACULA, ANN MARIE BAILEY, 

JOHN MICHAEL MUNRO, JENNIE

TOMASELLO SKULA, LENARD

JEROME WILLIAMS, JR., MARIE 

DEPAROLESA, DAWN CHARLTON, 

DEBORAH MERRILL, MARJORIE 

CONNOR,

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

GRAMPA’S REAL ESTATE INC. d/b/a 

GRAMPA’S BAKERY & RESTAURANT, 

CAROL GRAMPA, 

Defendants.

___________________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion for Sanctions [DE 38] (the 

“Motion”) and the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Strauss [DE 54] (the 

“Report”), dated August 10, 2021. 

The Report recommends that the Court deny the Motion for Sanctions and issue an order 

requiring Plaintiffs Mark Macula and Lenard Jerome Williams to show cause why their claims 

should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. [DE 54] On August 11, 2021, Defendants’ filed 

a notice of non-objection to the Report. [DE 55]. On August 9, 2021, Plaintiffs’ counsel filed an 

unopposed motion to withdraw stating that counsel has lost contact with Plaintiffs.1 [DE 53]. The 

1 The Court notes a Scrivener’s error in Plaintiffs’ counsel’s motion which seeks to withdraw from representing 

Plaintiffs Mark Macula and Lenard Jerome Williams and lists Macula and Williams addresses but states that counsel 

has lost contact with Munro and Williams. 

Case 0:20-cv-61557-WPD Document 56 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/12/2021 Page 1 of 2
Report also notes that Plaintiffs’ counsel has not been able to contact Plaintiffs Williams and 

Macula. 

 The Court has conducted a de novo review of the Report [DE 29] and record and is 

otherwise fully advised in the premises. The Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s reasoning 

and conclusion that the Motion [DE 38] should be denied

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 

1. The Report [DE 54] is hereby ADOPTED and APPROVED;

2. Defendant’s Motion [DE 38] is DENIED;

3. Plaintiffs’ counsel must promptly serve this Order upon Plaintiffs Mark Macula and

Lenard Jerome Williams, Jr. and file a Notice of Compliance in the record.

4. The Court will separately order Plaintiffs Mark Macula and Lenard Jerome Williams,

Jr. to show cause on or before September 8, 2021 why their claims should not be

dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure comply with a Court order.

5. The Clerk is DIRECTED to mail copies of this Order to the addresses below.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, 

Florida, this 11th day of August, 2021.

Copies furnished to: 

All Counsel of Record 

Jerome Williams, Jr.

726 N 26 Ave 

Hollywood, FL 33020 

Mark Macula 

1720 N 62 Ave 

Hollywood, FL 33224

Case 0:20-cv-61557-WPD Document 56 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/12/2021 Page 2 of 2
----

Notice inviting applications for authorisation to prospect for hydrocarbons in block segment L1b of the Dutch continental shelf

(2005/C 331/15)

(Text with EEA relevance)

The Minister for Economic Affairs of the Kingdom of the Netherlands hereby gives notice that an application for authorisation to prospect for hydrocarbons has been received for the segment of block L1 indicated on the map appended as Annex 3 to the Mining Regulation (Mijnbouwregeling) (Staatscourant 2002, No 245), known as ‘block segment L1b’.

With reference to Article 3(2) of Directive 94/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 1994 on the conditions for granting and using authorisations for the prospection, exploration and production of hydrocarbons and the publication as described in Article 15 of the Mining Act (Mijnbouwwet) (Staatsblad 2002, No 542), the Minister of Economic Affairs invites interested parties to submit an application for authorisation to prospect for hydrocarbons for block segment L1b.

Applications may be submitted for 13 weeks after publication of this notice in the Official Journal of the European Union and should be sent to the Minister of Economic Affairs, for the attention of the Director of Energy Production, specifying ‘personal’, Princess Beatrixlaan 5, The Hague, The Netherlands. Applications submitted after the expiry of this period will not be considered.

A decision on the applications will be taken not later than 12 months after the period has expired.

The Minister for Economic Affairs is the competent authority for the granting of authorisations. The criteria, conditions and requirements referred to in Articles 5(1), 5(2) and 6(2) of the Directive are set out in the Mining Act (Mijnbouwwet) (Staatsblad 2002, No 542).

Further information can be requested by telephone (31-70) 379 66 94.

----