alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Annual Report of Sunway Global Inc. (the “Company”) on Form
10-K/A for the period ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Liu Bo, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section  
1350 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.





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350 and is not being filed for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be
incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or
after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such
filing.





Date:
      March 6, 2009
                  By:
                  /s/
      Liu BoLiu
      BoChief
      Executive Officer(principal
      executive officer)
Before the Second Division,

December 24, 1941

No. 46740.

#### Protest 67200-K of George Borgfeldt Corp. (New York).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of Abstract 45502 the papier-máché manger sets in question were held dutiable as entireties at 25 percent under'paragraph 1403 as claimed.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

BILL LOCKYER

Attorney General of the State of California

MARY JO GRAVES

Chief Assistant Attorney General

MICHAEL P. FARRELL

Senior Assistant Attorney General

STEPHEN G. HERNDON

Supervising Deputy Attorney General

ALISON ELLE ALEMAN

Deputy Attorney General

State Bar No. 117566

 1300 I Street

 P.O. Box 944255

 Sacramento, CA 94244-2550

 Telephone: (916) 324-5164

 Fax: (916) 324-2960

Attorneys for Respondent

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERT GALLEGOS, Sr, 

Petitioner,

v.

THOMAS L. CAREY, Warden,

Respondent.

CIV-S-04-2741 MCE GGH P

ORDER

Respondent has filed a request to modify the briefing schedule.

1. GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, it is hereby ordered that Respondent’s request

is hereby granted.

2. The scheduling order is hereby modified for Respondent to file the response

within thirty (30) days from the date of this order.

Dated: 10/25/06 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows

____________________________________

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

 

gall2741.po2

Case 2:04-cv-02741-MCE -GGH Document 37 Filed 10/25/06 Page 1 of 1
# EUR-Lex - 52007BP0111(01) - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 52007BP0111(01)

**1. European Parliament decision of 24 April 2007 on the discharge for implementation of the European Union general budget for the financial year 2005, Section VIIIB - European Data Protection Supervisor (C6-0472/2006 - 2006/2170(DEC) **

*
Official Journal 074 E , 20/03/2008 P. 0172 - 0172 *

1.

European Parliament decision of 24 April 2007 on the discharge for implementation of the European Union general budget for the financial year 2005, Section VIIIB — European Data Protection Supervisor (C6-0472/2006 — 2006/2170(DEC)

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the European Union general budget for the financial year 2005 [1],

- having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Communities for the financial year 2005 — Volume I (C6-0472/2006) [2],

- having regard to the Annual Report of the Court of Auditors on implementation of the budget for the financial year 2005 and the Court of Auditors' special reports, together with the audited institutions' replies [3],

- having regard to the statement of assurance as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors pursuant to Article 248 of the EC Treaty [4],

- having regard to Articles 272(10), 274, 275 and 276 of the EC Treaty,

- having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities [5], and in particular Articles 50, 86, 145, 146 and 147 thereof,

- having regard to Rule 71 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A6-0111/2007),

1. Grants the European Data Protection Supervisor discharge for the implementation of the budget for the financial year 2005;

2. Sets out its observations in the resolution below;

3. Instructs its President to forward this decision and the resolution that forms an integral part of it to the Council, the Commission, the Court of Justice, the Court of Auditors, the European Economic and Social Committee, the Committee of the Regions, the European Ombudsman and the European Data Protection Supervisor, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

[1] OJ L 60, 8.3.2005.

[2] OJ C 264, 31.10.2006, p. 1.

[3] OJ C 263, 31.10.2006, p. 1.

[4] OJ C 263, 31.10.2006, p. 10.

[5] OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1995/2006 (OJ L 390, 30.12.2006, p. 1).

--------------------------------------------------
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DIRECTV INC.,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2409 EJG GGH PS

vs.

JACK TURNBOUGH,

Defendant. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

By order filed March 25, 2005, defendant was ordered to show cause, within ten

days, why his answer should not be stricken and judgment entered for plaintiff. The ten day

period has now expired, and defendant has not shown cause or otherwise responded to the court’s

order.

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that the defendant’s answer be stricken, and

judgment be entered for plaintiff.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge's

Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the

Case 2:04-cv-02409-GEB-GGH Document 14 Filed 05/04/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951

F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: 5/3/05

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

directv2409.fsc

Case 2:04-cv-02409-GEB-GGH Document 14 Filed 05/04/05 Page 2 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Leon Wilson Crockett

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2614 DFL CMK P

vs.

Jim Pope

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner who is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis. 

Plaintiff seeks relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

By order filed March 8, 2005, the court dismissed plaintiff’s claims with leave to

amend the complaint within thirty days. The thirty day period has now expired, and plaintiff has

not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s order. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s complaint be

dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 11-110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within

twenty days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file

written objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate

Case 2:04-cv-02614-DFL-CMK Document 8 Filed 10/26/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections

within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v.

Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: October 24, 2005.

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-02614-DFL-CMK Document 8 Filed 10/26/05 Page 2 of 2
No. 54690.

#### Olavarria & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 13315-K, etc. (Wilmington, N. C.).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the-court dismissed the protests.
No. 59587.

protests 252967-K and 153818-K (New York).

#### Keepnews Importers, Inc., and M. Oettinger *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of figures or figurines similar in all material respects to those passed upon in *Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp.*v. *United States*(39 C. C. P. A. 15, C. A. D. 458), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Exhibit 99.2


  Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
      as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


Solely for the  purposes of  complying  with  Section 1,  U.S.C.,  1950,  I, the
undersigned  Chief Financial  Officer of M.B.A.  Holdings,  Inc. (the "Company")
hereby  certify,  based on my knowledge,  that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of
the  Company for the fiscal year ended  October  31, 2004 (the  "Report")  fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) of the Securities  Exchange Act
of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition of the Company.


Dated   February 10, 2005


                            By /s/ Dennis M. O'Connor
                              -------------------------------------
                               Dennis M. O'Connor
                               Chief Financial Officer


                                       34
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 17-10052

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 6:16-cr-00127-ACC-TBS-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ERIC JASON HENDERSON, 

a.k.a. Feezy, 

 Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

________________________

(August 9, 2017)

Before ED CARNES, Chief Judge, TJOFLAT and WILLIAM PRYOR, Circuit 

Judges.

PER CURIAM: 

Case: 17-10052 Date Filed: 08/09/2017 Page: 1 of 2 
2

Jenny L. Devine, appointed counsel for Eric Henderson in this direct 

criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the 

appellant and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). 

Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of 

the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the 

entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is 

GRANTED, and Henderson’s convictions and sentences are AFFIRMED.

Case: 17-10052 Date Filed: 08/09/2017 Page: 2 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES L. LABER and LAURA M. LABER,

Plaintiffs,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY,

INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE,

 Defendant.

CIV. S-04-2078 DFL PAN PS

ORDER 

—NFN—

On October 17, 2005, plaintiffs filed a request for

enlargement of time to file their opposition to defendant’s

motion for summary judgment on the ground they have needed to

attend to the recent deaths and estates of close family members. 

For good cause shown (Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)), plaintiffs shall

have until Monday, October 31, 2005, to serve and file their

opposition to defendant’s motion; defendant may file a reply on

or before November 7. Defendant shall abide by its promise made

Case 2:04-cv-02078-DFL-PAN Document 44 Filed 10/21/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

at the September 28 and October 11 hearings to suspend all

collection activities against plaintiffs until this court’s

decision on defendant’s motion for summary judgment.

So ordered.

Dated: October 20, 2005. 

 /s/ Peter A. Nowinski 

 PETER A. NOWINSKI

 Magistrate Judge

Case 2:04-cv-02078-DFL-PAN Document 44 Filed 10/21/05 Page 2 of 2
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

					NO. 2-04-131-CR

REGINALD DALE PETERS							APPELLANT

	V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS	STATE

	----------

	FROM COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT NO. 8 OF TARRANT COUNTY

	----------

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

	----------

	We have considered “ Motion To Withdraw Appeal” filed by Reginald Dale Peters, pro se. The motion complies with rule 42.2(a) of the rules of appellate procedure.  Tex. R. App. P. 42.2(a).  No decision of this court having been delivered before we received this motion, we grant the motion and dismiss the appeal.  See id.; Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f).

								PER CURIAM

PANEL D:	DAUPHINOT, HOLMAN, and GARDNER , JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: May 6, 2004
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 the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service 

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service, Treasury. 

# ACTION:

Notice of Closed Meeting of Art Advisory Panel. 

# SUMMARY:

Closed meeting of the Art Advisory Panel will be held in Washington, DC 

# DATES:

The meeting will be held September 20 and 21, 2007. 

# ADDRESSES:

The closed meeting of the Art Advisory Panel will be held on September 20 and 21, 2007, in Room 4136 beginning at 9:30 a.m., Franklin Court Building, 1099 14th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Karen Carolan, C:AP:ART, 1099 14th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005. Telephone (202) 435-5609 (not a toll free number). 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Notice is hereby given pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App., that a closed meeting of the Art Advisory Panel will be held on September 20 and 21, 2007, in Room 4136 beginning at 9:30 a.m., Franklin Court Building, 1099 14th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005. 

The agenda will consist of the review and evaluation of the acceptability of fair market value appraisals of works of art involved in Federal income, estate, or gift tax returns. This will involve the discussion of material in individual tax returns made confidential by the provisions of 26 U.S.C. 6103. 

A determination as required by section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act has been made that this meeting is concerned with matters listed in section 552b(c)(3), (4), (6), and (7), and that the meeting will not be open to the public. 

Karen S. Ammons, 

Deputy Chief, Appeals. 

[FR Doc. E7-3943 Filed 3-6-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A19D0395. RODOLFO VEGA BARRIENTOS v. THE STATE.

Rodolfo Vega Barrientos pleaded guilty in September 2009 to armed robbery,

two counts of aggravated assault, hijacking a motor vehicle, possession of a weapon

during the commission of crime, and giving a false name. In January 2019, Barrientos

filed a motion for out-of-time appeal. The trial court denied the motion, and

Barrientosfiled this timely application for discretionary appeal. Because Barrientos’s

application included a copy of the trial court’s order dated February 18, 2019, but not

a stamped “filed” copy, we directed Barrientos on March 25, 2019 to supplement his

application with a stamp “filed” copy of the order within ten days.

However, the denial of a motion for an out-of-time appeal is directly

appealable. Lunsford v. State, 237 Ga. App. 696, 696 (515 SE2d 198) (1999);see also

Wetherington v. State, 296 Ga. 451 (769 SE2d 53) (2015) (addressing merits of direct

appeal from denial of motion for out-of-time appeal following guilty plea).

Accordingly, this application for discretionary appeal is hereby GRANTED pursuant

to OCGA § 5-6-35 (j). Barrientosshall have ten daysfromthe date of this order to file

his notice of appeal in the trial court. OCGA § 5-6-35 (g). The clerk of the trial court

April 18, 2019
is DIRECTED to include a copy of this order in the record transmitted to the Court

of Appeals.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

04/18/2019
No. 59598.

protests 190114-K, etc. (New York).

#### Baar & Beards, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

*358Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of silk scarves or squares similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *The Specialty House, Inc., Bryant & Heffernan, Inc., et al.*(42 C. C. P. A. 136, C. A. D. 585), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Sampling and Analytical MethodsMedicine Lake Coring Project
Three methods of coring were used: 1.) a hammer corer with a 40 pound weight used with a 7.2 cm diameter aluminum core barrel and an 8 cm diameter PVC plastic barrel (one core), 2.) a box core 22 cm in length by 15 x 7.5 cm in width, and 3.) a gravity core with a 50 pound weight and an 8.5 cm diameter PVC plastic liner in a steel barrel. The shallow water coring was conducted using a shallow draft boat with core recovery aided by diving. The hammer core and the box core recovered limited core sections due to overconsolidated gravelly sediment that underlies a thin stratigraphic unit composed of modern lake sediments. The gravity core, which was used in the deeper lake region (core 9), only recovered 27 cm of soupy brown mud. Poor sediment recovery was probably due to gravel-rich sediments, which limited penetration, and failure of core catcher to close (low density mud). The cores were cut and separated into a working and archive sections. The cores are stored at the Coastal and Marine Geology core depository located in Menlo Park, California. The core locator number for the core sections is F299NC.

The core strata were initially visually described. These data are presented as descriptive lithologic logs. Approximately 5 cc of sediment was obtained at 5 cm intervals or at lithostratigraphic boundaries and wet sieved using a 2.0 mm and 0.062 mm screens. The sieve analysis yielded a gravel fraction, (>2.0 mm), a sand size fraction, (2.0 to 0.062 mm), and a silt and clay fraction, (<0.062 mm). The textural percentages and the interpretive depositional environments are presented after each lithologic core description. The sand-size fraction was examined microscopically for grain composition and fossil content.
No. 44054.

#### Protests 948785-G/87811, etc., of A. Stein & Co. (Chicago).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

On the entire record, including an examination and inspection of the samples, it was held that the plaintiffs did not establish a *prima facie*case. The protests were therefore overruled, the court saying: “In the light of the decision of our appellate court in the case of *Robinson-Goodman*v. *United*
      *270
      *States,*17 C. C. P. A. 149, T. D. 43473, the testimony offered by the plaintiffs herein might be considered as establishing a commercial designation for the-involved merchandise different from the common meaning applicable thereto.. However, since the above decision does not appear to be in harmony with other-decisions on the question of commercial designation, we do not feel justified or warranted in basing our decision herein on commercial designation.”
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-6603

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

MICHAEL KENNY CARTER, a/k/a Blaze,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at 

Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Senior District Judge. (3:17-cr-00351-JFA-1)

Submitted: January 26, 2024 Decided: February 5, 2024

Before GREGORY, AGEE, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Kenny Carter, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6603 Doc: 21 Filed: 02/05/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Michael Kenny Carter appeals the district court’s orders denying his postjudgment 

motions and his motions for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no 

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s orders. United States v. Carter, 

No. 3:17-cr-00351-JFA-1 (D.S.C. May 2, 2023, May 24, 2023, and July 28, 2023). 

Carter’s motion titled as a writ and his motions for default, to expedite, for bail or release 

pending appeal, and to voluntarily dismiss his appeal without prejudice are denied. 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

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6603 Doc: 21 Filed: 02/05/2024 Pg: 2 of 2