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  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q of WNC Housing
     Tax Credit Fund VI,  L.P.,  Series 12 (the  "Partnership")  for the quarter
     ended  September  30,  2005 as  filed  with  the  Securities  and  Exchange
     Commission  on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  and pursuant to 18 U.S.C.,
     section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act
     of 2002, I, Wilfred N. Cooper,  Jr.,  President and Chief Executive Officer
     of WNC &  Associates,  Inc.,  general  partner of the  Partnership,  hereby
     certify 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  result  of
               operations of the Partnership.


     /s/WILFRED N. COOPER, JR.
     -------------------------
     Wilfred N. Cooper, Jr.
     President and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.
     November 14, 2005
Before the First Division,

December 7, 1954

No. 58562.

protest 99549-K (San Francisco).

#### H. J. L. Baum Co. and Wheeler & Miller *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of celluloid reindeer the same in all material respects as those the subject of Abstract 56902, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
**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 Quarterly Report of m-Wise, Inc. ("the Company") on Form
      10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities
      and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof ("the Report"), I, Mordechai Broudo,
      Chairman of the Board and Secretary, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
      1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      that
      to my knowledge:





(1)
      the
      Report fully comply 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 result of operations of the Company.





By: 
       /s/ Mordechai Broudo


Mordechai Broudo, Chairman





Dated: November 13, 2007
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7887

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

THOMAS MORANTE,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr.,

Chief District Judge. (CR-95-8, CA-96-129-5)

Submitted: April 17, 1997 Decided: April 30, 1997

Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Thomas Morante, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Oliver Mucklow, Assistant

United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.

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 orders denying

his motion for reduction of sentence pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P.

35, and his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 &

Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's

opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning

of the district court. United States v. Morante, Nos. CR-95-8;

CA-96-129-5 (N.D.W. Va. Nov. 21 & Nov. 22, 1996). 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
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access to publicationsin the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging and locatorservices, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications (CGP). Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event that publicationsare no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:**NASAaerospace flight battery program [electronic resource] : wet life ofnickel-hydrogen (Ni-H2) batteries
pt 1|pt 2|
 
SuDoc Number:NAS 1.15:2010-216729/V.1-2

Item Number: 0830-D (online)

CGP systemNumber:000753179 
November 2, 2018
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Tommie Crosby, Also Known as Bobby Taylor, Appellant.

[633 NYS2d 364]

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Wade, J.), rendered September 17, 1992, convicting him of burglary in the second degree (two counts) and robbery in the third degree (three counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the law, by vacating the sentence imposed; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for resentencing.

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, 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 of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence *(see,*CPL 470.15 [5]).

The trial court’s charge, when viewed in its entirety, does not warrant reversal *(cf, People v Hollis,*106 AD2d 462). The court carefully outlined the defendant’s contentions and drew adequate attention to the possible unreliability of the identification testimony *(see, People v Whalen,*59 NY2d 273).

As the People correctly concede, it is clear from the record that the trial court was laboring under the mistaken impression that it was required to impose consecutive sentences for the two burglaries the defendant committed. The decision of whether to impose concurrent or consecutive sentences is within the discretion of the sentencing court *(see,*Penal Law § 70.25). Accordingly, we vacate the sentence imposed and remit the matter to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for resentencing in the trial court’s discretion.

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Joy, J. P., Hart, Goldstein and Florio, JJ., concur.
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

1

 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SACRAMENTO DIVISION

MARK MCGUIRE,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. TOLLEN, et al.,

Defendants.

2:04-cv-1465 FCD PAN (JFM) P

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’

MOTION FOR FILING OF PHOTO

ALBUM AND PHOTOGRAPHS IN

SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR

SUMMARY JUDGMENT

On September 8, 2006, defendants filed a motion for permission to file a photo

album and photographs in support of defendants’ motion for summary judgment, pursuant to

Local Rule 5-133(b). Good cause appearing, the request will be granted. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that pursuant to Local Rule 5-133(b)

the Clerk is directed to accept for filing a photo album and photographs as exhibits to defendants’

statement of Undisputed Facts in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment.

Dated: September 28, 2006.

14mcgu1465.o

Case 2:04-cv-01465-FCD-EFB Document 24 Filed 09/28/06 Page 1 of 1
United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 30, 2005

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

REVISED JUNE 30, 2005

In the

United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

_______________

m 04-41290

Summary Calendar

_______________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

VERSUS

SALVADOR VEGA-DIAZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

m 5:04-CR-473-1

______________________________

Before DAVIS, SMITH, and DENNIS,

Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

*

Having pleaded guilty of illegal re-entry

after deportation, Salvador Vega-Diaz appeals

hisforty-six-month sentence of imprisonment,

which isto be followed by a three-year termof

supervised release. He argues that his sentence under a mandatory application of the

sentencing guidelines must be vacated in light

of United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738

(2005). We review this issue for harmless

error, because Vega-Diaz did raise it in the

district court.

Our review of the record convinces us that

the district court would have imposed a lower

sentence under advisory guidelines. Conse-

* 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.
2

quently, we vacate the sentence and remand

for resentencing. United States v. Pennell,

409 F.3d 240, 246 (5th Cir. 2005); United

States v. Gracia-Cantu, 302 F.3d 308, 313

(5th Cir. 2002).

The decision to remand makes it unnecessary for us to address whether the enhancement of Vega-Diaz’s sentence based on prior

drug trafficking convictions pursuant to

U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(i) constitutes

reversible error in light of United States v.

Gutierrez-Ramirez, 405 F.3d 352, 353-60 (5th

Cir. 2005). United States v. AngelesMendoza, 407 F.3d 742, 754 & nn.26-27 (5th

Cir. 2005). The district court will have the

benefit on remand of the record supplements

provided by the government relative to this

issue.

Finally, Vega-Diaz arguesthat the “felony”

and “aggravated felony” provisions of 8

U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b) are unconstitutional

in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S.

466 (2000). We agree with Vega-Diaz’s

concession that this issue is foreclosed. See

Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S.

224, 247 (1998); United States v. ManciaPerez, 331 F.3d 464, 470 (5th Cir. 2003).

The judgment of sentence is VACATED

and REMANDED for resentencing.
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

###### United States Mint 

# SUMMARY:

Pursuant to United States Code, Title 31, section 5135(b)(8)(C), the United States Mint announces the Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee (CCAC) public meeting scheduled for March 20, 2007. 

*Date:*                         March 20, 2007.                     

*Time:*                         Public Meeting Time: 9 a.m. to 12 p.m.                               ( print page 11088)    

*Location:*                         United States Mint; 801 Ninth Street, NW., Washington, DC 20220; 2nd floor.                     

*Subject:*                         Review candidate designs for the Dr. Norman E. Borlaug Congressional Gold Medal (Pub. L. 109-395), the 2008 First Spouse Bullion Coins (Pub. L. 109-145), and other general business.                     

Interested persons should call 202-354-7502 for the latest update on meeting time and room location. 

Public Law 108-15 established the CCAC to:
      - Advise the Secretary of the Treasury on any theme or design proposals relating to circulating coinage, bullion coinage, Congressional Gold Medals, and national and other medals.
      - Advise the Secretary of the Treasury with regard to the events, persons, or places to be commemorated by the issuance of commemorative coins in each of the five calendar years succeeding the year in which a commemorative coin designation is made.
      - Make recommendations with respect to the mintage level for any commemorative coin recommended.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Cliff Northup, United States Mint Liaison to the CCAC; 801 Ninth Street, NW., Washington, DC 20220; or call 202-354-7200. 

Any member of the public interested in submitting matters for the CCAC's consideration is invited to submit them by fax to the following number: 202-756-6830. 

(Authority: 31 U.S.C. 5135(b)(8)(C).) 

Dated: March 7, 2007. 

Edmund C. Moy, 

Director, United States Mint.

 [FR Doc. E7-4311 Filed 3-9-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810-37-P
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman,

 Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Kurtis T. Wilder

Elizabeth T. Clement,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 

 

May 29, 2018 

s0521 

Order 

 

Clerk 

May 29, 2018 

156284 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 156284 

 COA: 337141 

Saginaw CC: 08-030784-FC 

ROBERT DERRELL RUCKER, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 18, 2017 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
## Are Further Changes Needed? • Two-capacity units thattransition between low and high capacity differently

- "Onthe fly" transition

- Shut down for some finite interval when transitioning • Test method ofnon-ducted equipment • Others?

## New CD Defaults / NAECA Compliance • Recently initiated efforts to investigate assigning additional CD defaults based on equipment features

- Examples: type ofexpansion device, wi orwlo TDR, capacity

- Resource: ARI certificationtesting database

- This rulemaking or in a separate, focused rulemaking • Will any ofthe proposed changes negatively impact a unit's ability to meet existing NAECA standards?

## Proposed Agenda • Public Hearing on the January 22, 2001 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for the DOEresidential air conditioner andheatpump testprocedure

- General Statements

- Proposed changes on testing & rating specific equipment

- Proposed changes/additions that effect lab testing

- Other Changes?

- New defaults for CD

- Anyproblems with maintaining NAECA compliance? • Public Workshop on othertestprocedure issues: TXVs_and mixed systemrating methods

## BriefHistory • Draftrevision completed June 1996: Distributed for • peerreVIew • DOE workshop held September 25, 1997 • Draft test procedure onDOE web site: October 1998 • Convertedto "PlainLanguage": Summer 1999 • Completes DOE internal review: Fall 2000 • Proposedrulemaking published January 22, 2001

## Revision Objectives • Bring Up-to-Date (last revised March 1988) • Reduce "GrayAreas"; Be More Comprehensive • Stay with U.S. Customary (I-P) units • Goal: No revision to NAECA minimum standards

## Testing & Rating Specific Equipment • Non-defrost heatpumps: 3 options in NOPR • Heat Comfort Controllers: Anyproblems with the proposed algorithm? Do we need to covertwocapacity and variable-speed heatpumps? • Small-duct, high-velocity units: Proposal to test as coil-only units • Rating options for two-capacity heatpumps that can be configured to onlyuse low capacity when cooling

## Lab Testing Changes and Additions • Variable-speed, constant CFM blowers

- Drop requirement for an 8% agreement with the certified SCFM?

- Is the correction to minimum static burdensome?

- Cyclic testuses the approximation ofa step response in air flow • Proposal for addressing leakage in packaged units • Air flow limits when testing a two-capacity coil -only unit at low capacity • No lab-only refrigerant charging criteria; prevent manufacturer consultation on third party testing
OFFICE OF 7liE AflORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Honozsble 0. H. IUlliamaon 

couuty Att.0rn.y 

Eirath county 

driver 

f,otir trustee of 

n School District 

later of anothar suoh 

of your letter to this dspartvising that the sGh001 scald of 

trlct in izrath county has trene 

dlatriot to tie Stram PutUo ~ohool 

t &hOOl DbJtrict in P&O Ph-itO CGlUlt~. 

advise a8 follotrr 

“A perrorr who 16 thk rife of one of *e Sohoof 

Bowa meaers or Ruah creek m4 8he ir aho tha 

Sirtar of amther meaiber of the Rub Creek Board, 

bar made a~liGat%OKl to the Stn8’n Sohool Board 

for the porition of sci~ool Eur Crlver to trussport the Rush Cr*6k Studentr to the straun Sohoo~.’ 
Honorable 0. II. rPlll58maon, w&e i% 

You then inquire if such employment by the Strawn toard 

Is lqal. 

Artisle 432, Penal Cade, provld.8 a8 followa 

*so orfiaer of th58 state or uq orfleer of 

a ny dir tr lc t, I) l l reheal dirtriot, * l l ‘01 member of any 8chool di8txiot, l l l oreated by or 

under authority oi 

th i8 State, l ik l l 

Uk & ~==@ L~~~~W~~o ~~~ 

c c 7nfl.mthe ~ a ppo intwa nt to a ny l l a pcdtfon, 

***employnurntorduty, ot any 

lrl!r 

reon rolated 

8lthl.n the 8ecOnd d9ga-e. by aif ty, or with513 

th8 th5Fd degree by GOll88Il&Ubity to th. person 

l o appointing or 80 voting, or to any other member 

0r eny such b o a r d 0 * l a s r h la h 8uoh p er so n 80 

rppolntlngorvotingnuybe amtmber,rh+athe 

ralery, + 0 + or oaa&nnsatlon of nroh appointee 

58 to be paid for, diraot2.y or indiraotl~, out of 

or iraa publila fund8 OF feb8 of office 05 ans kind 

or ahmoter sbatsoever.m 

Article 433, Penal Code, provido8 es ~0110~s: 

*Tha inhibition, ah forth in thir law rhall 

apply to and inolude + o e pub&+ l Ohoo1 truetoes.* 

It doea not appear fmnn pour oonmunicetion that the 

applloant Sar th8 bun drlver~r po8ltlon in qazeatlon i8 related 

rfthln any of the proh5blted degree8 tG any of the Bard Member8 

of the Strarm Independent SG‘hGO~ DiatriOt, -Oh Board oomntftutes the asp10 5ng aganog in tha in&ant oraeg md we amum 

that no mush re la tioMhip exf8t8. Thme being no conetltutlonal 

or statutory inhibitiGn against l uGh employment, gur inquiry la 

ansmered in the off5mmtlve. 

Said appuoa&, Of GOU?SO~ IUUBt m8et the POqUl~nents of 

Articls 2687a, Revlead Civil Statutoa, md of ZGctlcn 5 ?f ArticlG 
6667b Vexmoa*s Aswatatbd Revised Civil Sktuto8, both u 

8d5Ab by tti pr0~58;ms 0r senate 3lll 1,19 of the Portyeighth Lag5rlature. (V.T.S.L.8. (18th Mg., R.S., pe U.) 

I,. 3. PtGsalbA 

Aeeistanf 

LaP-8
**EXHIBIT 32.01**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

Pursuantto the requirements set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and Section 1350 ofChapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. § 1350),Paul L. Berns, the President and Chief Executive Officer of AllosTherapeutics, Inc. (the “Company”), and David C. Clark, the VicePresident, Finance and Treasurer of the Company, each hereby certifies that, tothe best of his knowledge:

 

1.                                       The Company’sAnnual Report on Form 10-K/A for the period ended December 31, 2009,to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.01 (the “AnnualReport”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) orSection 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and

 

2.                                       The informationcontained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| Dated: September 1, 2010 |                                          |
|-------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------|
|                          |                                          |
|                          | /s/ PAUL  L. BERNS                       |
|                          | Paul  L. Berns                                |
|                          | President  and Chief Executive Officer        |
|                          | (Principal  Executive Officer)                |
|                          |                                          |
|                          | /s/ DAVID  C. CLARK                      |
|                          | David  C. Clark                               |
|                          | Vice  President, Finance and Treasurer        |
|                          | (Principal  Financial and Accounting Officer) |

 

Asigned original of this written statement has been provided to the Company andwill be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its Staff upon request. This certification “accompanies” theForm 10-K/A to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into anyfiling of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after thedate of the Form 10-K/A), irrespective of any general incorporation languagecontained in such filing.

 

----