alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32



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 City Telecom (H.K.) Limited (the Company) on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended August 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned officers of the Company certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to such officers
knowledge:



| | (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 as of the dates and for the
periods expressed in the Report.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: January 27, 2006



/s/ Wong Wai Kay, RickyName: Wong Wai Kay, Ricky Title: Chairman




/s/ Lai Ni QuiaqueName: Lai Ni Quiaque Title: Chief Financial Officer




The foregoing
certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
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



In connection with this Quarterly Report of
East Coast Diversified Corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2014, as filed
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Kayode Aladesuyi, Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial
Officer; Principal Accounting Officer) of the Company, certify to the best of my knowledge, 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; 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: August 19, 2014 | By: | /s/ Kayode Aladesuyi                                                                                                                            | 
|                      |     | Kayode Aladesuyi                                                                                                                                | 
|                      |     | Chief Financial Officer
        (Principal Financial Officer)
        (Principal Accounting Officer)
        East Coast Diversified Corporation |
No. 54098.

#### B. Altman & Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 80795-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
# C_2007141EN.01002301.xml

| 26.6.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 141/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.6.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 141/23

---

Commission notice pursuant to Article 4(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92

Modification by Italy of the public service obligation in respect of scheduled air services between Crotone-Rome-Milan

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 141/08)

In accordance with Article 4(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 of 23 July 1992 on access for Community air carriers to intra-Community air routes (1), the Italian Government has decided to modify the public service obligation in respect of the scheduled air services between Crotone-Rome-Milan, published in
  Official Journal of the European Union C 225, 14.9.2005, p. 13, concerning point 2.5 on the fares applicable to these routes.

1

Official Journal of the European Union

In accordance with point 2.5(b) of the public service obligation, the fares are revised as follows:

| Route | Revised fare |
| --- | --- |
| Crotone-Rome or vice versa | EUR 74 |
| Crotone-Milan or vice versa | EUR 105 |

Route

Revised fare

Crotone-Rome or vice versa

EUR 74

Crotone-Milan or vice versa

EUR 105

The other requirements of the public service obligation published in OJ C 225, 14.9.2005, p. 13, remain unchanged.

---

(1)  OJ L 240, 24.8.1992, p. 8.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM BALANCE
SHEET AND INCOME STATEMENT AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997             DEC-01-1997
<CASH>                                               0                  20,254
<SECURITIES>                                         0                  48,294
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0                 154,277
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0                 230,491
<PP&E>                                               0                  51,518
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0                  31,649
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0                 298,385
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0                  55,966
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             0                   7,052
<OTHER-SE>                                           0                 233,682
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0                 298,385
<SALES>                                        182,140                 497,217
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0                       0
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  160,107                 436,647
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    82                     732
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  51                     151
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 23,106                  62,778
<INCOME-TAX>                                     9,545                  25,962
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                    13,561                  36,816
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .19                     .53
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .19                     .51
        


</TABLE>
Exhibit 23

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM



The Board of Directors
First South Bancorp, Inc. and subsidiary
Spartanburg, South Carolina


We consent to the  incorporation by reference in the  Registration  Statement on
Form S-8 (No.  333-128522),  of First South  Bancorp,  Inc., of our report dated
March 9, 2006, related to the audit of the consolidated  balance sheets of First
South  Bancorp,  Inc.  as  of  December  31,  2005  and  2004  and  the  related
consolidated  statements of income,  stockholders' equity and cash flows for the
three year period ended December 31, 2005 which are included in the December 31,
2005 Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of First South Bancorp, Inc.



/s/ Cherry, Bekaert & Holland, L.L.P.


Charlotte, North Carolina
March 29, 2006
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Melissa Fornal, Appellant.

[633 NYS2d 372]

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Pano Z. Patsalos, J.), rendered November 8, 1993, convicting her of manslaughter in the first degree, upon her plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the April 1, 1994, amendment to Correction Law § 851 (2) (L 1994, ch 60, § 42), which, *inter alia,*precludes inmates convicted of manslaughter in the first degree from participating in a "work release program” (Correction Law § 851 [3]), constitutes an ex post facto law and deprives her of due process. The amendment was enacted after the defendant was sentenced and applies to those inmates who were not participating in a work release program as of April 1, 1994 (L 1994, ch 60, § 46).

This issue is improperly raised on the direct appeal from the judgment of conviction, as it does not affect the propriety of the defendant’s sentence *(see, e.g., People v Curtis,*143 AD2d 1030; *People v Walters,*91 AD2d 843). The defendant’s remedy, *362if she be so advised, is a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to challenge the actions of prison officials and the constitutionality of the amendment as applied to her *(see, e.g., Matter of Jandelli v Coughlin,*217 AD2d 733; *Matter of McCormack v Posillico,*213 AD2d 913). In any event, were we to reach the issue, we would find it to be without merit *(see, Matter of Jandelli v Coughlin, supra; Matter of McCormack v Posillico, supra; see also, People v Miller,*79 AD2d 687, *cert denied*452 US 919).

We conclude that the defendant’s sentence was not excessive *(see, People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80). The court kept the promise made as part of the negotiated plea agreement that it would not impose a sentence greater than 4 to 12 years *(see, e.g., People v Mercer,*204 AD2d 741; *People v Chariot,*203 AD2d 374; *People v Kazepis,*101 AD2d 816). Balletta, J. P., Miller, O’Brien and Copertino, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Forms S-8 Nos. 33-00175, 33-16187, 33-00176, 2-76657, 2-91931, 33-16188,
33-38361, 2-40012, 2-87193, 2-61721, 2-89418, 33-38360, 33-38361, 33-52760,
33-52758, 33-52756, 33-52762, 333-16113, 333-56119, 333-56752, 333-62759,
333-68566, and 333-100436 and Form S-3 No. 333-46329) of Keane, Inc. and in the
related Prospectuses of our report dated February 10, 2003, except for Note Q,
as to which the date is February 28, 2003, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements of Keane, Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K)
for the year ended December 31, 2002.


                                                  /s/ Ernst and Young LLP

BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS
March 21, 2003
No. 64906.

#### Justin Tharaud & Son, Inc., and J. J. Murphy & Co. *v.*United States,

protests 144016-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of Rockingham earthenware similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Justin Tharaud & Sons, Inc., et al.*v. *United States*(44 Cust. Ct. 216, C.D. 2177), the merchandise was held dutiable as follows: (a) The items entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption prior to January 1, 1948, at 12% percent ad valorem under paragraph 210, as modified by the trade agreement with the United Kingdom (T.D. 49753), and (b) as to the items entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on and after January 1, 1946, at 20 cents per dozen articles, but not less than 7% percent nor more than 25 percent ad valorem, under said paragraph, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T.D. 51802).
Exhibit 10.2

 

FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE
 PMC COMMERCIAL TRUST
  2005 EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN

 

THIS FIRST AMENDMENT (the “Amendment”) to the PMC Commercial Trust 2005 Equity Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) is effective as of the date this Amendment is approved by the shareholders of PMC Commercial Trust (the “Company”).

 

W I T N E S S E T H:

 

WHEREAS, the Plan was originally adopted by the Company’s Board of Trust Managers (the “Board”) on March 5, 2005, and approved by the shareholders of the Company on June 11, 2005 (unless otherwise defined herein, capitalized terms defined in the Plan, when used herein, shall have the respective meanings set forth therein);

 

WHEREAS, the Board now finds it desirable and in the best interest of the Company to amend the Plan, subject to approval by the shareholders of the Company, to (i) increase the number of Shares to be reserved and authorized for issuance under the Plan by 1,000,000 Shares to 1,500,000 Shares; and (ii) increase the limitation on the number of Restricted Shares that may be granted to all Independent Trust Managers in the aggregate during any fiscal year.

 

NOW THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows:

 

1.                                      Increase in Shares Issuable.  The first sentence of Section 3(a) of the Plan is amended as follows:

 

“The maximum number of Shares reserved and available for issuance under the Plan shall be 1,500,000 Shares, subject to adjustment as provided in Section 3(b).”

 

2.                                      Increase in Restricted Share Limitation.  The final sentence of Section 6(a) of the Plan is amended as follows:

 

“No more than 20,000 Restricted Shares may be granted to all executive officers in the aggregate and no more than 500,000 Restricted Shares may be granted to all Independent Trust Managers in the aggregate during any fiscal year.”

 











 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Amendment to be executed by its duly authorized officer.

 

	
 
    	
 
    	
PMC   COMMERCIAL TRUST
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
By:
    	
/S/   Jan F. Salit
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
Name:   Jan. F. Salit
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
Title:   President and Secretary
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. Fr ederick 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'sopinion 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 withoral 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
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

216 CA 11-02071 PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, AND MARTOCHE, JJ.

IN THE MATTER OF THE ARBITRATION BETWEEN NAIL IT CONSTRUCTION, INC., DOING BUSINESS AS CARLSON CONSTRUCTION, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,

AND ORDER
GERALD CARLSON AND TARA CARLSON, ALSO KNOWN AS TARA HUSTON, RESPONDENTS-RESPONDENTS.

SELLSTROM LAW FIRM, LLP, JAMESTOWN (STEPHEN E. SELLSTROM OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER-APPELLANT.
BLY, SHEFFIELD, BARGAR & PILLITTIERI, JAMESTOWN (LANA M. HUSTON OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENTS-RESPONDENTS.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Chautauqua County (James H. Dillon, J.), entered June 15, 2011 in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75. The order remanded this matter to the American Arbitration Association for new proceedings in accordance with its “Regular Track” procedures. It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in the decision at Supreme Court.

Entered: March 16, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
Before the Second Division,

May 5, 1955

No. 59025.

protests 225513-K, etc. (New York).

#### Greatrex, Ltd., and D. C. Andrews & Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of traveling irons similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Greatrex, Limited,*and *J. J. Gavin & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(33 Cust. Ct. 79, C. D. 1639), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
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

JOHN EPPS, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2014 LKK DAD P

vs.

K. MENDOZA POWERS, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action

seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate

Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local General Order No. 262.

On April 12, 2006, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations

herein which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections

to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Plaintiff has filed

objections to the findings and recommendations and requests the appointment of counsel.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72-

304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the

entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and

by proper analysis. In addition, for the reasons set forth in the magistrate judge’s April 12, 2006

Case 2:04-cv-02014-LKK -DAD Document 22 Filed 07/07/06 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

order denying appointment of counsel, plaintiff’s renewed request for the appointment of counsel

will be denied.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed April 12, 2006, are adopted in full; 

2. Plaintiff’s request for the appointment of counsel, filed on May 31, 2006, is

denied; and

3. This action is dismissed due to plaintiff’s failure to state a cognizable claim. 

DATED: July 6, 2006.

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

/epps2014.804

Case 2:04-cv-02014-LKK -DAD Document 22 Filed 07/07/06 Page 2 of 2
## Budget

### Strategic Plans

    - Strategic Plan FY 2022-2026
    - Strategic Plan FY 2018-2022
    - Strategic Plan FY 2014-2018 
    - Strategic Plan FY 2010-2015
    - Strategic Plan FY 2009-2014
    - Strategic Plan FY 2006-2011
    - Strategic Plan FY 2003-2008
    - Strategic Plan FY 2000-2005
    - Strategic Plan FY 1997-2002

### Budget

    - FY 2025 Performance Budget and Justification
    - FY 2024 Performance Budget and Justification
    - FY 2023 Performance Budget and Justification
    - FY 2022 Performance Budget and Justification
    - FY 2021 Performance Budget and Justification
    - FY 2020 Performance Budget and Justification
    - FY 2019 Performance Budget and Justification
    - FY 2018 Performance Budget and Justification
    - FY 2017 Performance Bud get and Justification
    - FY 2016 Performance Budget and Justification
    - FY 2015 Performance Budget and Justification
    - FY 2014 Performance Budget and Justification
    - FY 2013 Performance Budget and Justification
    - FY 2012 Performance Budget and Justification  
    - FY 2011 Performance Budget and Justification
    - FY 2010 Performance Budget and Justification
    - FY 2009 Integrated Budget Request and Annual Performance Report
    - FY 2008 Integrated Budget Request and Annual Performance Report
    - FY 2007 Integrated Budget Request and Annual Performance Report
    - FY 2006 Integrated Budget Request and Annual Performance Report
    - FY 2005 Integrated Budget Request and Annual Performance Report
    - FY 2004 Integrated Annual Performance Plan and Budget Request
    - FY 2003 Integrated Budget Request and Annual Performance Plan, March 2002
    - FY 2002 Budget Request, April 2001
    - FY 2001 Budget Request

### Performance Reports

    - Performance and Accountability Report (FY 2023)
    - Performance and Accountability Report (FY 2022)
    - Performance and Accountability Report (FY 2021)
    - Performance and Accountability Report (FY 2020)
    - Performance and Accountability Report (FY 2019)
    - Performance and Accountability Report (FY 2018)
    - Performance and Accountability Report (FY 2017)
    - Performance and Accountability Report (FY 2016)
    - Performance and Accountability Report (FY 2015)
    - Performance and Accountability Report (FY 2014)
    - Performance and Accountability Report (FY 2013)
    - Performance and Accountability Report (FY 2012)
    - Performance and Accountability Report (FY 2011)
    - Performance and Accountability Report (FY 2010)
    - Performance and Accountability Report (FY 2009)
    - Performance and Accountability Report (FY 2008)
    - Performance and Accountability Report (FY 2007)
    - Annual Performance Report, (FY 2006)
    - Annual Performance Report, (FY 2005)
    - Annual Performance Report, (FY 2004)
    - Annual Performance Report, (FY 2003)
    - Annual Performance Report, (FY 2002)
    - Annual Performance Report, (FY 2001 )
    - Annual Performance Report, (FY 2000 )
    - Annual Performance Report, (FY 1999 )