alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 the Quarterly Report of Keewatin Windpower Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended August 31, 2007 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his 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.

Date: October 11, 2007

/s/ Victor S. Dusik
------------------------------------
Victor S. Dusik
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer and
Principal Accounting Officer)
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

February 7, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

131903 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. JODY MAY and DON EDDY, Stephen J. Markman, Co-Conservators of JOSHUA EDDY, Justices a minor, 

Plaintiffs-Appellees, 

v SC: 131903 

 COA: 266417 

Oakland CC: 2003-049855-NF 

TITAN INSURANCE COMPANY, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 26, 2006 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the questions presented should now be reviewed by this Court. 

p0131 

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

February 7, 2007 

 Clerk
**Exhibit 32.2**

**Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,**

**as Adopted pursuant to Section 906 ofthe**

**Sarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002**

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of KBS Real Estate Investment Trust, Inc. (the “Registrant”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), the undersigned, Stacie K. Yamane, the Chief Financial Officer and Controller of the Registrant, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that, to the best of her knowledge and belief: 

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

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

Date: May 4, 2006
2005 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

8-29-2005

Paripovic v. Atty Gen USA

Precedential or Non-Precedential: Precedential

Docket No. 03-4193

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2005

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2005 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"Paripovic v. Atty Gen USA" (2005). 2005 Decisions. Paper 584.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2005/584
PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-4193

 

ZELJKO PARIPOVIC

Petitioner

v.

*ALBERTO R. GONZALES, ATTORNEY GENERAL

OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondent

* Substituted pursuant to Rule 43c, F.R.A.P.

 

On Appeal from an Order entered before

The Board of Immigration Appeals

(No. A72-780-152)

 

Argued December 13, 2004

Before: AMBRO, VAN ANTWERPEN and STAPLETON, Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed August 12, 2005)

Sunit K. Joshi, Esquire (Argued)

Sokol Braha, Esquire

Joshi & Associates, P.C.

225 Broadway, Suite 705

New York, NY 10007

Attorneys for Petitioner

Peter D. Keisler

 Assistant Attorney General

Civil Division

Richard M. Evans
 Assistant Director

Douglas Ginsburg, Esquire

John D. Williams, Esquire

David E. Dauenheimer, Esquire (Argued)

United States Department of Justice

Office of Immigration Litigation

P.O. Box 878, Ben Franklin Station

Washington, D.C. 20044

Attorneys for Respondent

ORDER AMENDING PUBLISHED OPINION

AMBRO, Circuit Judge

IT IS NOW ORDERED that the published Opinion in the above case filed

August 12, 2005, be amended as follows:

On page 7, replace the entire paragraph in the middle of the page beginning

“Because Paripovic’s deportation . . . (Sept. 30, 1996).”, with the following:

At the time Paripovic’s petition for review (which relates to

deportation proceedings begun prior to April 1, 1997) was

filed, our jurisdiction arose from the former Immigration and

Nationality Act (“INA”) § 106(a) and was governed by the

“transitional rules” of § 309(c) of the Illegal Immigration

Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, Pub. L.

No. 104-208, 110 Stat. 3009 (Sept. 30, 1996). On May 11,

2005, Congress enacted The REAL ID Act, which provides,

inter alia, that a “petition for review filed under former

section 106(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act

. . . shall be treated as if it had been filed as a petition for

review under [8 U.S.C. § 1252], as amended by this section.” 

REAL ID Act § 106(d), 119 Stat. 310-311 (May 11, 2005). 

Thus, our jurisdiction now arises under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, as

amended by The REAL ID Act. Cf. Elia v. Gonzales, __ F.3d

__, 2005 WL 1903723 at *3 (6th Cir. July 22, 2005).

By the Court,

/s/ Thomas L. Ambro, Circuit Judge

Dated: August 29, 2005
In The 

Court of Appeals 

Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

________________________

Nos. 07-19-00333-CR 

 07-19-00334-CR 

 07-19-00335-CR 

________________________

NATHAN GENE COLLINS, APPELLANT 

 

V. 

 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE 

 

On Appeal from the 181st District Court 

Potter County, Texas 

Trial Court Nos. 74,154-B-CR, 76,517-B-CR, 77,804-B-CR; Honorable Dan L. Schaap, Presiding 

 

January 6, 2020 

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

 

Before PIRTLE and PARKER and DOSS, JJ. 

Pursuant to plea bargain agreements, Appellant, Nathan Gene Collins, was 

convicted of unauthorized use of a motor vehicle,1 possession of a controlled substance 

1 TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 31.07 (West 2016) (state jail felony). Appellant’s range of punishment 

was enhanced by two prior state jail felony convictions. Id. at § 12.425 (a) (West 2019). 
2

in an amount less than one gram,2 and bail jumping and failure to appear.3 He was 

sentenced to five years confinement for each offense, with the sentences to run 

concurrently. The trial court’s certifications of Appellant’s right of appeal reflect that these 

are plea-bargained cases with no right of appeal and that Appellant has waived the right 

of appeal. Notwithstanding the certifications, Appellant filed a notice of appeal 

challenging his convictions.

We are required by Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(d) to dismiss an appeal “if a 

certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of 

the record.” By letter of October 28, 2019, we notified Appellant of the consequences of 

the certifications and invited him to file amended certifications providing a right of appeal 

or demonstrate other grounds for continuing the appeals by November 7. We 

subsequently granted Appellant an extension to December 16 to file a response. 

Appellant has not responded to the court’s letter to date. 

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeals based on the trial court’s certifications. TEX.

R. APP. P. 25.2(d).

Per Curiam

Do not publish.

2 TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 481.115(b) (West 2017) (state jail felony). Appellant’s range 

of punishment was enhanced by two prior state jail felony convictions. TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 12.425(a). 

3 TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 38.10(f) (West 2016) (third degree felony). Appellant’s range of 

punishment was enhanced by a prior final felony conviction. TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 12.42(a) (West 2019).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          28,081
<SECURITIES>                                    24,235
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,241
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      2,082
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                58,648
<PP&E>                                          35,363
<DEPRECIATION>                                   9,728
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  91,694
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           16,433
<BONDS>                                        115,447
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            17
<OTHER-SE>                                    (39,636)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    91,694
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                22,232
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                81,371
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,364
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (61,870)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (61,870)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (61,870)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (3.90)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (3.90)


</TABLE>
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


L\_2017336DE.01006001.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 16.12.2017 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 336/60 |

---

Berichtigung der Richtlinie 2006/112/EG des Rates vom 28. November 2006 über das gemeinsame Mehrwertsteuersystem

(
[Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 347 vom 11. Dezember 2006](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOL_2006_347_R_TOC)
)

Seite 12, Artikel 14 Absatz 2 Buchstabe b

Anstatt:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| „b) | die Übergabe eines Gegenstands auf Grund eines Vertrags, der die Vermietung eines Gegenstands während eines bestimmten Zeitraums oder den Ratenverkauf eines Gegenstands vorsieht, der regelmäßig die Klausel enthält, dass das Eigentum spätestens mit Zahlung der letzten fälligen Rate erworben wird;“ |

muss es heißen:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| „b) | die Übergabe eines Gegenstands aufgrund eines Vertrags, der die Vermietung eines Gegenstands während eines bestimmten Zeitraums oder den Ratenverkauf eines Gegenstands vorsieht, der die Klausel enthält, dass das Eigentum unter normalen Umständen spätestens mit Zahlung der letzten fälligen Rate erworben wird;“. |

---
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION

File Name: 15a0720n.06

Nos. 03-3626, 12-4269

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

ANDRE WILLIAMS,

Petitioner-Appellant,

v.

CARL ANDERSON, WARDEN,

Respondent-Appellee.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

ON APPEAL FROM THE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT 

COURT FOR THE NORTHERN

DISTRICT OF OHIO

ORDER

BEFORE: MOORE, GIBBONS, and ROGERS, Circuit Judges.

On July 7, 2015, we vacated the district court’s denial of Andre Williams’s petition for a 

writ of habeas corpus and remanded to the district court for the grant of a conditional writ of 

habeas corpus “unless the State reassesses Williams’s Atkins[ v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002)]

petition consistent with this opinion.” Williams v. Mitchell, 792 F.3d 606, 624 (6th Cir. 2015). 

Ten days later, Williams filed a motion with our court requesting that the attorneys who 

represented him in connection with his federal habeas petition be appointed to represent him in 

any state Atkins proceeding pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3599.1

 

1

18 U.S.C. § 3599(e) details the scope of representation permitted for federally appointed 

counsel, which extends to

every subsequent stage of available judicial proceedings, including pretrial 

proceedings, trial, sentencing, motions for new trial, appeals, applications for writ 

of certiorari to the Supreme Court of the United States, and all available postconviction process, together with applications for stays of execution and other 
Nos. 03-3626, 12-4269

- 2 -

There are two components to a successful claim for appointment of counsel: (1) the 

petitioner must seek to be represented by counsel in “judicial proceedings transpiring 

‘subsequent’ to her appointment,” Harbison v. Bell, 556 U.S. 180, 188 (2009); and (2) the 

petitioner must be “unable to obtain adequate representation,” id. at 189. Williams argues that 

any state Atkins proceeding will be “subsequent” to the federal habeas proceedings in which his 

counsel has already been appointed, and that state-funded counsel is unavailable to him.

We find it appropriate that the district court rule on Williams’s motion in the first 

instance and find any facts that may be necessary to do so. We therefore DENY Williams’s 

motion, without prejudice to its being renewed.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

____________________________________

Deborah S. Hunt, Clerk

 

appropriate motions and procedures, and . . . such competency proceedings and 

proceedings for executive or other clemency as may be available to the defendant.
## Nonresponse Follow

- Up (E

- Mail Text)

Dear < principal or superintendent name>

,

I am contacting you on behalf of the U .S. Department of Education to discuss an opportunity for <district

or school name> to participate in a study that would provide access to the National High School Center’s Early Warning and Intervention Monitoring System (EWIMS) including training and technical support at no cost.

This project, conducted by the Midwest Regional Educat ional Laboratory at American Institutes for Research (AIR) and funded by the U.S. Department of Education’s Institutes of Educational Sciences, is

aimed at preventing high school dropout by using data to identify at

- risk students early in high school and

a ssign struggling students to interventions that get them back on track for eventual graduation.

The timeline for recruiting districts and school s to participate in this opportunity is extremely tight. Would you be able to touch base briefly by phone on < day>, <month> <date> to discuss whether this might be a good opportunity for <district or school name>?

Please feel free to reach me by email or at 312

- 283

- 2318.

Thank you and I look forward to speaking with you!

<name of project outreach recruiter>

<name of project outreach recruiter> Project Outreach

On

- Time Graduation Project Midwest Regional Educational Laboratory
American Institutes for Research 20 North Wacker Drive, Suite 1231, Chicago, IL 60606 t: 312.283.2318 | www.air.org

Per the policies and procedures required by the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002, Tit le I, Part E, Section 183, responses to this data collection will be used only for statistical purposes. The reports prepared for this study will summarize findings across the sample and will not associate responses with a specific district or
individual. Any willful disclosure of such information for nonstatistical purposes, except as required by law, is a class E felony.
|   | (1) |   | The      Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period      ended June 30, 2008 (the “Form 10-Q”)  fully complies with      the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,      as amended; and |   |
|--------|-----|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|

|   | (2) |   | The      information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and results of      operations of the Company. |   |
|--------|-----|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|

|                            |                                                                           |                            |
|---------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------|
|                            | VALLEY FORGE COMPOSITE      TECHNOLOGIES, INC.(Registrant)                     |
|                            |                                                                           |                            |
| Date: August 14, 2008 | By:                                                                  | /s/ Louis J.      Brothers |
|                            | Louis J.      Brothers                                                         |
|                            | President, Secretary      and Treasurer(Principal Executive      Officer) |

----
##### 



Exhibit 31.1
 LEGACY BANCORP, INC.
 CERTIFICATION
Pursuant to Rule 13a  14(a) / 15d-14(a)
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Legacy Bancorp, Inc.;
 2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of
the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the
period covered by this report;
 3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods
presented in this report;
 4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; andc)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most
recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting;
and
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants
auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent function):
 a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting.
 Date:
    
    November 9, 2006
    
    
    
    /s/ J. Williar DunlaevyJ. Williar DunlaevyChief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board
 26
Exhibit 32.2  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  I, Louis J. Brothers, President, Secretary, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer of Valley Forge Composite Technologies, Inc. (the Company), hereby certify to my knowledge that:


| |     |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                | 
| | --- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
| | (1) |  | The Companys quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009 (the Form 10-Q) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and | 




| |     |  |                                                                                                                                                         | 
| | --- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
| | (2) |  | The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. | 




|                      |                                                                                             |                      
|--------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------
|                      |                                                                                             |                      
|                      | VALLEY FORGE COMPOSITE TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
(Registrant)                                     
|                      |                                                                                             |                      
|Date: August 13, 2009 | By:                                                                                         | /s/ Louis J. Brothers
|                      | Louis J. Brothers                                                                          
|                      | President, Secretary, Treasurer, and Chief Financial Officer)
(Principal Financial Officer)