alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned officer of MailTec, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby
certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that the Company's Quarterly
Report on Form 10-QSB for the nine months ended December 31, 2005 (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 and results of operations of the Company.

                                 /s/ W. Ross C. Corace
                                 ----------------------
                                 W. Ross C. Corace
                                 Chief Executive Officer
                                 Chief Financial Officer

March 21, 2006
#### Wayne Allen JARAWDI, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 87-1222.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 2, 1988.

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Brad Permar, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Alan L. Overton, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PARKER, Judge.

At Jarawdi’s sentencing hearing following his convictions for grand theft and failure to appear, the trial court imposed restitution to the victim in the amount of $94,-*262000.- Jarawdi appeals from the order of restitution. We reverse.

Jarawdi first argues that the trial court erred in ordering restitution to the victim when the victim had recovered from an insurance company damages resulting from Jarawdi’s conduct. We disagree. *See Amison v.*State, 504 So.2d 473 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) (the insurance company is sub-rogated to the rights of the victim and restitution can be ordered for the full amount of loss irrespective of reimbursement to the victim).

However, Jarawdi correctly asserts that the trial court erred in failing to consider his ability to pay the restitution amount, as required by section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1987). We agree and remand for a proper hearing to determine Jarawdi’s ability to pay. *Amison; Pettway v. State,*502 So.2d 1366 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987).

Reversed and remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

LEHAN, A.C.J., and THREADGILL, J., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM AUDITED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF JUNE 30,1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                         494,681
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,700,753
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  1,760,643
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,361,245
<PP&E>                                       1,706,833
<DEPRECIATION>                                 944,292
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,420,913
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,920,232
<BONDS>                                         26,230
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        101
<COMMON>                                         9,020
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,465,330
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,420,913
<SALES>                                     10,386,524
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            10,386,524
<CGS>                                        7,545,176
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,946,620
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              95,382
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (115,113)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (115,113)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (115,113)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2274 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Liquid Crystal Device (LCD) panel 

assemblies for use in LCD direct view televisions. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 29, 2009 

Mrs. FEINSTEIN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Liquid Crystal Device 

(LCD) panel assemblies for use in LCD direct view 

televisions. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN PANEL ASSEMBLIES FOR LCD TELE4 VISIONS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

6 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

7 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

8 new heading: 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2274 IS

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Liquid Crystal Device (LCD) 

panel assemblies for use in 

LCD direct view televisions 

(provided for in subheading 

9013.80.90) ........................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2011 ’’. 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2290 

To extend temporarily the suspension of duty on p-Chloro-o-Nitro Aniline. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 29, 2009 

Mr. BROWN (for himself and Mr. VOINOVICH) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To extend temporarily the suspension of duty on p-Chloroo-Nitro Aniline. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. P-CHLORO-O-NITRO ANILINE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.25.15 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 p-Chloro-o-Nitro Aniline) is amended by striking the date 

7 in the effective column period and inserting ‘‘12/31/2011’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2290 IS

1 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

2 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Project Nos. 12865-002 and 14072-000]

                    The Commission has received two preliminary permit applications deemed filed on February 1, 2011, at 8:30 a.m.,[1]                                          for proposed projects to be located on the Mississippi River, near the town of North Vacherie, in St. James Parish, Louisiana. The applications were filed by FFP Project 17, LLC for Project No. 12865-002, and Northland Power Mississippi River LLC for Project No. 14072-000.                

                    On January 17, 2012, at 9 a.m. (eastern time), the Secretary of the Commission, or her designee, will conduct a random drawing to determine the filing priority of the applicants identified in this notice. The Commission will select among competing permit applications as provided in section 4.37 of its regulations.[2]                                          The priority established by this drawing will be used to determine which applicant, among those with identical filing times, will be considered to have the first-filed application.                

The drawing is open to the public and will be held in room 2C, the Commission Meeting Room, located at 888 First St. NE., Washington, DC 20426. A subsequent notice will be issued by the Secretary announcing the results of the drawing.

Dated: January 10, 2012.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,

Deputy Secretary. 

# Footnotes

1.                             Under the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, any document received after regular business hours is considered filed at 8:30 a.m. on the next regular business day. 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(2) (2011).                    
        Back to Citation      

2.                             18 CFR 4.37 (2011).                    
        Back to Citation      

[FR Doc. 2012-693 Filed 1-13-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
Exhibit 21



                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT



                               State or Other
                               Jurisdiction of
Name of                        Incorporation                  Percent
Subsidiary                     or Organization                 Owned
----------                     ---------------                 -----


High Worth Holdings, Ltd.      British Virgin Islands           100

CBR Finance (B.V.I) Ltd.       British Virgin Islands           100

March International Group      British Virgin Islands           100
  Ltd.

Zhaoqing Blue Ribbon High      Sino-foreign joint venture        60 (1)
  Worth Brewery, Ltd.

Zhaoqing Brewery               People's Republic of China        60 (1)

Zhaoqing Blue Ribbon           Sino-foreign joint venture        24 (1)
  Brewery Noble, Ltd.

Zhaoqing Blue Ribbon Beer      People's Republic of China        42 (1)
  Marketing Company Limited

Zao Yang Blue Ribbon High      People's Republic of China        33 (1)
  Worth Brewery Ltd.

--------------------------

(1)     Represents the Company's effective interest.


<PAGE>
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATION BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO****RULES 13A-15(E) AND 15D-15(E) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT**I, Robert E. Farr, the Chief Executive Officer of Birmingham Bloomfield Bancshares, Inc., certifythat:1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-QSB of Birmingham Bloomfield Bancshares, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presentedin this report;4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have: a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly duringthe period in which this report is being prepared;  b. [Reserved];  c. Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and  d. Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case ofan annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and5. The small business issuers’ other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small businessissuer’s auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer’s board of directors(or persons performing the equivalent functions): a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the small business issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the small business issuer’s internal control overfinancial reporting.Date: May 5, 2006/s/ Robert E. Farr
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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Project Nos. 12851-002 and 14082-000]

                    The Commission has received two preliminary permit applications deemed filed on February 1, 2011, at 8:30 a.m.,[1]                                          for proposed projects to be located on the Mississippi River, near the town of New Orleans, in Jefferson and Orleans Parishes, Louisiana. The applications were filed by FFP Project 7, LLC for Project No. 12851-002, and Northland Power Mississippi River LLC for Project No. 14082-000.                

                    On January 17, 2012, at 9 a.m. (eastern time), the Secretary of the Commission, or her designee, will conduct a random drawing to determine the filing priority of the applicants identified in this notice. The Commission will select among competing permit applications as provided in section 4.37 of its regulations.[2]                                          The priority established by this drawing will be used to determine which applicant, among those with identical filing times, will be considered to have the first-filed application.                

The drawing is open to the public and will be held in room 2C, the Commission Meeting Room, located at 888 First St. NE., Washington, DC 20426. A subsequent notice will be issued by the Secretary announcing the results of the drawing.

Dated: January 10, 2012.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,

Deputy Secretary.

# Footnotes

1.                             Under the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, any document received after regular business hours is considered filed at 8:30 a.m. on the next regular business day. 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(2) (2011).                    
        Back to Citation      

2.                             18 CFR 4.37 (2011).                    
        Back to Citation      

[FR Doc. 2012-696 Filed 1-13-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
#### JOHN R. THOMPSON COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellant and Cross-Appellee, v. NORTHWESTERN MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee and Douglas Schofield, Trustee, Defendant-appellee and Cross-Appellant.

Nos. 7966, 7967.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Jan. 18, 1940.

Galvin & Babin, of Cleveland, Ohio, for John R. Thompson Co.

Garfield, Cross, Daoust, Baldwin & Vrooman, of Cleveland, Ohio, for Northwestern Mut. Life.

Douglas F. Schofield, of Cleveland, Ohio, in pro. per.

Before HICKS, ALLEN, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This cause was heard upon the transcript of the record, briefs and argument of counsel, in consideration whereof, it is ordered and adjudged that the decree from which the appeal and cross-appeal was taken be and is affirmed upon the grounds and.for the reasons stated in the opinion of the District Judge filed July 3, 1937.
<PAGE>
                                                                    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 Annual report of Omni U.S.A., Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the period ending June 30, 2002, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I (We), Jeffrey K.
Daniel of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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

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


/s/ CRAIG DANIEL              VICE PRESIDENT   OCTOBER 12, 2005
---------------------------
CRAIG DANIEL
</TABLE>


                                       49
Cite as 2013 Ark. 401

SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS

No. CR-13-496

JAMES FLOWERS

APPELLANT

V.

STATE OF ARKANSAS

APPELLEE

Opinion Delivered OCTOBER 10, 2013

MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL

GRANTED.

PER CURIAM

James Flowers appealed his convictions for capital murder and aggravated robbery, for

which he was sentenced concurrently to life without parole and 480 months’ imprisonment. 

This court affirmed. Flowers v. State, 373 Ark. 119, 282 S.W.3d 790 (2008). Flowers

subsequently filed a petition for postconviction relief in the trial court pursuant to Rule 37

of the Arkansas Rules of Criminal Procedure. The trial court held a hearing and then denied

the petition by order entered April 29, 2013. Counsel for Flowers, Mr. James P. Clouette,

filed a notice of appeal and then, on June 6, 2013, lodged the record on appeal with this

court. A brief was due to be filed on Flowers’s behalf on July 16, 2013. No brief has been

filed, nor has any request for extension of time been filed. 

The State has now moved for dismissal of Flowers’s appeal from his postconviction

proceedings due to the failure to file a brief. No response to the State’s motion has been filed. 

The State’s motion to dismiss the appeal is therefore granted.
Cite as 2013 Ark. 401

There is no explanation on the record before us for counsel’s failure to file a brief and

abandonment of this appeal after having lodged the record in this court. We therefore

forward a copy of this opinion to this court’s Committee on Professional Conduct. 

2
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

MIDDLE DISTRICT 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

 Respondent 

 v. 

JAVIER ORTIZ, 

 Petitioner 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 219 MAL 2016 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 28th day of September, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of 

Appeal is DENIED. 

Justice Mundy did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.