alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit
      32.2**





**Certification
      Pursuant To**


**Section
      906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**





The
      undersigned, in the capacities and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies
      that:




1.  This
      quarterly report of Affinity Media International Corp. 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 operation of Affinity Media International
      Corp.




Date:November
                14, 2006
            By:
            **/s/
              Howard
              Cohl**Howard
                Cohl
              President




A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
      authentications, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
      in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
      by Section 906, has been provided to Affinity Media International Corp. and
      will
      be retained by Affinity Media International Corp. and furnished to the
      Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<PAGE>   1




                                   EXHIBIT 21
                                 TO FORM 10-K OF
                           SEA PINES ASSOCIATES, INC.

                   Subsidiaries of Sea Pines Associates, Inc.

         Sea Pines Company, Inc., a South Carolina corporation, a wholly-owned
and the only subsidiary of Sea Pines Associates, Inc. The active subsidiaries of
Sea Pines Company, Inc. are:

         (a)      Sea Pines Real Estate Company, Inc., a South Carolina
                  corporation doing business as Sea Pines Real Estate Company.

         (b)      Sea Pines Senior Living Center, Inc., a South Carolina
                  corporation.

         (c)      Sea Pines Forest Preserve Conservation Association, Inc., a
                  Delaware corporation.

         (d)      Lighthouse Realty, Inc., a South Carolina corporation.

         (e)      The Hilton Head Company, Inc., a South Carolina corporation.

         (f)      Sea Pines/TidePointe, Inc., a South Carolina corporation.

         (g)      Fifth Golf Course Club, Inc., a Delaware corporation.
#### McDANIEL WELDING SERVICE, INC. v. STATE of Louisiana DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY.

No. 88-OC-1056.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 20, 1988.

In re McDaniel Welding Service, Inc.; applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and supervisory writs; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. CA88 0176; State of Louisiana Dept, of Environmental Quality.

Denied.
EXHIBIT 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       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 BigString  Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2006 (the "Report"),  I,
Darin M. Myman,  President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, do hereby
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss.1350,  as adopted  pursuant to ss.906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

(1)      the Report fully complies with the requirements of ss.13(a) or 15(d) of
         the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. ss.78m or 78o(d), and,

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



Dated:  August 11, 2006                      /s/ Darin M. Myman
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Darin M. Myman
                                           President and Chief Executive Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S.J. Res. 18 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. J. RES. 18

  Honoring the World War II crewmembers of the U.S.S. Alabama on the 
  occasion of the 1999 annual reunion of the U.S.S. Alabama Crewmen's 
                              Association.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 13, 1999

  Mr. Shelby (for himself and Mr. Sessions) introduced the following 
joint resolution; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                           Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
  Honoring the World War II crewmembers of the U.S.S. Alabama on the 
  occasion of the 1999 annual reunion of the U.S.S. Alabama Crewmen's 
                              Association.

Whereas the members of the crew of the battleship U.S.S. Alabama (BB-60) during 
        World War II were a courageous group who braved both Arctic chill and 
        Pacific heat to help defend our great country against enemy oppression;
Whereas the U.S.S. Alabama crewed by those men was awarded nine battle stars and 
        shot down 22 enemy aircraft; and
Whereas the U.S.S. Alabama Crewmen's Association is holding its annual reunion 
        on April 15 to 18, 1999: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. COMMENDATION AND RECOGNITION OF CREWMEN OF THE U.S.S. 
              ALABAMA.

    The United States honors the 6,300 persons who were members of the 
U.S.S. Alabama's crew during World War II, commends and thanks them for 
their sacrifice and service in the defense of the United States, and 
recognizes those among them who are assembling April 15 to 18, 1999, as 
the U.S.S. Alabama Crewmen's Association on the occasion of the 
association's 1999 annual reunion.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 52 (Friday, March 16, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 15737]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-6539]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings Notice

TIME AND DATE: Wednesday, March 21, 2012, 2 p.m.-3 p.m.

PLACE: Hearing Room 420, Bethesda Towers, 4330 East West Highway, 
Bethesda, Maryland.

STATUS: Commission Meeting--Open to the Public.

Matters To Be Considered

    Briefing Matter: Sec.  1112 Lab Withdrawal, Codification & Audit 
Provisions. A live webcast of the Meeting can be viewed at 
www.cpsc.gov/webcast.

TIME AND DATE: Wednesday, March 21, 2012; 3 p.m.-4 p.m.

PLACE: Hearing Room 420, Bethesda Towers, 4330 East West Highway, 
Bethesda, Maryland.

STATUS: Closed to the Public.

Matter To Be Considered

Compliance Status Report

    The Commission staff will brief the Commission on the status of 
compliance matters.
    For a recorded message containing the latest agenda information, 
call (301) 504-7948.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Todd A. Stevenson, Office of the 
Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West 
Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, (301) 504-7923.

    Dated: March 13, 2012.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-6539 Filed 3-14-12; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
**Exhibit
      32.1**







**INDEX
      OIL AND GAS, INC.**


**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 Index Oil and Gas, Inc. on Form 10-QSB
      for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Lyndon West, Chief
      Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.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 results of operations of the Company.





A
      signed
      original of this written state ment
      required by Section 906 has been provided to Index Oil and Gas, Inc. and will
      be
      retained by Index Oil and Gas, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
      Commission or its staff upon request.











/s/
      Lyndon West


Lyndon
        West


Chief
      Executive Officer


November
      14, 2006
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7290

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MICHAEL DELANEY JOHNSON, a/k/a Jamil Abdul Aziz, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge. (CR-93-390, CA-97-860-2-18) Submitted: November 19, 1998 Decided: December 3, 1998 Before HAMILTON and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Delaney Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Bruce Howe Hendricks, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Michael Delaney Johnson seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Johnson , Nos. CR93-390; CA-97-860-2-18 (D.S.C. Aug. 1, 1997). 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.

AFFIRMED
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19
- 1708

MARCUS D. KELLY , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. QVC , Defendant

– Appellee , and KATHY MCGEARY, Employee Relations; MIKE GEORGE, CEO of QVC; STERLING INFOSYSTEMS, Compliance Department; MS. CLARE HART , Defendants.

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

. R. Bryan Harwell, Chief District Judge. ( 4:17

- cv
- 02858

- RBH )

Submitted : November 19, 2019 Decided: November 21, 2019

Before WILKINSON and RICHARDSON , Circuit Judges , and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.2 Marcus D. Kelly , Appellant Pro Se. William Lee Duda , OGLETREE DEAKINS NA SH SMOAK & STEWART, PC , Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.3 PER CURIAM: Marcus D. Kelly appeals the district court’s order s denying relief on his employment
discrimination complaint. The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2012). The magistrate judge recommended that
relief be denied and advised Kelly that failure to file timely , specific objections to this
recommendation coul d waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the
recommendation. The timely filing of specific objections to a magistrate judge’s recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been warned of the consequences of noncompliance. United States v. Midg ette , 478 F.3d 616, 62 1

- 2 2 (4th Cir. 2007) ; see also Thomas v. Arn , 474 U.S. 140 , 154

- 55 (1985). Although Kelly filed timely objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation, he has waived appellate review because the objections were not specific
to the particularized legal recommendations made by the magistrate judge. See Midgette , 478 F.3d at 622 (holding “ that to preserve for appeal an issue in a magistrate judge’s report,

a party must object to the finding or recommendation on that issue with sufficient specificity so as reasonably to alert the district court of the true ground for the objection”)

. *

* We further note tha t , in his informal brief, Kelly fail s to contest the district court ’s order finding that he failed to exhaust several of his claims . Thus, he has forfeited appellate review of th at order as well. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b) ; Jackson v. Lightsey , 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved in that brief.”).4 Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. 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
EXHIBIT 32.2
  , Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
 (1)
    
    the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended March
31, 2010 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934(15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and
 (2)
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
  /s/ David M. Gandossi

David M. Gandossi
Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 99.1

              CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO
                SECTION 302(a) OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      I, Jiangping Jiang, certify that:

      1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Universal
Travel Group.

      2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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
quarterly report;

      3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly 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 quarterly report is being prepared;
and

            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; 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 registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

            a) all significant deficiencies and material weakness in the design
or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial data; and

            b) 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: August 14, 2007                /s/ Jiangping Jiang
                                     -------------------------------------------
                                     Name: Jiangping Jiang
                                     Title: Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
                                            (Principal Executive Officer)
#### Michael Ray ELMORE, Petitioner, v. CITY OF ORANGE CITY, Respondent.

No. 88-565.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

July 28, 1988.

Lawrence J. Nixon and Delia A. Doyle, Daytona Beach, for petitioner.

Jose B. Alvarez, DeLand, for respondent.

DANIEL, Judge.

Petitioner, Michael Ray Elmore, was terminated from his employment with the Orange City Police Department. After unsuccessfully pursuing his administrative remedies, Elmore filed a notice of administrative appeal in the Circuit Court, Seventh Judicial Circuit. Respondent, Orange City, filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on the basis that the proper remedy was certiora-ri. The circuit court entered an order granting the motion to dismiss, and Elmore now seeks review of that order by certiora-ri. We have jurisdiction pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.030(b)(2).

*998Elmore contends that instead of granting the motion to dismiss, the circuit court should have treated the appeal as a certio-rari proceeding. For support, Elmore cites Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.040(c), which states that if a party seeks an improper remedy, the cause shall be treated as if the proper remedy had been sought, provided that it shall not be the responsibility of the court to seek the proper remedy.

In determining the merits of the petition, we cannot consider factual assertions unsupported by the available record. The circuit court did not articulate the reasons for granting the motion to dismiss, but the sole basis for the motion was that certiorari, and not an appeal, was the proper remedy. Unless there is some jurisdictional impediment1, a case should not be dismissed on the basis that an improper remedy has been sought. Rule 9.040(c) must be complied with by courts acting in their review capacity. *See Pridgen v. Board of County Commissioners,*389 So.2d 259 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980), *rev. denied,*397 So.2d 777 (Fla.1981).

Because the respondent city government is not an administrative agency as contemplated by the Administrative Procedure Act (Chapter 120, Florida Statutes), Elmore had no statutory right to an appeal. *See Cherokee Crushed Stone v. City of Miramar,*421 So.2d 684 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). Therefore, certiorari was the proper remedy. As it appears there was no jurisdictional bar in treating the appeal as a certiorari proceeding, the circuit court should have followed that procedure. Accordingly, the order granting the motion to dismiss is quashed.

WRIT ISSUED.

DAUKSCH and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.

1

. *See, e.g., Johnson v. Citizens State Bank,*518 So.2d 410 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988).
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 57 (Friday, March 23, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 17102]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-6985]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

THE NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES

Meetings of Humanities Panel

AGENCY: The National Endowment for the Humanities, National Foundation 
on the Arts and the Humanities

ACTION: Cancellation of Panel Meeting.

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

    Notice is hereby given of the cancellation of the following meeting 
of the Humanities Panel at the Old Post Office, 1100 Pennsylvania 
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20506, which was published in the Federal 
Register on March 13, 2012, 77 FR 14836.

DATES: April 23, 2012.
    Time: 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Room: 315.
    Program: This meeting will review applications for The Summer 
Seminars and Institutes grant program, submitted to the Division of 
Education Programs, at the March 1, 2012 deadline.

Lisette Voyatzis,
Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2012-6985 Filed 3-22-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7536-01-P
```
EXHIBIT 32.2








Certification
by the Chief Financial Officer


of


Boardwalk
GP, LLC


pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350


(as
adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)








Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the
undersigned chief financial officer of Boardwalk GP, LLC hereby certifies, to
such officer's knowledge, that the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period
ended June 30, 2008, (the "Report") of Boardwalk Pipeline Partners, LP (the
"Partnership") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Partnership.





July 29,
2008


/s/  Jamie
L.
Buskill


Jamie L.
Buskill


Senior
Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer


(Principal
Financial Officer)
#### Gary Dean SPEIGHTS v. STATE of Mississippi.

No. 57317.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Jan. 6, 1988.

Delos H. Burks, Stewart, Burks, Pace & Carroll, Picayune, for appellant.

Edwin Lloyd Pittman, Atty. Gen., by Deirdre D. McCrory, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.

Before ROY NOBLE LEE, C.J., and ANDERSON and ZUCCARO, JJ.

AFFIRMED.

HAWKINS and DAN M. LEE, P.JJ., and PRATHER, ROBERTSON, SULLIVAN and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-50646

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

SERGIO PENA-GONZALES,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

(P-97-CR-42-1)

May 11, 1998

Before JOHNSON, SMITH, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Sergio Pena-Gonzales appeals his conviction for possession

with intent to distribute marijuana, arguing that the district

court erred in denying his motion to suppress the evidence of the

marijuana.

A Texas Department of Public Safety Trooper found the

marijuana during a consent search of Pena-Gonzales’ vehicle

following a traffic stop. Pena-Gonzales argues that the traffic

stop for violation of Texas’ window tint laws was a pretext for the
2

Trooper’s ulterior belief that the vehicle was carrying drugs. He

also argues that he was prevented from challenging the reliability

of the information that he was carrying drugs.

The district court did not err in denying Pena-Gonzales’s

motion to suppress. Pena-Gonzales does not challenge the district

court’s holding that the officer was objectively justified in

stopping the vehicle for a traffic violation. We need look no

further to determine whether the officer executed the stop for an

ulterior motive, for as long as there is objective justification

for a traffic stop, the officer’s subjective intent is not

relevant. United States v. Flores, 63 F.3d 1342, 1362 (5th Cir.),

cert. denied, 117 S.Ct. 87 (1996); United States v. Roberson, 6

F.3d 1088, 1092 (5th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1204

(1994). Pena-Gonzales’ argument is without merit. Id.

AFFIRMED.