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 Annual
Report on Form 10-K of Papaya Growth Opportunity Corp. I (the "Company") for the year ended December 31, 2021, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Daniel Rogers, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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. | To my knowledge, the information contained in
    the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for the
    period covered by the report.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|Date: March 31, 2022 | By: | /s/ Daniel Rogers            
|-------------------- | --- | -----------------------------
|                     |     | Daniel Rogers                
|                     |     | Chief Financial Officer      
|                     |     | (Principal Financial Officer)
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**691 KA 14-00491**  PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CARNI, SCONIERS, VALENTINO, AND WHALEN, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

V ORDER
ADAM C. SMITH, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL PALERMO, WOLCOTT, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
JON E. BUDELMANN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, AUBURN (CHRISTOPHER T. VALDINA OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Cayuga County Court (Thomas G. Leone, J.), rendered October 17, 2013. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and conspiracy in the fourth degree.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Entered: June 12, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

December 23, 2015

No. 04-15-00684-CR

Ricardo YANES,

Appellant

v.

The State 

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law, Medina County, Texas

Trial Court No. 30085

Honorable Vivian Torres, Judge Presiding

ORDER

The Appellant’s Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief has this date been received 

and filed in the above styled and numbered cause. Extension of time to file the Appellant’s brief 

is this date GRANTED. Time is extended to January 18, 2016.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO: ____________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE

CLERK OF COURT

cc: Kimberly Ann Pepper Havel

Medina County Attorney's Office

1100 16th St Fl 3

Hondo, TX 78861-1822

Sean Keane-Dawes

Law Offices of Sean Keane-Dawes

118 Broadway St., Suite 530

San Antonio, TX 78205
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

January 13, 2023

No. 04-23-00028-CR

IN RE Juan Antonio Belmares CENICEROS

Original Mandamus Proceeding

ORDER

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Beth Watkins, Justice

On January 12, 2023, relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus and an emergency

motion to stay pending final resolution of the petition for writ of mandamus. This court believes

a serious question concerning the mandamus relief sought requires further

consideration. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(b). Respondent and real party in interest may file a

response to the petition in this court no later than February 2, 2023. Any such response must

conform to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.4.

Relator’s emergency motion for temporary stay is GRANTED IN PART as follows:

1. All pretrial settings requiring relator’s in-person appearance are STAYED 

pending further order from this court. Pretrial settings that do not require relator’s 

in-person appearance may proceed.

2. The January 23, 2023 trial setting is STAYED pending further order from this 

court. 

It is so ORDERED on January 13, 2023.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO: _____________________________

Michael A. Cruz, Clerk of Court
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Solo Cup Company (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended July 3, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Robert L. Hulseman, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Robert L. Hulseman 
|Robert L. Hulseman     
|Chief Executive Officer
|August 16, 2005        



4
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO



18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,



AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO



SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual
Report on Form 10-K of The Growth for Good Acquisition Corporation (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2021, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Yana Watson Kakar, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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. | To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for the period covered by the Report.
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|Date: March 18, 2022 | By: | /s/ Yana Watson Kakar        
|-------------------- | --- | -----------------------------
|                     |     | Yana Watson Kakar            
|                     |     | Chief Executive Officer      
|                     |     | (Principal Executive Officer)
**
**Exhibit 31.2**

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a) OR15d-14(a)**

**UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, Craig Sinfield-Hain, certify that: 

 
1.
I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of InvestcorpEurope Acquisition Corp I; 

 
2.
Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial 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(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

 
 (a)
Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to bedesigned under my 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 beingprepared; 

 
 (b)
[Omitted]; 

 
 (c)
Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport my 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 

 
 (d)
Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred 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 internalcontrol over financial reporting; and 

 
5.
The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation 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 functions): 

 
 (a)
All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

 
 (b)
Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role inthe registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 
**

Date: April 1, 2022 

 
By: 
/s/ Craig Sinfield-Hain
 Craig Sinfield-Hain Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED AUGUST 29, 2013

NO. 03-12-00041-CR

Teresa Perez, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 147TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE JONES, JUSTICES ROSE AND GOODWIN

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE ROSE

THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the record of the court below, and the same being 

considered, it is the opinion of this Court that there was no error in the judgment of conviction. 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the judgment of conviction is in all things affirmed; and 

it appearing that the appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, that no adjudication as to costs 

is made, and that this decision be certified below for observance.
EXHIBIT 32.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (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: November 14, 2008
    /s/ Crit S. DeMentName:
    Crit S. DeMentTitle:
    Chief Executive Officer of the General Partner
Seth Robinson

505 Dare Road

Yorktown VA, 23692

SethLTRobinson@gmail.com

Dear Sir or Madam,

My name is Seth Robinson. I am a Video Production Specialist for my local 

government and I am seeking exemption for my own personal business use from these 

sections of the Title 14 CFR:

14 CFR 21 subpart H

14 CFR 45.23(b)

14 CFR 61.113(a) & (b)

14 CFR 91.7(a)

14 CFR 91.9(b) (2)

14 CFR 91.103

14 CFR 91.109

14 CFR 91.119(b) & (c)

14 CFR 91.121

14 CFR 91.151(a)

14 CFR 91.203 (a) & (b)

14 CFR 91.405 (a)

14 CFR 91.407 (a) (1)

14 CFR 91.409 (a) (1) & (2)

14 CFR 91.417(a) & (b)

I seek relief from these sections in order to own and operate a sUAS commercially. 

Many of these rules require actions that do not pertain to the type of vehicle I plan to operate 

which will also fall under the “blanket” COA that has been granted since March 23, 2015.

Granting my request could benefit the public in many different ways. If I become 

exempt I plan to use a sUAS for aerial photography and videography for real estate, local 

events, nature shoots and assist my local community if a need rises that requires a higher 

vantage point. A birds eye view offers detail greater than one could imagine from the ground.

I take safety very serious as a previous 911 dispatcher. If exempt, first, I would invest in

equipment that is tested and proven in the field to be safe with multiple safeguards in place to 

prevent any type of incident. The type of vehicle I plan to operate is battery powered and 

gives plenty of warning when it is running low. As a safeguard I will plan each flight 

beforehand making sure factors such as weather, crowds, location and duration will not cause

any disruption in safety and performance and document each event. While keeping a high 

standard in safety I also plan to operate no greater than what is already permitted under 

hobbyist rules where the only difference is that I wish to profit for my time.

Here is a summary you may publish in the Federal Register:
I, Seth Robinson, am seeking exemption from the requirements of Title 14 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations sections 21 H, 45.23 (b), 61.113 (a) & (b), 91.7 (a), 91.9 (b) (2), 

91.103, 91.109, 91.119 (b) & (c), 91.121, 91.151 (a), 91.203 (a) & (b), 91.405 (a), 91.407 (a) 

(1), 91.409 (a) (1) & (2), 91.417 (a) & (b). I wish these exemptions in order to start a 

commercial business related in aerial photography and videography based on guidelines 

allowed already to hobbyist.

As stated before mostly of what I wish to do is already allowed as a hobbyist. The only 

difference is that I wish to build a small business around it. I have been researching the 

technology for several years now and believe I have what it takes to create a safe and 

successful commercial operation. I thank you for your time. If you have any questions please 

feel free to contact me for any clarification.

Sincerely,

Seth Robinson
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 6 D0 33 4 . ELI Z ABETH L. CUNNI NGHAM v . J . ALAN KOHR.

El i zab et h Cu n ni n g h am , t h e fo rm er g u ard i an o f Dav i d N ap i er Cu n n i n g h am , ch al l en g es t he t ri al co urt ’ s o rd er d i rect i n g h er t o p ay at t o rn ey fees an d ex p en s es

i n cu rred b y Al an K o h r, t he cu rren t g uard i an o f Dav i d Cu n n i n g h am , in d i sch arg i n g

a p et it i o n fo r wri t o f h ab eas co rp u s fi l ed b y El i zab et h Cu n n i n g ham

. In i t s o rd er, t h e

co u rt ci t es b ot h O CGA § 9

- 1 5 -1 4 an d t h e h ab eas co rp u s s t at u t e, OCGA § 9 -1 4 -2 1,

as b as es fo r i t s award

. El i zab et h Cu n n i n g h am arg u es t h at at t o rn ey fees an d ex p en s es

are n o t p erm i t ted u nd er t h e h ab eas co rp u s s t at u t e.

Th e Geo rg i a Su p rem e Co u rt h as ap p el l at e ju ri s di ct i o n o v er al l cas es i nv o l v i n g

h ab eas co rp u s

. See Ga. Co n s t

. o f 1 9 8 3

, Art

. VI, Sec. VI, Par. I I I ( 4 )

. U n d e r t h e

ci rcu m s t an ces p res en t ed i n t h is ap p l i cat i on , i t ap p ears ju ri s di ct i o n m ay l i e i n t h e

Su p rem e Co u rt

. It is w el l -s et t l ed t h a t t h e u l t i m at e res p o n si b i l i t y fo r d et erm i n i n g

ap p el l at e ju ri s d i ct i o n i s v es ted i n t h e Su p rem e Co u rt o f Geo r g i a. See Sa xt o n v.

C o a s t a l Di a l

ys i s & c. , 2 67 Ga. 1 7 7

, 1 7 8 (4 7 6 SE2 d 58 7 ) (1 9 9 6 ). A cco rd i n g l y , t h i s

ap p li cat io n i s h ereb y

TRANSFERRED t o t h e Su p rem e Co u rt fo r d i s p os i t i o n

. May 03, 2016C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O f f i c e

, A t la n t a

,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r t i f y t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a tr u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t

h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 05/03/2016
z z

U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

Public Notice 

Rogers Road Municipal Landfill Superfund Site 

August 7, 2009 

z z

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

signed the Explanation of Significant Differences 

for the Rogers Road Municipal Landfill Superfund 

Site near Jacksonville in Pulaski County, Arkansas 

on August 7, 2009. The Explanation of Significant 

Differences is being issued to document that 

groundwater monitoring stopped in 1997 after four 

years of monitoring because no contaminants of 

concern were detected in the ground water during 

the four years of monitoring. The contaminated soil 

on site, along with drums and other wastes were 

excavated and any soils and other wastes above 

risk values were incinerated. The remedy selected 

for the Rogers Road Landfill Site included excavation of the on-site waste material, thermal treatment and ash disposal of this material at the Vertac 

Chemical Corp., capping of residual waste onsite, 

long term groundwater monitoring and site maintenance. Wastes at the Rogers Road Landfill Site 

below the risk values were capped with clean soil. 

The remedy included long-term ground water 

monitoring and site maintenance. That these actions have been implemented was recorded in the 

Third Five Year Review completed in 2005. 

Cleanup values were established for areas identified for cleanup during the remedial action. No 

other significant differences exist between the final 

remedial action and the selected remedy presented 

in the September 1990 Record of Decision. 

The Administrative Record and Five-Year Review 

Reports are available at the following locations: 

Jacksonville City Hall 

1 Municipal Drive 

Jacksonville, AR 72078 

501.982.3181 

Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality 

5301 Northshore Drive 

North Little Rock, AR 72118 

501.682.0744 

Questions concerning the Rogers Road Landfill Site 

should be directed to Shawn Ghose, M.S.,P.E., ASME, 

Remedial Project Manager, at 214.665.6782; or 

1.800.533.3508 (toll-free). 

For press inquiries, please call the EPA Press Office at 

214.665.2208.

002381
III 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 603 

Designating September 2018 as ‘‘School Bus Safety Month’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

AUGUST 1, 2018 

Mrs. FISCHER (for herself and Mr. PETERS) submitted the following 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

SEPTEMBER 6, 2018 

Committee discharged; considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Designating September 2018 as ‘‘School Bus Safety Month’’. 

Whereas, every school day in the United States, approximately 500,000 public and private school buses carry 

more than 26,000,000 children to and from school; 

Whereas school buses comprise the largest mass transportation fleet in the United States; 

Whereas 55 percent of all K–12 students ride a school bus, 

totaling 260,000,000 miles for each of the 180 school 

days in a year, or 46,800,000,000 miles driven annually; 

Whereas the Child Safety Network, celebrating 29 years of 

national public service, supports the CSN Safe Bus campaign, which is designed to provide the latest technology 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

SRES 603 ATS 

and free safety and security resources to the school bus 

industry; 

Whereas the designation of School Bus Safety Month will 

allow broadcast and digital media and social networking 

industries to make commitments to disseminate public 

service announcements that are produced in order— 

(1) to provide resources designed to safeguard children; and 

(2) to recognize school bus drivers and professionals; 

Whereas key leaders who are deserving of recognition during 

School Bus Safety Month and beyond have provided security awareness training materials to more than 14,000 

public and private school districts, trained more than 

100,000 school bus operators, and provided more than 

110,000 counterterrorism guides to individuals who are 

key to providing both safety and security for children in 

the United States; and 

Whereas School Bus Safety Month offers the Senate and the 

people of the United States an opportunity to recognize 

and thank all of the school bus drivers in the United 

States and the professionals who are focused on school 

bus safety and security: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate designates September 

2 2018 as ‘‘School Bus Safety Month’’. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

May 24, 2011 

t0516 

Order 

 

May 24, 2011 

142493 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 142493 

 COA: 301422 

Wayne CC: 09-026016-FC 

THEODORE MAURICE BELL, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 10, 2011 

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

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
## In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06

- 13

- 00148

- CR

RYAN M. TUTTLE, Appellant
V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 7th District Court Smith County, Texas Trial Court No. 007

- 0911

- 12

Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.2 

### O RDER
Court reporter Jennifer Lowrance recorded the trial court proceedings in cause number
06

- 13

- 00148

- CR, styled Ryan M. Tuttle v. The State of Texas , trial court cause number 007

- 0911

- 12, in the 7th Judicial District Court of Smith County, Texas. The reporter’s re cord was originally due in this case August 5, 2013, and after two extensions, was currently due to be filed by October 4, 2013. We granted the first two motions, and stated in our disposition of the second motion that no more extensions would be granted. Lowrance has now filed a third motion, requesting an additional thirty

- day extension to prepare and file the record. The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure establish that “trial and appellate courts are jointly responsible for ensuring that the appellat e record is timely filed.” T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 35.3(c). The rules further instruct that an “appellate court may enter any order necessary to ensure the timely filing of the appellate record.” Id. In furtherance of our responsibilities established by the
Ru les, we find we must take steps to ensure the filing of the record in this case. The motion to extend time is overruled. We , therefore, order Jennifer Lowrance to file the reporter’s record in cause number 06

- 13

- 00148

- CR, to be received by this Court no later than Monday, November 4, 2013. If the record is not received by November 4, we warn Lowrance that we may begin contempt proceedings and order her to show cause why she should not be held in contempt of this Court for failing to obey its order.3 IT IS SO ORDERED.

BY THE COURT
Date: October 15, 2013