alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350,AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report of SIN Holdings, Inc.
(the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2007 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Steve S. Sinohui, Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as
adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)     
the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) 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.

| | /s/ Steve S. Sinohui
Steve S. Sinohui, Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

August 8, 2007
Exhibit 99.1
  
 Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
 As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
 
 The undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for iPayment, Inc. ("Issuer") for the period ending March 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report):
 
 (a) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 (b)the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.
  
 This Certification is executed as of June 17, 2003.
 
 /s/ Gregory S. DailyGregory S. Daily
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
 
 
 
 
 Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
 As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
 
 The undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for iPayment, Inc. ("Issuer") for the period ending March 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report):
 
 (b) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 (b)the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.
  
 This Certification is executed as of June 17, 2003.
 
 /s/ Clay M. WhitsonClay M. Whitson
Chief Financial Officer
# C_2009032EN.01004401.xml

| 7.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 32/44 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 32/44

---

Action brought on 7 November 2008 — Ryanair/Commission

(Case T-509/08)

(2009/C 32/85)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Ryanair Ltd (Dublin, Ireland) (represented by: E. Vahida, I. Metaxas-Maragkidis, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | declare in accordance with Articles 230 and 231 EC that the Commission's implied decision refusing access to the documents for which access was requested by the applicant in an application dated 20 June 2008 is void and that the Commission's decision of 26 September 2008 refusing access to the same documents is non-existent; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare in accordance with Articles 230 and 231 EC that the Commission's implied decision refusing access to the documents for which access was requested by the applicant in an application dated 20 June 2008 is void and that the Commission's decision of 26 September 2008 refusing access to the same documents is non-existent;

| — | alternatively, declare in accordance with Articles 230 and 231 EC that the Commission's decision of 26 September 2008 refusing access to the documents for which access was requested by the applicant in an application dated 20 June 2008 is void; |
| --- | --- |

—

alternatively, declare in accordance with Articles 230 and 231 EC that the Commission's decision of 26 September 2008 refusing access to the documents for which access was requested by the applicant in an application dated 20 June 2008 is void;

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs incurred by the applicant in the proceedings; and |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs incurred by the applicant in the proceedings; and

| — | take such further action as the Court may deem appropriate. |
| --- | --- |

—

take such further action as the Court may deem appropriate.

Pleas in law and main arguments

By means of this application the applicant seeks annulment of the Commission implied decision rejecting the applicant's request, pursuant to Regulation No 1049/2001 (1), of the access to documents relating to State aid procedures concerning the presumed State aid granted through an agreement with the operator of Bratislava airport. The said decision was followed by the express decision of 26 September 2008. The annulment of the express decision is alternatively sought by the applicant in the present case.

1

The pleas in law and main arguments relied on by the applicant are identical to those relied on in Case T-494/08 Ryanair v Commission.

Ryanair

Commission

---

(1)  Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents, OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43.

1

---
#### BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF WAGONER COUNTY, Oklahoma, Plaintiff in Error, v. STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION OF the State of OKLAHOMA, Defendant in Error.

No. 39361.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma.

June 13, 1961.

*257James B: Martin, County Atty., Wagoner County, Wagoner, for plaintiff in error.

Mac Q. Williamson, Atty. Gen., Fred Hansen, First Asst. Atty. Gen., L. G. Hy-den, Asst. Atty. Gen., Albert Lynn, Gen. Counsel, Oklahoma Tax Commission, Ed Armstrong, Asst. Counsel, Oklahoma Tax Commission, Oklahoma City, for defendant in error.

Otjen & Carter, by Frank Carter, Enid, for Oklahoma Farm Bureau, amicus curiae.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error appeals from the same order of the State Board of Equalization that was appealed from in other cases, including Cause No. 39321. Okl., 363 P.2d 242. As to Wagoner County, here involved, the order required the same respective percentages of increase in valuations for rural and urban property that it required in the county involved in the cited case.

There is no material difference between the arguments advanced herein by plaintiff in error and those urged under three of the appellant’s propositions for reversal in Cause No. 39321. We, therefore, apply what was therein said concerning those arguments, to the arguments of plaintiff in error herein, and adopt, by reference, those pronouncements as our opinion in this case.

Affirmed, and, as in the cited case, the period for the filing of a petition for rehearing is hereby reduced to 10 days.

WILLIAMS, C. J., BLACKBIRD, V. C. J., and WELCH, DAVISON, HALLEY, JOHNSON and BERRY, JJ., concur.

IRWIN, J., concurs specially.

JACKSON, J., dissents.

IRWIN, Justice

(concurring specially).

I concur specially for the reasons set forth in Case No. 39,321, Board of County Commissioners of Canadian County, Oklahoma v. State Board of Equalization, Okl., 353 P.2d 242.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Reynaldo Diaz, Appellant.

— Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Ulster County (Vogt, J.), rendered October 18, *9681989, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the first degree.

Upon pleading guilty to criminal sale of a controlled substance in the first degree, a class A-I felony, defendant received a prison sentence of 15 years to life. Defendant’s only contention on appeal is that the sentence should be reduced as a result of his age, his addiction to cocaine at the time and his lack of criminal history. Not only did defendant receive the most lenient sentence possible (Penal Law § 70.00 [2] [a]; [3] [a] [i]), but 10 other felony counts and one misdemeanor count were dropped as a result of the plea agreement. In addition, defendant voluntarily pleaded guilty knowing that he would receive the sentence ultimately imposed by County Court. Finally, defendant’s self-induced drug addiction does not present the type of extraordinary circumstances warranting a reduction in his sentence *(see, People v Mackey,*136 AD2d 780, 781, *lv denied*71 NY2d 899). Under the circumstances, we find no abuse by County Court in imposing sentence *(see, supra; People v Neira,*130 AD2d 518, *lv denied*70 NY2d 715).

Mikoll, J. P., Levine, Mercure, Crew III and Harvey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Exhibit
      No. 32.1








CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO


18
      U.S.C.
      ss. 1350,


AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In
      connection with Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report of Universal Express,
      Inc.
      (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB/A for the year ended June 30, 2005 as filed
      with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
      Richard Altomare, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Accounting Officer 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 results of operations of the Company.




Dated:
                November 8, 2006
              By:
              /s/ Richard
                AltomareRichard
                  AltomareChief
                Executive Officer and Chief Accounting
                Officer


This
      certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
      purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
      amended.





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
      authenticating, 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 the Company and will be retained by the
      Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
      upon request.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 118 (Friday, August 3, 2012)]
[Daily Digest]
[Page D825]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                        House of Representatives

Chamber Action
Public Bills and Resolutions Introduced: 2 public bills, H.R. 6357-6358 
were introduced.
  Page H5716
Additional Cosponsors:
  Page H5717
Reports Filed: There were no reports filed today.
Speaker: Read a letter from the Speaker wherein he appointed 
Representative Flores to act as Speaker pro tempore for today. 
                                                             Page H5715
Senate Message: Message received from the Senate by the Clerk and 
subsequently presented to the House today appears on page H5715.
Senate Referrals: S. 3245 was referred to the Committees on the 
Judiciary and Education and the Workforce; S. Con. Res. 58 and S. Con. 
Res. 59 were held at the desk.
  Page H5715
Quorum Calls--Votes: There were no Yea-and-Nay votes, and there were no 
Recorded votes. There were no quorum calls.
Adjournment: The House met at 10 a.m. and adjourned at 10:05 a.m.
```
Order filed November 20, 2014, Withdrawn, Appeal Reinstated and Order 

filed January 6, 2015.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-13-00840-CR

____________

LORENZA ANDRE SAM, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 240th District Court

Fort Bend County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 10-DCR-055360A

ORDER

On November 20, 2014, this Court issued an order abating the appeal and 

directing the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine the reason for failure to 

file a brief. On December 29, 2014, appellant filed a motion to reinstate the appeal 

because the brief has been filed.

The motion is granted. Our order of November 20, 2014, is withdrawn. 

The appeal is reinstated.

PER CURIAM
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 16

- 0637 Filed April 5, 2017
FRANKLIN LEE HARRIS, Applicant

- Appellant,

vs. STATE OF IOWA, Respondent

- Appellee.

________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Des Moines County, Mark E. Kruse, District Associate Judge.

Franklin Harris appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment on his app lication for postconviction relief

. AFFIRMED.

William R. Monroe of Law Office of William Monroe, Burlington, for appellant. Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Sharon K. Hall, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Vogel and Vaitheswaran, JJ.2

VAITHESWARAN, Judge. We must decide whether a postconviction relief application is time

- barred. I. Background Proceedings In 2008, Franklin Harris pled guilty to second

- degree murder in connection with the stabbing death of his girlfriend. His direct appeal was dismissed as frivolous, and procedendo issued in 2008. Harris filed his first application f or postconviction relief shortly thereafter. The district court denied the application, and this court affirmed the ruling. See H arris v

. State , No. 10

- 2035, 2013 WL 5758164, at *2

- 3 (Iowa Ct. App. Oct. 23, 2013)

. Harris filed his second application for postconviction relief in 2014

. The State moved for summary disposition asserting , in part , that the application was time

- barred. The district court granted the motion. This appeal followed. II. Time - Bar P ostconviction relief applications must be filed “ within three years from the date the conviction or decision is final or, in the event of an appeal, from the date the writ of procedendo is issued. ” Iowa Code § 822.3 (201 4 )

. “ [T]his limitation does not apply to a ground of fact or law that could not have been raised within the applicable time period. ” Id

. § 822.3. Harris concedes his app lication fell outside the three

- year period but argues he raised a ground of fact that could not have been raised within that period. He relies on a medical report that he claims not to have seen until years after he was imprisoned. However, his resistance to the State’s motion for summary disposition failed to refute the State’s affirmative assertion that the medical report was “handed over to the Petitioner’s original3

defense attorney on February 25th, 2008” and “the Petitioner has been in
p ossession of this document for seven years.” Production of documents to a person’s attorney is sufficient to place the person on notice of those documents. See, e.g ., Rhode v. State , No. 02

- 2003, 2004 WL 151713, at *2 (Iowa Ct. App. Jan. 28, 2004) (rejec ting applicant’s claim as time

- barred where the challenged evidence “was available at trial and certainly before the

. . . running of the statute of limitations ”). We conclude Harris’ s second postconviction relief application was time

barred , and the grou nd

- of

- fact exception to the time bar is inapplicable. The district court did not err in granting the State’s motion for summary disposition of the application. AFFIRMED.
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 of Sky Financial Group, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Marty E. Adams, Chief Executive Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                               
|-----------------------------------------------
|                                               
|/s/    MARTY E. ADAMS                          
|                                               
|Marty E. Adams                                 
|Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer





February 23, 2004
<PAGE>


                         [COHO ENERGY, INC. LETTERHEAD]




                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1




April 5, 2002


United States Securities and Exchange Commission
Washington, DC 20549

RE: December 31, 2001 Audit

Arthur Andersen LLP (Andersen) represented to Coho Energy, Inc. that its audit
was subject to Andersen's quality control system for the U.S. accounting and
auditing practice to provide reasonable assurance that the engagement was
conducted in compliance with professional standards and that there was
appropriate continuity of Andersen personnel working on the audit and
availability of national office consultation. Availability of personnel at
foreign affiliates of Arthur Andersen is not relevant to this audit.


Sincerely,

/s/ Gary L. Pittman

Gary L. Pittman
Chief Financial Officer
From: Susan Miller [mailto:SMiller@bia.org]

Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2015 12:43 PM

To: Nizich, Sharon

Cc: terry.schimmel@boral.com

Subject: Lee Brick

SharonTerry and I have reviewed the information on Lee Brick. While there are some things that we 

believe make the process different from most brick kilns, we have concerns about the stack test 

itself.

• The volume of stack gas collected during this test (and another at Lee Brick) does not meet 

the minimum volume of 1 cubic meter that is required for a good test. I cannot recall if this 

minimum is included in the test method itself, the referencing regulation, but it is definitely 

best practice. [I am checking on the reference with our testing expert, but perhaps you 

could check with yours as well].

• There is also a problem with the times on these tests- if you look at the times, it appears 

that Runs 2 and 3 overlapped almost the entire time. That does not seem to be consistent 

with testing protocol.

We believe that this test should not be included in the database.

Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any other questions.

susan

Susan J Miller

Vice President, Environment, Health & Safety

Brick Industry Association

311 South Academy Street

Cary, North Carolina 27511

919 380-2191

smiller@bia.org

When you talk, you are only repeating what you already know; but when you listen, you may learn 

something new. 

-Dalai Lama
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2 Section 906 Certification of Chief Financial Officer CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT OT
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Quarterly Report of SBS Technologies, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2003, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, (the
Report), I, James E. Dixon, Jr., Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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. /s/ James E. Dixon, Jr.James E. Dixon, Jr.
Chief Financial Officer
February 13, 2004
Specimen Certificate evidencing shares of common stock



 

 







 IBuyDigital.com, Inc. 
  
 THE CORPORATION WILL FURNISH WITHOUT CHARGE TO EACH STOCKHOLDER WHO SO REQUESTS THE POWERS, DESIGNATIONS, PREFERENCES AND
RELATIVE, PARTICIPATING, OPTIONAL OR OTHER SPECIAL RIGHTS OF EACH CLASS OF STOCK OR SERIES THEREOF AND THE QUALIFICATIONS, LIMITATIONS OR RESTRICTIONS OF SUCH PREFERENCES AND/OR RIGHTS. ANY SUCH REQUEST SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO THE SECRETARY OF THE
CORPORATION AT ITS PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS. 
  
 The following
abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this certificate, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: 
  

													
	 TEN COM
	 	 –
	 	as tenants in common	  	UNIF GIFT MIN ACT– 	 	 	 	Custodian  	 	 
	 TEN ENT
	 	 –
	 	as tenants by the entireties	  	 	 	(Cust)	 	 	 	(Minor)
					
	 JT TEN
	 	 –
	 	as joint tenants with right of
survivorship and not as
tenants in common	  	 	 	under Uniform Gifts to Minors
	 	 	 	 	  	 	 	Act                                     
 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	  	 	 	 (State)
	 	 
							
	 	 	 	 	 	  	UNIF TRANS MIN ACT– 	 	 	 	Custodian  	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	  	 	 	(Cust)	 	 	 	(Minor)
					
	 	 	 	 	 	  	 	 	under Uniform Transfers to Minors
						
	 	 	 	 	 	  	 	 	Act                                     
 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	  	 	 	 (State)
	 	 

  
 Additional
abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list. 
  

					
	 For value received, 
	 	 	 	 hereby sell assign and transfer unto



					
		
	 PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER
IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE
	 	 
	 	
	 	 	 
	
	 
	Please print or typewrite name and address including postal zip code of assignee	 	 
	
	 
	
	 
		
	 	 	 Shares

	of the Common Stock represented by the within Certificate, and do hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint	 	 
	
	 
	Attorney to transfer the said Shares on the books of the within-named Corporation with full power of substitution in the
premises.

  

					
	 Dated 
	  	 	  	 

  

			
	 	 	 
	 	 	NOTICE: THE SIGNATURE TO THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND WITH THE NAME AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE, IN EVERY PARTICULAR, WITHOUT ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT OR ANY CHANGE
WHATEVER.

  

			
	 	 	 
	 	 	THE SIGNATURE(S) MUST BE GUARANTEED BY AN ELIGIBLE GUARANTOR INSTITUTION (BANKS, STOCKBROKERS, SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS AND CREDIT UNIONS WITH MEMBERSHIP IN AN APPROVED SIGNATURE
GUARANTEE MEDALLION PROGRAM), PURSUANT TO S.E.C. RULE 17AD-15.

  
 KEEP THIS CERTIFICATE IN A SAFE
PLACE. IF IT IS LOST, STOLEN, MUTILATED OR DESTROYED, THE CORPORATION WILL REQUIRE A BOND OF INDEMNITY AS A CONDITION TO THE ISSUANCE OF A REPLACEMENT CERTIFICATE.