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





**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 on Form 10-QSB of Playlogic Entertainment,
      Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2007, as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
      I, Willem M. Smit, Chief Executive 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.




Date:
                  April 25, 2007
              
              /s/
                  Willem M. Smit
                Willem
                    M. Smit
                    Chief
                      Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION

In connection with the periodic report of Abraxis BioScience, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Lisa Gopalakrishnan, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby
certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods
indicated.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       |  |  |  |                        
|---------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|                       |  | 
|Date: November 9, 2007 |  |  |  | /s/ LISA GOPALAKRISHNAN
|                       |  |  |  | Lisa Gopalakrishnan    
|                       |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer

This certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-Q pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act). Such certification
will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
#### Douglas J. NEELEY, Plaintiff in Error, v. The STATE of Oklahoma, Defendant in Error.

No. A-12054.

Criminal Court of Appeals of Oklahoma.

Nov. 10, 1954.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 15, 1954.

*218Frank M. Massad, Wayne E. Wheeling, Oklahoma City, for plaintiff in error.

Mac Q. Williamson, Atty. Gen., Sam H„ Lattimore, Asst. Atty. Gen., for defendant in error.

POWELL, Presiding Judge.

Douglas J. Neeley, Howard Lee Voegel and Billy Don Morgan were jointly charged in the district court of Oklahoma County with the crime of robbery with firearms. The defendants each waived a preliminary hearing, were bound over to answer the charge in the district court,- and were admitted to bail.

Douglas J. Neeley, the appellant here, and Voegel, were arraigned in the district court on November 5, 1953, and entered pleas of not guilty, but on November 18, 1953 they withdrew their former pleas, entered pleas of guilty, and sentence date was-set for November 23, 1953.

On the date set Douglas J. Neeley, hereinafter referred to as defendant, appeared in court and was sentenced to serve a term of seven years in the Oklahoma State Penitentiary. No notice was given and there was no order extending time to make and serve casemade. The time therefore expired on December 8, 1953. But a court minute recites that on December 3, 1953 there came on for hearing a motion for new trial, and motion to withdraw plea of guilty, although no such motion appears in the transcript presented. The motions were overruled, and notice of appeal given, and there is a notation: “30-3-3 days allowed to make and serve casemade”. Under the provisions of a later order filed, the defendant was granted until January 2, 1954 in which to make and serve casemade. There was no attempt made to serve casemade until February 3, 1954. Therefore, the appeal could not be by casemade, and the record was certified as a transcript.

The appeal being by transcript this court finds nothing for consideration that could form the basis for determining whether or not the trial court erred in refusing to set aside the judgment entered on a plea of guilty by the defendant, and permitting him to enter a plea of not guilty and *219being tried on the merits of the case. See the companion case of Voegel v. State, Okl.Cr., 277 P.2d 215, for more detailed treatment of the issues presented.

The judgment appealed from is affirmed.

JONES and BRETT, JJ., concur.
Order entered September 11 , 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
No. 05 - 12 - 01079 - CR No. 05 - 12 - 01080 - CR KEITH BRONSHA PAUL, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 7 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No s . F11 - 41122 - Y , F10 - 42448 - Y 

### O RDER The Court ORDERS the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine why appellant’s brief has not been filed. In this regard, the trial court shall make appropriate findings and

recomme ndations and determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeals, whether appellant is indigent, or if not indigent, whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeals. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 38.8( b ). If the trial court cannot obtain appellant’s pr esence at the hearing, the trial court shall conduct the hearing in appellant’s absence. See Meza v. State , 742 S.W.2d 708 (Tex. App.

– Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.) (per curiam). If appellant is indigent, the trial court is ORDERED to take such measures a s may be necessary to assure effective representation, which may include appointment of new counsel.We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record of the proceedings, which shall include written findings and recommendations, to this Court within THIRTY DA YS of the date of this order. The appeals are ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with the above order. The appeals shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the findings are received, whichever is earlier.

/s/ DAVID EVA NS JUSTICE
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4906 

To amend title 13, United States Code, to prohibit the use of questions 

on citizenship, nationality, or immigration status in any decennial census, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 30, 2018 

Ms. NORTON (for herself and Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

A BILL 

To amend title 13, United States Code, to prohibit the use 

of questions on citizenship, nationality, or immigration 

status in any decennial census, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Ensuring Full Partici5 pation in the Census Act of 2018’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PROHIBITING CENSUS QUESTIONS ON CITIZENSHIP, 

7 NATIONALITY, OR IMMIGRATION STATUS. 

8 Section 141 of title 13, United States Code, is 

9 amended— 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4906 IH

1 (1) by redesignating subsection (g) as sub2 section (h); and 

3 (2) by inserting after subsection (f) the fol4 lowing: 

5 ‘‘(g)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), a ques6 tionnaire or survey used to carry out, or in connection 

7 with, any decennial census of population may not include 

8 any question regarding citizenship, nationality, or immi9 gration status of the respondent, any family member of 

10 the respondent, or any individual living in the respondent’s 

11 household. 

12 ‘‘(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the survey, con13 ducted by the Secretary, commonly referred to as the 

14 ‘American Community Survey’.’’. 

Æ 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
**Exhibit32.1**

 

**WRITTENSTATEMENT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**PURSUANTTO 18 U.S.C. 1350**

 

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C.1350, I, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of Liquidmetal Technologies,Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certifies, based on my knowledge, that theQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended September30, 2007, (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a)of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/ Larry E. Buffington                                  |   |
|----------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Larry Buffington, President and Chief Executive  Officer |
| November 14, 2007                                        |

 

----
The Hono rable Elsijane T. Roy, United States District Judge for the Easter n 1 District of Arkansas. United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 96-2651

___________ Paul M. McDonald, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the Unite d States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District o f Arkansas. St. Louis Southwestern Railroad, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: August 5, 1997

Filed: August 18 , 1997

___________ Before WOLLMAN, LOKEN, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Paul M. McDonald appe als the district court & s orders 1 gra nting summary judgment to St. Louis Southwester n Railroad a nd denying his Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60 ( b) motion in this employment discrimination action
. Af ter de novo review we conclude the district court & s grant of summary judgment was correct. See 8th Cir. R
. 47B.-2--3-

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the distric t court. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed November 12, 2014.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D13-2361

Lower Tribunal No. 07-19086 

________________

Patricia Sbroggio,

Appellant,

vs.

Graziano Sbroggio,

Appellee.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, John C.

Schlesinger, Judge.

Robert J. Merlin, for appellant. 

Perez-Abreu & Martin-Lavielle and Ana-Maria Mejer and Javier PerezAbreu, for appellee. 

Before SUAREZ, ROTHENBERG, and LAGOA, JJ. 

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court on the granting of Appellee’s Petition for

Modification of Parenting Plan/Timesharing. We reverse the trial court’s retention
of jurisdiction to consider Appellant’s claim for attorney’s fees because it was not

properly pled below.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part.

2
Exhibit 31.2
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
I, William M. Scharninghausen, Chief Financial Officer of Vialta, Inc., certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Vialta, Inc. (the “registrant”);
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 of operationsand 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 andmaintaining disclosure 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 andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
     (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
     (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control 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 auditcommittee 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 ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’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 asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.   Date: May 16, 2005 /s/ William M. Scharninghausen   William M. Scharninghausen Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF BUCKHEAD AMERICA CORPORATION FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED
DECEMBER  31,  1997,  AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY BY  REFERENCE  TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. </LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000



<S>                                                  <C>             <C>

<PERIOD-TYPE>                                        12-MOS           12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                    DEC-31-1997      DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                       JAN-01-1997      JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                         DEC-31-1997      DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                                       3,282    1,802
<SECURITIES>                                                 3,188    3,027
<RECEIVABLES>                                                2,202    2,374
<ALLOWANCES>                                                    58    1,442
<INVENTORY>                                                      0       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                             8,234    5,861
<PP&E>                                                      36,937    20,352
<DEPRECIATION>                                               2,661    1,621
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                              52,164    27,035
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                        4,225    1,271
<BONDS>                                                     28,582    12,419
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                            0        0
<PREFERRED>                                                  3,000        0
<COMMON>                                                        19       18
<OTHER-SE>                                                  16,334    13,066
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                52,164    27,035
<SALES>                                                     15,591    9,979
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                            18,816    13,873
<CGS>                                                       11,920    8,659
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                               13,185    10,552
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                             3,786        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                 0        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                           1,601     1,505
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                244     1,817
<INCOME-TAX>                                               (2,930)        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                          3,174     1,817
<DISCONTINUED>                                                   0        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                  0        0
<CHANGES>                                                        0        0
<NET-INCOME>                                                 3,174     1,817
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                 1.67      1.03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                 1.56      1.00



</TABLE>
* 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. 98-11251

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ERNEST LEE HOWARD,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:98-CR-84-A-1

- - - - - - - - - -

June 2, 1999

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Ernest Lee Howard has appealed his conviction and sentence

for controlled substance and firearms violations. For the

following reasons, we AFFIRM.

After DaJuan Pratt, a fifteen-year-old employee at a “weed

house” maintained by Howard and codefendant Alfred Brooks,

mistakenly shot and fatally wounded a seven-year-old boy with a

firearm supplied by Howard, Pratt hid the weapon under a mattress

at Howard’s nearby residence. Later that day, Pratt authorized 
No. 98-11251 

-2-

the investigating officer to enter the residence and retrieve the

weapon. The district court denied Howard’s motion to suppress

the firearm.

 We find no error, clear or otherwise, in the district court’s

finding that DaJuan Pratt had apparent authority to authorize

authorities to enter Howard’s dwelling to retrieve the firearm. 

United States v. Gonzales, 121 F.3d 928, 938 (5th Cir. 1997),

cert. denied, 118 S. Ct. 726, 1804 (1998). We likewise reject

Howard’s suggestion that Pratt’s consent to the search was

involuntary due to his age and custodial status. United States

v. Kelley, 981 F.2d 1464, 1470 (5th Cir. 1993); see also United

States v. Gutierrez-Hermosillo, 142 F.3d 1225, 1231-32 (10th Cir.

1998). 

The record supports the district court’s finding that Howard

acted with malice aforethought when he supplied a teenager with a

weapon and instructed him to use it if someone came in the back

door. Thus, the district court correctly applied the sentencing

guidelines for second degree murder to determine Howard’s base

offense level. United States v. Branch, 91 F.3d 699, 711, 734

(5th Cir. 1996), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1185 (1997); United

States v. Gonzales, 996 F.2d 88, 89-92 (5th Cir. 1993); see

U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(c)(1)(B). 

While Howard waited nearby in a car, his codefendant,

Brooks, threatened a witness not to reveal his and Howard’s names

to the police. Howard challenges the district court’s

determination that Howard had obstructed justice because the

intimidation of the witness was jointly undertaken by both Howard
No. 98-11251 

-3-

and Brooks. We find no error in the enhancement of Howard’s

sentence for obstruction of justice. United States v. Ismoila,

100 F.3d 380, 397 (5th Cir. 1996), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1219,

1247 (1997). 

AFFIRMED.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-14-00150-CR

Antonio GARCIA-VERA,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012CR10713

Honorable Maria Teresa Herr, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE STONE, JUSTICE ANGELINI, AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED.

SIGNED April 9, 2014.

_________________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                WRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                           PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350

         Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. 1350, I, the
undersigned Chief Financial Officer of Liquidmetal Technologies, Inc. (the
"Company"), hereby certifies, based on my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended June 30, 2003, (the "Report")
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.

/s/   Brian McDougall
_______________________________________________
Brian McDougall, Chief Financial Officer
August 14, 2003
IIB 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5005 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 6, 2018 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources 

AN ACT 

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special 

resource study to determine the suitability and feasibility 

of establishing the birthplace of James Weldon Johnson 

in Jacksonville, Florida, as a unit of the National Park 

System. 

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


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 5005 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. SPECIAL RESOURCE STUDY OF JAMES WELDON 

2 JOHNSON BIRTHPLACE. 

3 (a) STUDY.—The Secretary of the Interior shall con4 duct a special resource study to determine the suitability 

5 and feasibility of establishing the birthplace of James 

6 Weldon Johnson located at Adams & Lee Street in Jack7 sonville, Florida, as a unit of the National Park System. 

8 (b) STUDY REQUIREMENTS.—The Secretary shall 

9 conduct the study in accordance with section 100507 of 

10 title 54, United States Code. 

11 (c) REPORT.—Not later than 3 years after the date 

12 on which funds are made available to carry out this Act, 

13 the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Natural 

14 Resources of the House of Representatives and the Com15 mittee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate 

16 a report that describes— 

17 (1) the results of the study; and 

18 (2) any recommendations of the Secretary. 

Passed the House of Representatives June 5, 2018. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS