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 of European Micro Holdings, Inc. (the
“ Company ”)
      on
      Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “ Report ”),
      the
      undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby
      certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:




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.  The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.






Date:October
                10, 2007
            By:*/s/
                Jay P. Nash*
              
              Name:Jay
                P. NashTitle:Chief
                Financial Officer





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 European Micro Holdings, Inc. and will
      be
      retained by European Micro Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
      Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Case 3:22-cr-00093-M Document 21 Filed 06/30/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 37
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-7623

LANCE M. JOHNSON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

JAMES DALTON, Circuit Court Judge; PAMELA BASKERVILLE, 

Circuit Court Judge; PHILLIP T. DISTANISGELLO, JR., Defense 

Attorney,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District 

Judge. (2:11-cv-00577-RAJ-FBS)

Submitted: March 29, 2012 Decided: April 3, 2012

Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lance M. Johnson, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Lance M. Johnson appeals the district court’s order 

dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) action for failure to 

state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2006). We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, 

we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Johnson

v. Dalton, No. 2:11-cv-00577-RAJ-FBS (E.D. Va. Nov. 7, 2011). 

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
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 21.1

                              List of Subsidiaries



1.   Essex Portfolio, L.P., a California limited partnership
2.   Essex Management Corporation, a California corporation
3.   Essex-Palisades Facilitator, a California limited partnership
4.   Essex Sunpointe Limited, a California limited partnership
5.   Essex Washington Interest Partners, a California general partnership
6.   Essex San Ramon Partners L.P., a California limited partnership
7.   Essex Bristol Partners, L.P., a California limited partnership
8.   Essex Fidelity I Corporation, a California corporation
9.   Essex Camarillo Corporation, a California corporation
10.  Essex Camarillo L.P., a California limited partnership
11.  Essex Meadowood Corporation, a California corporation
12.  Essex Meadowood, L.P., a California limited partnership
13.  Essex Bunker Hill Corporation, a California corporation
14.  Essex Bunker Hill, L.P., a California limited partnership
15.  Essex Treetops Corporation, a California corporation
16.  Essex Treetops, L.P., a California limited partnership
17.  Essex Bluffs, L.P., a California limited partnership
18.  Essex Huntington Breakers, L.P., a California limited partnership
19.  Essex Stonehedge, L.P., a California limited partnership
20.  Essex Bridle Trails, L.P., a California limited partnership
21.  Essex Spring Lake, L.P., a California limited partnership
22.  Essex Maple Leaf, L.P., a California limited partnership
23.  Fountain Court Apartment Associates, L.P., a Washington limited partnership
24.  Essex Fountain Court, LLC, a Washington limited liability company
25.  Essex Inglenook Court, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
26.  Essex Wandering Creek, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
27.  Essex Fairways, LLC, A California limited liability company
28.  Essex Columbus, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
29.  Essex Loraine, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
30.  Essex Glenbrook, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
31.  Essex Euclid, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
32.  Essex Loraine, Inc., a California corporation
33.  Essex Columbus, Inc., a California corporation
34.  Richmond Essex L.P., a California limited partnership
35.  Essex Chesapeake L.P., a California limited partnership
36.  Essex Los Angeles L.P., a California limited partnership
37.  Essex Woodland Apartments L.P., a California limited partnership
38.  Essex The Crest L.P., a California limited partnership
39.  Richmond Essex, Inc., a California corporation
40.  Essex City Heights Corporation, a Delaware corporation
41.  Essex VFGP Corporation, a Delaware corporation
42.  Essex Anaheim, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
43.  Jackson School Village, L.P. a California limited partnership
PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

________

No. 09

- 1466

________

DOROTHY RHUE ALLEN,

by her Attorney in fact, James Martin,

Individually and as a class representative on behalf

of others similarly situated,

Appella nt

v.

LASALLE BANK, N.A;

CENLAR FEDERAL SAVINGS BANK FSB;

FEIN, SUCH, KAHN AND SHEPARD, PC;

JOHN DOE SERVICERS 1

- 100;

JOHN DOE LAW FIRMS 1

- 100

________

On Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of New Jersey

(D.C. No. 3

- 08

- cv

- 02240 )

District Judge: Honorable Anne E. Thompson

________

Argued September 13 , 2010

Before: SLOVITER, BARRY, and SMITH

Circuit Judges

ORDER AMENDING OPINION

IT IS ORDERED that the slip opinion in the above case, filed January 12,

2011 be amended as follows:2 Page 3, line 3, “Federal Debt Collection Practices Act ” should be del e ted

and replaced by “Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.”

By the Court,

/s/ Dolores K. Sloviter

Circuit Judge

Dated : January 13, 2011
**Exhibit
      32.2**





**ESSEX
      PORFOLIO, L.P.**


**Certification
      of Chief Financial Officer**


**Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted**


**Pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**








Pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections (a) and (b) of
      Section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), I, Michael T. Dance,
      Chief Financial Officer, of Essex Property Trust, Inc., the general partner
      of
      the registrant, Essex Portfolio, L.P., hereby certify, to the best of my
      knowledge, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December
      31,
      2005 (the “Form 10-K”) of Essex Portfolio, L.P. fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and information contained in the Form 10-K
      fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
      of operations of Essex Portfolio, L.P. at the dates of and for the periods
      presented.











Date:
      March 15, 2006     /s/
      Michael T. Dance


Michael
      T. Dance


Chief
      Financial Officer, Executive Vice President,


Essex
      Property Trust, Inc., general partner of


Essex
      Portfolio, L.P
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04

- 23

- 00318

- CR

IN RE Isaias PAZ

- ESTRADA , et al

. Original Proceeding 1



### PER CURIAM
Sitting: Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Beth Watkins , Justice Liza A. Rodriguez , Justice

Delivered and Filed: February 21, 2024

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DISMISSED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART
On April 4, 2023, relators filed a petition for writ of mandamus. On June 6, 2023, we

receiv ed notice that relator Alberto Garcia Galvan ’s request for relief is now moot. Accordingly,

we dismiss r elator Galvan’s request for relief as moot.
As for the remaining seventeen relators, a fter considering the petition, real party in

interest’s response, relators’ reply, amicus briefing, and this record, this court concludes relators

1 This proceeding arises out of eighteen civil bond forfeiture cases involving the State of Texas and the following defendants and their trial cause numbers: Isaias Paz

- Estrada , Cause No. 1096; Jorge Luis de la Cruz

- Cordov a , Cause No. 1110 ; Marcelo Hernandez

- Pablo , Cause No. 1111 ; Diego Villarreal Castellanos , Cause No. 1112 ; Jose Domingo Palacio Lazarin
, Cause No. 1113 ; Oribel Martinez Leon , Cause No. 1220 ; Roque Alvarez Arias , Cause No. 1242 ; Pedro Marcos Ruiz Aguilar , Cause No. 1246 ; Romario Lopez Jimenez , Cause No. 1249 ; Alberto Garcia Galvan
, Cause No. 1254 ; Walter Gonzalez Rueda , Cause No. 1256 ; Jorge Luis Olalde

- Gustavo ; Cause No. 1275 ; Luis Adrian Medina

- Gonzalez , Cause No. 1277 ; Joel Santiago Zamora , Cause No. 1278 ; Juan Ignasio Gonzalez Abundis , Cause No. 1279 ; Carlos Oviedo Oviedo , Cause No. 1280 ; Oscar Gerado Posadas

- Garcias, Cause No. 1283; and Abenmar Cordova Cacho , Cause No. 1311 all pending in the County Court
, Kinney County, Texas, the Honorable David E. Garcia presiding.04

- 23

- 00318

- CR

- 2

- 

### are not entitled to the relief sought. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. See

T EX



### . R. A PP



### . P. 52.8(a)

.
PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000938322
<NAME> CIGF-II
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                       2,628,639
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  208,454
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               341,358
<PP&E>                                       9,018,778
<DEPRECIATION>                             (1,795,034)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,402,195
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,302,397
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     7,099,798
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,402,195
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               920,786
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               866,780
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 54,006
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             54,006
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    54,006
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

The undersigned officer of The Stride Rite Corporation (the "Company") hereby
certifies that the Company's quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly
period ended March 4, 2005 (the "Report"), as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission of the date hereof, fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended, and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company. This certification is provided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and
shall not be deemed to be a part of the Report or "filed" for any purpose
whatsoever.



Date: April 13, 2005                Name:       /s/ David M. Chamberlain
      ------------------                  ------------------------------------

                                    Title:      Chairman and CEO
                                           -----------------------------------
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                         660,557
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,480,487
<ALLOWANCES>                                   228,594
<INVENTORY>                                    229,832
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,498,537
<PP&E>                                       1,266,163
<DEPRECIATION>                                 725,210
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,609,973
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,517,219
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     8,038,955         
<OTHER-SE>                                 (6,920,732)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,609,973
<SALES>                                      5,114,844
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             6,316,756
<CGS>                                        4,434,530
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,177,119
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,362,799
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              82,632
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (302,869)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (302,869)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (302,869)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.08)
        

</TABLE>
1 

### Nesky, Anthony

From: Dawn Kolkman <dkolkman@uranerz.com>

Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2015 3:42 PM

To: Nesky, Anthony

Cc: Mike Thomas

Subject: Public Hearing for 40 CFR 192

Tony,

I received your notification of the public hearing in D.C.; however, given the distance I would request a public hearing in

Wyoming. Casper Wyoming is a central location to the majority of ISR operations that are the focus of the proposed

rulemaking and it would be prudent and practical for EPA to hold a hearing here.

Thank You

Dawn Kolkman

Permitting Manager

Uranerz Energy Corporation

1701 East “E” Street

PO Box 50850

Casper, WY 82605

‐ 0850 USA

T: 307

‐ 289

‐ 8900 | F: 307

‐ 265

‐ 8904 | E: dkolkman@uranerz.com

This electronic coummunication, and any attachments, may contain information which is confidential and/or privileged. If you are not the intended

recipient, you are hereby notified that any distribution, copying or reliance upon the contents of this coummunication is strictly prohibited. If you

have received this coummunication in error, please notify the sender immediately and kindly delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AMARILLO DIVISION

LINDSAY CRAVEN, §

§

§

Petitioner, §

§

v. § 2:22-CV-045-Z

§

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, §

§

§

Respondent. §

FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION TO DISMISS

Petitioner, Lindsay Craven, filed a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence under 

28 U.S.C. § 2255 by a person in federal custody. By order to show cause signed June 2, 2023, 

the undersigned noted that the motion appeared to be untimely and ordered Petitioner to file a 

response no later than June 16, 2023, explaining why this case is not barred by the one-year 

statute of limitations or why the statute of limitations should be tolled on equitable grounds. The 

order cautioned that failure to comply might result in the dismissal of the action for failure to 

prosecute. FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b). To date, Petitioner has failed to respond to the order or 

correspond with the Court in any manner.

RECOMMENDATION

For the reasons discussed herein, it is the RECOMMENDATION of the United States 

Magistrate Judge to the United States District Judge that the motion of Petitioner, Lindsay Craven,

be DISMISSED.

Case 2:22-cv-00045-Z-BR Document 5 Filed 06/30/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID 54
2

INSTRUCTIONS FOR SERVICE

The United States District Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Findings, Conclusion and 

Recommendation to each party by the most efficient means available.

IT IS SO RECOMMENDED.

ENTERED on June 30, 2023.

* NOTICE OF RIGHT TO OBJECT *

Any party may object to these proposed findings, conclusions and recommendation. In the 

event parties wish to object, they are hereby NOTIFIED that the deadline for filing objections is 

fourteen (14) days from the date of filing as indicated by the “entered” date directly above the 

signature line. Service is complete upon mailing, Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2)(C), or transmission by 

electronic means, Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2)(E). Any objections must be filed on or before the 

fourteenth (14th) day after this recommendation is filed as indicated by the “entered” date. See

28 U.S.C. § 636(b); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d).

Any such objections shall be made in a written pleading entitled “Objections to the 

Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation.” Objecting parties shall file the written objections 

with the United States District Clerk and serve a copy of such objections on all other parties. A 

party’s failure to timely file written objections shall bar an aggrieved party, except upon grounds 

of plain error, from attacking on appeal the unobjected-to proposed factual findings, legal 

conclusions, and recommendation set forth by the Magistrate Judge and accepted by the district 

court. See Douglass v. United Services Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1428-29 (5th Cir. 1996) (en 

banc), superseded by statute on other grounds, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), as recognized in ACS 

Recovery Servs., Inc. v. Griffin, 676 F.3d 512, 521 n.5 (5th Cir. 2012); Rodriguez v. Bowen, 857 

F.2d 275, 276-77 (5th Cir. 1988).

Case 2:22-cv-00045-Z-BR Document 5 Filed 06/30/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID 55
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 Apollo Gold Corporation (the “Company”)
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the
undersigned hereby certifies, 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 result of operations of the Company.




/s/
      R. David RussellR.
      David RussellPresident
      and Chief Executive OfficerNovember
      16, 2009





/s/ Melvyn WilliamsMelvyn
      WilliamsChief
      Financial Officer and Senior VicePresident-Finance and Corporate
  DevelopmentNovember
      16, 2009





A signed
original 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.




The
foregoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350.  It is not being filed
for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company,
whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general
incorporation language in such filing.
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS

Appeal of - )

)

BAE Systems Norfolk Ship Repair ) ASBCA No. 62707-ADR

)

Under Contract No. N00024-17-C-4409 )

APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT: Barbara A. Duncombe, Esq.

Brandon E. Dobyns, Esq.

Sean A. Graves, Esq.

 Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP

 Indianapolis, IN

James A. Kelley, Esq.

 James A. Kelley & Associates

 Washington, DC

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: Craig D. Jensen, Esq.

 Navy Chief Trial Attorney

Devin Wolak, Esq.

 Trial Attorney

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The dispute has been settled. The appeal is dismissed with prejudice.

Dated: March 29, 2022

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed 

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA No. 62707-ADR, Appeal of BAE 

Systems Norfolk Ship Repair, rendered in conformance with the Board’s Charter.

Dated: March 29, 2022 

HEIDI L. OSTERHOUT

Administrative Judge

Armed Services Board

of Contract Appeals

PAULLA K. GATES-LEWIS

Recorder, Armed Services

Board of Contract Appeals