alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 31.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Jeffery Daub, certify that:

1.    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Drinks Americas
      Holdings, Ltd.

2.    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement
      of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
      statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
      were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
      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 and I are responsible for
      establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
      defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant
      and have:

      a. designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

      b. evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

      c. disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most
recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

5.    The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on
      our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,
      to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's
      board of directors (or persons performing equivalent functions):

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

      b. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.



Dated as of  August 7, 2007                           /s/ Jeffery Daub
                                                      -----------------------
                                                      Jeffery Daub
                                                      Chief Financial Officer
**EXHIBIT 32**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVEOFFICER**

**AND PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING OFFICER**

**PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, Judd D.Hoffman, President and Chief Executive Officer of American Medical Technologies, Inc.(the “Company”), and Barbara D. Woody, Vice President Administration &Finance and principal accounting officer of the Company, certify that:

 

1.               the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Companyfor the year ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.               the information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/ Judd D. Hoffman                    |   | Dated: April 10,  2008 |
|----------------------------------------|--------|-----------------------------|
| Judd D. Hoffman                        |   |
| President and Chief  Executive Officer |   |

 

 
| /s/ Barbara D. Woody                                                                |   | Dated: April 10,  2008 |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|-----------------------------|
| Barbara Woody                                                                       |   |
| Vice President Administration &  Finance and principal

accounting officer |   |

 

----
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION OF CEO AND CFO PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with theAnnual Report of AVI BioPharma, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K forthe period ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Leslie Hudson, Ph.D.,as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and J. David Boyle II, as ChiefFinancial Officer of the Company, each 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 the best of his knowledge,:

 

(1) TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
| /s/ Leslie Hudson,  Ph.D.                        |   |
|--------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Leslie Hudson, Ph.D.                             |   |
| President, Chief  Executive Officer and Director |   |
| AVI  BioPharma, Inc.                        |   |
| March 16, 2010                              |   |

 

 
| /s/ J. David Boyle II                              |   |
|----------------------------------------------------|--------|
| J. David Boyle II                                  |   |
| Senior Vice President  and Chief Financial Officer |   |
| AVI  BioPharma, Inc.                          |   |
| March 16, 2010                                |   |

 

This certificationaccompanies the Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 andshall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, bedeemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934, as amended.

 

See also thecertification pursuant to Sec. 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which isalso attached to this Report.

 

----
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

JOHN JOEL RALSTON,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 72 WAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

JOHN JOEL RALSTON,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 73 WAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 18th day of September, 2023

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

DUANE ROLLINS, Defendant Below, Appellant,

v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff Below, Appellee. § § § No. 532, 2014 § § § Court Below—Superior Court § of the State of Delaware, § in and for New Castle County § Cr. No. 121201904 § § Submitted: October 28, 2014 Decided: October 28, 2014

ORDER

This 28 th day of October 2014, it appears to the Court that on September 22, 2014, the appellant, Duane Rollins, filed a notice of appeal from a Superior Court order denying his motion to withdraw his guilty ple a, his motion to dismiss counsel, and his counsel’s motion to withdraw. Th e appellant has not yet been

sentenced. The Senior Court Clerk issued a notice to the appellant to show cause why his appeal should not be dismissed for this Cou rt’s lack of jurisdiction to hear an interlocutory criminal appeal. The appellant ha s not responded to the notice to show cause within the required ten-day period and t herefore dismissal of the appeal is deemed to be unopposed. Dismissal of thi s appeal renders the appellant’s requests for appointment of counsel and an extensio n to file his opening brief

moot.2

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, under Supreme Court Rule 29(b), that this appeal is DISMISSED and the appellant’s r equests for appointment of counsel and extension to file his opening brief are moot. BY THE COURT:

/s/ Karen L. Valihura Justice
II 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 209 

To authorize an additional district judgeship for the district of Idaho. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 24, 2017 

Mr. CRAPO (for himself and Mr. RISCH) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To authorize an additional district judgeship for the district 

of Idaho. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DISTRICT JUDGESHIP FOR THE DISTRICT OF 

4 IDAHO. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—The President shall appoint, by 

6 and with the advice and consent of the Senate, 1 addi7 tional district judge for the district of Idaho. 

8 (b) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENT.— 

9 The table in section 133(a) of title 28, United States 

10 Code, is amended by striking the item relating to Idaho 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 209 IS

1 and inserting the following: 

‘‘Idaho ............................................................................................. 3’’. 

Æ 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**

June 22, 2021

No. 04

- 20

- 00553

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF A.Z.F., A CHILD
,

From the 408th Judicial District Court

, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2019

- CI

- 08725 Honorable David A. Canales , Judge Presiding



### ORDER

Appellant’s brief was due on February 24, 2021

. Neither the brief nor a motion for extension of time has been filed. We therefore ORDER appellant to file the appellant’s brief in this court no later than 15 days from the date of this order, along with a written response reasonably explaining : (1) the f ailure to timely file the brief and /or a motion for extension ; and (2) why appellee is not significantly injured by appellant’s failure to timely file a brief.

If appellant fails to file a brief and the written response by the date ordered, t his appeal will be dismissed for want of prosecution. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.8(a); see also T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(c) (allowing involuntary dismissal if appellant has failed to c omply with a court order).

________________ _________________ Liz a A. Rodriguez , Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 22nd day of June, 2021

.

______________ _____________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ
, Clerk of Court
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

NING HE, 

Petitioner, 

 v. 

WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, 

Respondent.

No. 18-72826 

Agency No. A205-540-281 

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

 Submitted October 15, 2019**

Before: FARRIS, LEAVY, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

Ning He, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of the 

Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an immigration 

judge’s decision denying her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and 

relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

OCT 22 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 18-72826 

8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, 

applying the standards governing adverse credibility determinations created by the 

REAL ID Act. Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034, 1039-40 (9th Cir. 2010). We 

deny the petition for review. 

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination 

based on an inconsistency between He’s testimony and the divorce decree as to the 

custody status of her son, as well as an inconsistency between He’s testimony and 

her visa application concerning her employment history. See id. at 1048 (adverse 

credibility finding reasonable under the totality of the circumstances). Substantial 

evidence also supports the agency’s finding that He’s corroborative evidence did 

not rehabilitate her testimony. See Garcia v. Holder, 749 F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir. 

2014). He’s explanations do not compel a contrary conclusion. See Lata v. INS, 

204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir. 2000). Thus, in the absence of credible testimony, 

in this case, He’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. 

Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).

He’s CAT claim also fails because it is based on the same testimony the 

agency found not credible, and He does not point to any other evidence in the 

record that compels the conclusion that it is more likely than not she would be 
3 18-72826 

tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to 

China. See id. at 1156-57.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C Section 1350)



In connection with the Annual Report of Guardian Technologies International, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB/A for the year ended December 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Gregory E. Hare, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, does hereby certify pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as amended, that, to the best of his knowledge:



(1)

The Report fully complies with the reporting 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 operations of the Company.





Date: August 31, 2006

Signed: /s/ Gregory E. Hare

Name:

Gregory E. Hare

Title:

Chief Financial Officer
JEFFREY A. LOVITKY

ATTORNEY AT LAW

1776 K STREET, N.W., SUITE 800

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006

MEMBER DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA TEL: (202) 429-3393

FLORIDA AND CONNECTICUT BARS FACSIMILE (202) 318-4013

 E-MAIL: jeff@lovitky.com

May 7, 2015

Via E-mail kathleen.blankriether@dot.gov

Ms. Kathleen Blank Riether

Sr. Trial Attorney

U.S. Department of Transportation

Office of the General Counsel

Aviation Enforcement Office

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE, W98-321

Washington, DC 20590

Re: Jonathan Parker v. Saudi Arabian Airlines, Docket DOT-OST-2015-0093

Tasha Grant v. Saudi Arabian Airlines, Docket DOT-OST-2015-0094

Dear Ms. Blank Riether: 

Complainant opposes a 60-day extension. As noted in our complaint, these 

cases directly involve the personal safety of individuals traveling on Saudi Arabian 

Airlines. We would respectfully assert that the personal security of individual

passengers should be of greater concern than any difficulties which respondent’s 

counsel may be experiencing in obtaining information from his client. 

Second, I would have expected that Mr. Cashen would have attempted to 

determine whether I would oppose his request for an extension to file a responsive 

pleading prior to contacting your office. In any event, there was no obvious 

necessity for Mr. Cashen to have engaged in an ex parte oral communication with 

your office when a simple written request for an extension would have sufficed. As 

you are undoubtedly aware, the APA contains a general prohibition on ex parte 

communications in formal adversarial proceedings. 5 U.S.C. 557. Accordingly, I 

would kindly request that all future communications with your office occur in the 

presence of both parties.
Kathleen Blank Riether

May 7, 2015

Page 2 of 2

Respectfully,

Jeffrey A. Lovitky

JAL/ls

Cc: Henry C. Cashen II
Opinion issued August 30, 2018

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01 - 1 8 - 00 479 - CR

——————————— PAULA SINCLAIR , Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 24 0th District Court Fort Bend County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1 7 - DCR - 076949 MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, Paula Sinclair , attempts to appeal from “ the trial court’s denial of her motion for new trial on May 22, 2018 . ” We dismiss the appeal. Generally, th is Court only has jurisdiction to consider an appeal by a criminal defendant whe n there has been a final judgment o f conviction. See Workman v. State ,2

343 S.W.2d 446, 447 ( Tex. Crim. App. 1961) ; Saliba v. State , 4 5 S.W . 3 d 329 , 329 (Tex. App.

— Dallas 200 1, no pet.) . Here, t he trial court, on March 9, 2018 , dismissed the case upon appellant’s conviction in another case, trial court cause number 17 - DCR - 079457 . 1 Accordingly , there is no judgment of conviction in the underlying case, only an order of dismissal . Absent a judgment of conviction, we do not have jurisdiction to consider appellant’s appeal. See Workman , 343 S.W.2d at 447; Skillern v. State , 355 S.W.3d 262, 266

– 67 (Tex. App.

— Houston [1st Dist.] 2011, pet. ref’d); see, e.g. , Meeks v. State , Nos. 14 - 14 - 00497 - CR, 14 - 14 - 00581 - CR, 2014 WL 3843821, at *1 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] Aug. 5, 2014, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (determining court wa s without jurisdiction when appellant filed notice of appeal of order dismissing case because appellant had been convicted in another case); Ballard v. State , Nos. 01 - 08 - 00947 - CR, 01 - 08 - 00948 - CR, 2009 WL 3248197, at *1 (Tex. App.

— Houston [1st Dist.] Oct. 8 , 2009, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (explaining court had no jurisdiction because “cause is finally disposed of by a judgment of dismissal and there is no judgment of conviction”) .

1 The clerk’s record filed in this Court does not include a motion for new trial filed in the underlying trial court proceeding but does include the trial court’s “Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law,” stating that the trial court “rules to deny [appella nt’s] motion for new trial.” However, these findings and conclusions were filed in trial court “Cause Numbers: 17 - DCR - 079457, 17 - DCR - 079458, 17 - DCR - 079459, and 17 - DCR - 079460,” not cause number 17 - DCR - 076949, the case underlying this appeal.3

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of ju risdiction. We dismiss any pending motions as moot. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Bland , and Lloyd . Do not publish. T EX . R. A PP . P. 47.2( b).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
REGISTRANT'S CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF AND FOR THE YEARS ENDED
AND AUGUST, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1997
<CASH>                                           6,304
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,522
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (241)
<INVENTORY>                                      3,612
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   334
<PP&E>                                          12,702
<DEPRECIATION>                                  (6,982)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  21,186
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,055
<BONDS>                                          1,660
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             6
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    21,186
<SALES>                                         17,197
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                23,353
<CGS>                                           11,882
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   16,731
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 5,553
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 275
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    794
<INCOME-TAX>                                        40
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                754
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       754
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.15<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.15<F1>
<FN>
<F1>SEE NOTE 5 OF NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
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 quarterly report of Netopia, Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-Q for the three months ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), William D. Baker, as Senior Vice President, Finance and Operations and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | i. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | ii. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



By:

/s/ William D. BakerWilliam D. BakerSenior Vice President, Finance and Operations, and Chief Financial OfficerDate: February 17, 2004