alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32



CERTIFICATION



(Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350



The undersigned hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge, (i) the foregoing Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q SB filed by Yadkin Valley Company (the
Company) for the quarter ended September 30, 2003, 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.



|                        |  |                                                          
|----------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------
|                        | 
|Date: November 10, 2003 |  | /s/  David S. Perry                                      
|                        | 
|                        |  | David S. Perry, President and Principal Financial Officer
# C_2022228EN.01000301.xml

| 13.6.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 228/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.6.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 228/3

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10662 – ATLANTIA / YUNEX)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 228/03)

On 7 June 2022, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32022M10662. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32022M10662. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
# C_2022100EN.01004101.xml

| 1.3.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 100/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.3.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 100/41

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.10559 – A P MOELLER-MAERSK / SENATOR INTERNATIONAL)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 100/09)

1.

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| — | A.P. Møller-Mærsk A/S Group (‘APMM’, Denmark), |
| --- | --- |

—

A.P. Møller-Mærsk A/S Group (‘APMM’, Denmark),

| — | Senator International group (‘Senator International’, Germany). |
| --- | --- |

—

Senator International group (‘Senator International’, Germany).

APMM will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of Senator International.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares and assets.

2.

| — | APMM: integrated transport and logistics company with worldwide activities. APMM’s core activities comprise container liner shipping through its subsidiaries Maersk A/S, SeaLand, and Hamburg Süd, container terminal services, inland transportation, inland services, supply chain management services, harbour towage and reefer container manufacturing, |
| --- | --- |

—

APMM: integrated transport and logistics company with worldwide activities. APMM’s core activities comprise container liner shipping through its subsidiaries Maersk A/S, SeaLand, and Hamburg Süd, container terminal services, inland transportation, inland services, supply chain management services, harbour towage and reefer container manufacturing,

| — | Senator International: family-owned company primarily specialized in international freight, shipping and logistics, with its main focus on air and ocean freight forwarding, as well as logistics, packaging and customs services. |
| --- | --- |

—

Senator International: family-owned company primarily specialized in international freight, shipping and logistics, with its main focus on air and ocean freight forwarding, as well as logistics, packaging and customs services.

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

4.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.10559 – A P MOELLER-MAERSK / SENATOR INTERNATIONAL

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax +32 22964301

Postal address:

| European Commission |
| --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

1

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-6819

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

EARL TYRONE WILLIAMS, a/k/a Bucky Williams,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. John R. Hargrove, Senior District Judge.

(CR-88-103-HAR, CA-94-1774-HAR)

Submitted: March 5, 1996 Decided: March 26, 1996

Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Earl Tryone Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Gregory Welsh, Assistant

United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his

28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1988) motion. Although he raises several ineffective assistance of counsel claims, he fails to establish prejudice.

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984). Furthermore,

Appellant's sentence of supervised release for a crime committed on

July 1, 1987, does not violate the Ex Post Facto clause. GozlonPeretz v. United States, 498 U.S. 395, 409-10 (1991). Accordingly,

we affirm the district court's order. 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
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 ValCom, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-Q for the quarter ended  December  31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof  (the  "Report"), I, Vincent Vellardita,
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer  of  the  Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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 and 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.

A signed original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to ValCom, Inc. and will be retained by  ValCom, Inc. and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

October 16, 2008

By: /s/  Vince Vellardita
    ----------------------
    Vince Vellardita
    Chief Executive Officer,
    Chief Financial Officer
   (Principal Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)
# C_2022166EN.01000401.xml

| 20.4.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 166/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.4.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 166/4

---

Withdrawal of notification of a concentration

(Case M.10594 – SECURITAS / STANLEY SECURITY)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 166/02)

On 18 March 2022, the European Commission received notification (1) of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) (‘Merger Regulation’).

On 11 April 2022, the notifying party informed the Commission that it withdrew its notification.

---

(1)  OJ C 134, 25.3.2022, p. 33.

(2)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. REVISED, OCTOBER 24, 2000

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-30898 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus FRANK S. JACKSON, JR., Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 99-CR-25-ALL-M

- - - - - - - - - - September 1, 2000 Before EMILIO M. GARZA, STEWART and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Frank S. Jackson, Jr., appeals from his jury-verdict conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm which had been shipped in interstate commerce. He argues that the district court erred in adding three criminal history points for his prior conviction for attempted manslaughter. Because he failed to object to this issue in district court, our review is limited to plain error. See United States v. Ocana , 204 F.3d 585, 588 (5th Cir. 2000).No. 99-30898 -2- Jackson’s sentence for his attempted-manslaughter conviction included a two-year term of imprisonment as a condition of his probation, and he was given credit for time served. His prior sentence therefore qualified as a sentence of imprisonment exceeding one year and one month under U.S.S.G. § 4A1.1(a). See U.S.S.G. §§ 4A1.1(a), 4A1.2(b), 4A1.2, comment. (n.2); see also United States v. Brown , 54 F.3d 234, 239-40 (5th Cir. 1995)(defendant, who was given credit for time served, actually served part of his prior sentence, thereby qualifying such prior sentence as a sentence of imprisonment under § 4A1.1(a)). The district court did not err in adding three points for his prior sentence under § 4A1.1(a), and its judgment is AFFIRMED. Jackson has moved this court for appointment of substitute counsel. Given the disposition of the instant appeal and the fact that his currently appointed counsel appears to have rendered meaningful assistance, his motion is DENIED.
AFFIRMED; MOTION DENIED.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

STEPHEN BEST, No. 65056 Appellant, DEMETE ROSS, V S. 

# FILED Respondent. 

### MAR 2 1 2016 gal EAAAN 

## Ai - V diet ar ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL Cause appearing, appellant's motion for a voluntary dismissal of this appeal is granted. This appeal is dismissed. NRAP 42(b).

It is so ORDERED.

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA CLERK'S ORDER 

### CLERK OF THE SUPREME COURT 

### TRACE K. 

### LINDEMAN BY: 

### at

cc: Hon. Cheryl B. Moss, District Judge, Family Court Division Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP/Las Vegas Michele L. Roberts Eighth District Court Clerk

(01-1947
# C_2022016EN.01000101.xml

| 13.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 16/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 16/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10471 – SUEZ / SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC / JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 16/01)

On 7 January 2022, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32022M10471. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32022M10471. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
# C_2022179EN.01000501.xml

| 2.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 179/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 179/5

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.10695 – APOLLO MANAGEMENT / BANK AND ACQUIRERS INTERNATIONAL HOLDING)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 179/04)

1.

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| — | Apollo Management, L.P. (‘Apollo’, US), |
| --- | --- |

—

Apollo Management, L.P. (‘Apollo’, US),

| — | Bank and Acquirers International Holding S.A.S. (‘BAI’, France), controlled by Worldline SA (‘Wordline’, France). |
| --- | --- |

—

Bank and Acquirers International Holding S.A.S. (‘BAI’, France), controlled by Worldline SA (‘Wordline’, France).

Apollo will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of BAI.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

| — | Apollo is a global alternative asset manager headquartered in New York City, |
| --- | --- |

—

Apollo is a global alternative asset manager headquartered in New York City,

| — | BAI is part of Worldline and is the sub-holding company of a group of companies active in the manufacturing and supply of point of sales terminals (POS terminals) and related software services mostly to merchant acquirers (banks and payment service providers), acquirers and distributors. |
| --- | --- |

—

BAI is part of Worldline and is the sub-holding company of a group of companies active in the manufacturing and supply of point of sales terminals (POS terminals) and related software services mostly to merchant acquirers (banks and payment service providers), acquirers and distributors.

3.

Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

4.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.10695 – APOLLO MANAGEMENT / BANK AND ACQUIRERS INTERNATIONAL HOLDING

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax +32 22964301

Postal address:

| European Commission |
| --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

1

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.

2

---
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13**  **- 1697** 

CHARLES OWUSU ANI , Petitioner ,

v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General , Respondent

.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Submitted : November 26, 2013 Decided: December 19, 2013

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNCAN , Circuit Judges.

Petition d ismissed by un published per curiam opinion

.

David Goren, LAW OFFICE OF DAVID GOREN, Silver Spring, Maryland, for Petitioner. Stuart F. Delery, Assistant Attorney General, Linda S. Wernery, Assistant Director, James E. Grimes, Office of Immigration Litigation , UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Wa shington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Charles Owusu Ani, a native and citizen of Ghana, petitions this court for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“Board”) order affirming the immigration judge’s denial of his request to continue his removal proceedings . Ani sought a continuance to allow his wife, who is an American citizen, to administratively appeal USCIS’s * order revoking its prior approval of the I

- 130 visa petition she had filed for Ani’s benefit . The Attorney General argues that this petition for review has been rendered moot by the Board’s subsequent affirmance of USCIS’s decision. We agree.

Whether the c ourt is “presented with a live case or controversy” is an is sue that “goes to the heart of the Article III jurisdiction of the courts.” Friedman’s, Inc. v. Dunlap , 290 F.3d 191, 197 (4th Cir. 2002) (inte rnal quotation marks omitted). To qualify for adjudication in federal court, “an actual controversy must be ext ant at all stages of review, not merely at the time the complaint is filed.” Arizonans for Official English v. Arizona , 520 U.S. 43, 67 (1997) (internal quotation marks omitted). “[I]f an event occurs while a case is pending on appeal that makes it impos sible for the court to grant ‘any effectual relief whatever’ to a prevailing party, the

* United States Citizenship and Immigration Services.3 appeal must be dismissed.” Church of Scientology of Cal. v. United States , 506 U.S. 9, 12 (1992) (quoting Mills v. Green , 159 U.S. 651, 653 (1895)). The sole issue i n this petition for review is Ani’s challenge to the Board’s decision affirming the immigration judge’s denial of his request for a continuance. Even if we were to accept Ani’s arguments and remand the case, Ani’s basis for seeking a continuance is no lon ger viable. Therefore, we cannot render a decision that would affect Ani’s legal rights.

See Qureshi v. Gonzales , 442 F.3d 985, 988

- 89 (7th Cir. 2006). We accordingly dismiss this petition for review as

moot. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

PETITION DISMISSED
# C_2022078EN.01000101.xml

| 18.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 78/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10304 – THERMO FISHER / PPD)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 78/01)

On 7 December 2021, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32021M10304. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32021M10304. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
# C_2022104EN.01000201.xml

| 4.3.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 104/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.3.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 104/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10480 – GOLDMAN SACHS / NN INVESTMENT PARTNERS HOLDING)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 104/02)

On 17 February 2022, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32022M10480. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32022M10480. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
relationships with major and national oil companies and foreign countries, oradditional trips authorized in advance by the Company’s CEO,(b) reimbursement of the cost for any domestic aircraft travel for business use in additionto the four (4) trips specified in (a) above in an amount not to exceed the cost of a firstclass ticket for such aircraft travel, and(c) reimbursement of the cost for gate-to-gate services in connection with connections forcommercial air travel.4. Except as specifically amended by this Amendment, all other terms and conditions of theAgreement shall remain in full force and effect.IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Parker and the Company have executed this Amendment to be effective as of thedate first written above.           PARKER DRILLING COMPANY   ROBERT L. PARKER             By: /s/Robert L. Parker, Jr.   By: /s/ Robert L. Parker             Name: Robert L. Parker, Jr.   Name: Robert L. Parker  Title: Chairman and CEO