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





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 SN Strategies Corp. a Nevada corporation
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2009, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
Michael Hawks, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certifies to the best of his knowledge, 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.





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











/s/
Michael
Hawks


Michael
Hawks


Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer


May 15,
2009






16
#### Fox River Paper Company, Appellant, vs. International Brotherhood of Papermakers, Local Union No. 16, Respondent.

*December 9, 1942*

January *12, 1943.*

*115The cause was submitted for the appellant on the brief of *Bouck, Hilton & Dempsey*of Oshkosh, and for the respondent on the brief of *Walter A. Graunke*of Wausau.

Per Curiam.

No principle of law is better established than that parties by agreement cannot confer jurisdiction upon a court. *State ex rel. Gaudynski v. Pruss*(1940), 233 Wis. 600, 290 N. W. 289. It is to be noted in this case that the order to show cause was signed by the circuit judge and returnable before the circuit judge and not before the court. Just how jurisdiction was conferred upon the court to make the order in question does not appear. This not being a proceeding in court, the court having no jurisdiction, the order from which the appeal is taken is clearly not an appealable order. This court has no jurisdiction to do anything but dismiss the appeal. *Delpo Corp. v. Northern States Power Co.*(1934), 215 Wis. 329, 254 N. W. 553.

Appeal dismissed.

Barlow, J., took no part.
#### Van Rooy Printing Company, Respondent, vs. Harvey Pierre Post No. 2778 of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, Appellant.

*April 13*

May 11, *1948.*

*526
      *Walter Melchior*of Appleton,' for the appellant.

For the respondent there was a brief by *Benton, Bosser, Becker, Parnell & Fulton*of Appleton, and oral argument by *David Fulton.*

Fairchild, J.

As appears from paragraph one of the contract, set out in the statement of facts above, the appellant legally bound itself to become publisher of five thousand copies of a book called, Appleton in World War II. The price was clearly agreed upon in paragraph two of the contract. The terms of paragraph three, relating to delivery and payment by instalments, do not alter the obligations arising under paragraphs one and two.

All that was submitted on the hearing for summary judgment shows that the obligations of appellant are definitely *527fixed by the contract; that by the terms there agreed upon the appellant is bound to pay for the copies of the book ordered. The books have been printed by the one engaged to do the printing. Five hundred volumes have been delivered. The rest are ready, and delivery has been offered. The appellant has paid upon account $300, and a balance of $7,950 is past due, as determined in the circuit court.

Upon the motion for summary judgment the appellant, in opposition, failed to meet the showing made by respondent. The contention that there was a lack of authority in the officers to make the contract and other like objections are not in any' way substantial, as an examination of appellant’s minutes as well as the payment on account reveal.

The court being properly convinced by the proofs submitted that respondent’s cause of action is established and the opposing party having failed to show facts that can be deemed sufficient to entitle appellant to a trial, judgment was granted. See sec. 270.635 (2), Stats. 1945.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
Exhibit 32


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 SUNBURST ACQUISITIONS V, INC.
(the "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the period ending April 30, 2005, (the "Report"), I, Jay
Lutsky, Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial and Accounting Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1)	The Report fully complies with the requirement 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 Company's financial position and results of
operations.


July 28, 2005

	/s/ Jay Lutsky
	Chief Executive Officer and
	Chief Financial and
	Accounting Officer
EXHIBIT 31.3

 

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

I, Michael Cammarata, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Neptune Wellness Solutions Inc.;

 

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.

 

 

Date:  April 21, 2023

|                                                                                                                                    |        |        |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|
|                                                                                                                               |   |   |
| /s/ Michael Cammarata                                                                                                              |
| Michael Cammarata

Chief Executive Officer, President and Director

Neptune Wellness Solutions Inc.

(Principal Executive Officer) |

 

----
## F I F T H 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________ Case No. 5D 2 0 2 3

- 2466 LT Case No. 2022

- CA

- 2485

_____________________________ J EANNIE F INLEY , Appellant,

v. L AKEVIEW L OAN S ERVICES , LLC, R ICHARD A. C APELLAN and J AMIE G ARCIA , Appellee s .

_____________________________ On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County. A.C. Soud , Jr., Judge. Louis C. Arslani an , of Ted Hollander & Associates, P.A ., Hollywo od, for Appellant. Heather L. Griffiths , of Padgett Law Group, Tallahassee , for Appellee , Lakeview Loan Servicing, LL C

. Edward F. Holodak, of Holodak, P.A., Ft. Lauderdale, for Appellee , Jam ie Garc ia

. No Appearance for Ap pellee , Richard A. Capel an . May 21, 2024 P ER C URIAM
. A FFIRMED
.2

L AMBERT , J AY , and K ILBANE , JJ., concur.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331 .

_____________________________
#### THE STATE ex rel. GREENE COUNTY, Appellant, v. GRANT G. LYDY et al.

In Banc,

April 23, 1912.

PLEADING: Demurrer: Failure to File Bond Sued On: Probate Judge. The failure of the county to file with its petition the official bond of the probate judge sued on or to file a copy of such bond with the petition, in a suit to compel the probate judge to pay into the county treasury the fees collected by him in excess- of the amount of the salary of the circuit Judge, cannot be raised by a demurrer 'to the petition.

Appeal from Greene Circuit *Court.*— Hon. *Alfred*Page, Judge.

Reversed and remanded *(with directions).*

*James H. Mason*and *Neville & Gorman*for appellant.

*J. T. White*and *Hamlin é Seawell*for respondents.

BROWN, J.

The issues in this case are precisely the same as those decided by this court In Banc in State ex rel. Buchanan County v. Imel, at this term, 242 Mo. 293, except that in the case at bar judgment was rendered in favor of defendant Lydy upon a demurrer which, in addition to assailing the constitutionality of part of section 10695, Revised Statutes 1909, also alleges that no bond is filed with said petition, nor is a certified copy thereof filed.

*317The failure of the plaintiff to file with its petition the official bond given by the defendant as judge of the probate court of Greene county or to file a copy of such bond with its petition, cannot be raised by demurrer. [Hannibal & St. Joe Railroad Company v. Knudson, 62 Mo. 569, l. c. 571; State ex rel. Gilbert v. Eldridge, 65 Mo. 584,l. c. 586; Christie v. Railroad, 94 Mo. l. c. 456.]

As the plaintiff’s petition states a cause of action against the defendant, we will reverse the judgment of the circuit court of Greene county and direct it to overrule defendant’s demurrer and try the cause pursuant to the law as announced in our opinion filed in the ease of State ex rel. Buchanan County v. Imel, supra.

It is so ordered.

All concur except *Woodson*and Graves, *JJ.,*who dissent.
# L_2012182EN.01003901.xml

| 13.7.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 182/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.7.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 182/39

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 10 July 2012

appointing a Spanish alternate member of the Committee of the Regions

(2012/376/EU)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal of the Spanish Government,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 22 December 2009 and on 18 January 2010, the Council adopted Decisions 2009/1014/EU (1) and 2010/29/EU (2) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2010 to 25 January 2015. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 22 December 2009 and on 18 January 2010, the Council adopted Decisions 2009/1014/EU (1) and 2010/29/EU (2) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2010 to 25 January 2015.

| (2) | An alternate member’s seat has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Ms María Isabel NIETO FERNÁNDEZ, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

An alternate member’s seat has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Ms María Isabel NIETO FERNÁNDEZ,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following is hereby appointed as alternate member to the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2015:

| — | Mr Enrique BARRASA SÁNCHEZ, Director General de Inversiones y Acción Exterior Junta de Extremadura. |
| --- | --- |

—

Mr Enrique BARRASA SÁNCHEZ, Director General de Inversiones y Acción Exterior Junta de Extremadura.

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.

Done at Brussels, 10 July 2012.

For the Council

The President

V. SHIARLY

---

(1)  
  OJ L 348, 29.12.2009, p. 22.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 12, 19.1.2010, p. 11.

2

---
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 this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Atlas Therapeutics Corporation (the “Company”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, J.B. Bernstein, Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officerof the Company, do hereby certify, 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 my 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 operations of the Company.





By:   /s/ J.B. Bernstein


J.B. Bernstein


Principal Executive Officer


Principal Financial Officer





Dated: May 16, 2011








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 purpose of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company. and will be retained and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
**EXHIBIT 32.02**

 

**Section 1350Certification**

 

In connection with this quarterly report of ML Transtrend DTP EnhancedFuturesAccess LLC (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30,2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(this “Report”), I, Barbra E. Kocsis, Chief Financial Officer of MerrillLynch Alternative Investments LLC, the manager of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.This Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.The information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date: August 13, 2010 |                                          |
|----------------------------|-----------------------------------------------|
|                       |                                          |
|                       |                                          |   |
| By:                        | /s/  BARBRA E. KOCSIS                         |   |
|                       | Barbra  E. Kocsis                             |   |
|                       | Chief  Financial Officer                      |   |
|                       | (Principal  Financial and Accounting Officer) |   |

 

----
Filed 6/13/24 In re Drake CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

In re

GARNETT DRAKE,

On Habeas Corpus. F087862

(Kern Super. Ct. No. BF115244A)



### OPINION

THE COURT *
ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS; petition for writ of habeas corpus.
Peter Kang, Kern County Public Defender, and Kathleen Furlong, Deputy Public
Defender, for Petitioner.
Rob Bonta, Attorney General, and Max Feinstat, Deputy Attorney General, for
Respondent

.

- ooOoo

This petition seeks a belated appeal from a September 15, 2023 judgment rendered
at a resentencing hearing held pursuant to Penal Code section 1172.75. Petitioner urges
this court to apply the con structive filing doctrine to permit such a belated filing.
In response to this court’s request to file an informal response, the Attorney
General does not oppose petitioner’s requested relief. Pursuant to the Attorney General’s
response, this court may g rant relief without further proceedings. ( People v. Romero
(1994) 8 Cal.4th 728, 740, fn. 7.)

* Before Levy, Acting P. J., Smith, J. and Snauffer, J.2

In addition to the Attorney General’s nonopposition, having read and considered
the declaration of petitioner’s counsel, petitioner demonstrates to this court’ s satisfaction
that his forthcoming notice of appeal should be deemed timely filed under the
constructive filing doctrine. ( In re Benoit (1973) 10 Cal.3d 72.) Accordingly, we grant
petitioner’s request to file a belated notice of appeal.

DISPOSITION
Petitioner is directed to file, on or before 60 days from the date of this opinion, a
notice of appeal in the Superior Court of Kern County action No. BF115244A.
Let a writ of habeas corpus issue directing the Clerk of the Superior Court of Ke rn County to file in its action No. BF115244A said notice of appeal, to deem said notice of
appeal timely filed, and to proceed with the preparation of the record on appeal in
accordance with the applicable rules of the California Rules of Court if the cle rk of that
court receives said notice on or before 60 days from the date of this opinion.
This opinion is final forthwith as to this court.
Yo lo- Sol ano AQ MD

Revised J anuar

y 13, 2010 Reg . I I , Rule 2.11, Pag e 1 RU LE 2 .1 1 P AR TIC UL AT E M AT TER CO NC EN TR

AT ION Ado pt e d J une 19, 1974 Revised J anuar

y 13, 2010 IN DE X 100 GENERAL 10 1 PURPOS E 102 APPL I CABI L I TY 200 DEF INITIONS 201 PARTI CUL ATE MATTER 300 STANDARDS 301 REQUI REMENT 400 MONITORING 401 TEST METHODSYo lo- Sol ano AQ MD

Revised J anuar

y 13, 2010 Reg . I I , Rule 2.11, Pag e 2 100 GENERAL 101 P URP OSE: The purpose of this rule is to protect the am b i en t air qua lity by establishing a

particulate matter e mission s tandar d. 102 AP P LICABILIT Y: This rule applies to any source operation which emits, or may emit dust, fumes, or total suspended pa rticulate matter 200 DEF INITIONS 201 P ARTICULATE MATTER: Any mate ri a l w hi ch is e mitte d a s li qu id o r s oli d particle s, or g aseous material which become s liquid or sol id particles whe n collecte d at st and ard

c on dit ion s. 300 STANDARD 301 RE QU IREM EN T: A person shall not relea se or discha rg e into the atmosphere from any single source operation, dust, fum es , or total suspended pa rticulate matter e mis sio ns in e xce ss o f 0 .1 g ra in p e r c ub ic fo ot o f g a s at dr y sta nd ard c on dit ion s. 400 MONITORING 401 TEST M ETHO DS: 40 1. 1 Th e e xha

us t sta c k g a s ve loc ity sh a ll b e de te rm ine d in a c c or da nc e wi th E PA or CARB Te st Method 2. 401.2 The e x haust stack g as moist ure c ontent shall be dete rmined in ac corda nce with EPA or CARB Test Method 4. 40 1. 3 De te rm inatio n o f p articul ate matte r e mis sio ns sh a ll b e c on du c te d in acc ordanc e with EPA or CARB Te st Method 5.
EX-31 Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certification.


  I, Brian Baker, the President and Chief Executive Officer of J.P. Morgan
  Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp., the depositor into the
  above-referenced Trust, certify that:

  1.I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form 10-D
    required to be filed in respect of period covered by this report on
    Form 10-K, of the Trust (the Exchange Act Periodic Reports);

  2.Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act Periodic Reports, taken as a
    whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing and other
    information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period
    covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act Periodic Reports;

  4.Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement(s) required
    in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as
    disclosed in the Exchange Act Periodic Reports, the Master Servicer and
    the Special Servicer have fulfilled their obligations under the Pooling
    and Servicing Agreement in all material respects; and

  5.All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria
    for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on
    assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed
    securities required to be included in this report in accordance with
    Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18
    have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise
    disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance
    described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form
    10-K.

    In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on
    information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:
    KeyCorp Real Estate Capital Markets, Inc., Midland Loan Services, a
    Division of PNC Bank, National Association, Wells Fargo Bank, National
    Association and Pentalpha Surveillance LLC.

    Dated:   March 28, 2013


    /s/ Brian Baker
    Signature

    President and Chief Executive Officer
    J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage
    Securities Corp.
    (senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
* 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. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-20409 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus RAMOUNE LANIER JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-00-CR-733-1

-------------------- February 21, 2002 Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Ramoune Lanier Johnson has appealed his conviction of having possessed a firearm as a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). We affirm. Johnson contends that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction. Specifically, he argues that § 922(g)(1) cannot constitutionally be construed to proscribe interstate possession of a firearm when the only interstate nexus is the fact that it traveled across a state line at some time in theNo. 01-20409 -2- past. He concedes, however, that this court has rejected his contention in several cases. In fact, “[t]his court has repeatedly emphasized that the constitutionality of § 922(g)(1) is not open to question,” based on “the mere fact that the ammunition [or firearm] traveled through interstate commerce in the past.” United States v. De Leon , 170 F.3d 494, 499 (5th Cir. 1999). The court iterated its previous ruling that United States v. Lopez , 514 U.S. 549 (1995), does not constitutionally invalidate § 922(g)(1). Id. ; see United States v. Rawls , 85 F.3d 240, 242 (5th Cir. 1996). Accordingly, Johnson’s argument based on Lopez lacks merit. Johnson also relies on Jones v. United States , 529 U.S. 848 (2000), as showing that Scarborough v. United States , 431 U.S. 563 (1977), and Rawls are no longer good law. This argument also lacks merit. See United States v. Daugherty , 264 F.3d 513, 518 (5th Cir. 2001), pet. for cert. filed , No. 01-7524 (Dec. 20, 2001). Therefore Johnson’s conviction of violating § 922(g)(1) must be affirmed. 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
  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of
section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934; and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.
 /s/  John M. CurtisNovember 9, 2009
    John M. CurtisPresident and Chief Executive Officer A signed original of this written statement has been provided to Vangent and will be retained
by Vangent and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request.