alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Order filed July 2, 2015.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-15-00420-CV

___________

UNIVERSAL MRI AND DIAGNOSTICS INC., Appellant

V.

MEDICAL LIEN MANAGEMENT INC. D/B/A BRIDGEWELL, Appellee

On Appeal from the 295th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 321010295

O R D E R

No reporter’s record has been filed in this case. The official court reporter 

for the 295th District Court informed this court that appellant had not made 

arrangements for payment for the reporter’s record. On May 14, 2015, the clerk of 

this court notified appellant that we would consider and decide those issues that do 

not require a reporter=s record unless appellant, within 15 days of notice, provided 

this court with proof of payment for the record. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(c). 

Appellant filed no reply. 
Accordingly, we order appellant to file a brief in this appeal within thirty 

days of the date of this order. If appellant fails to comply with this order, the court 

will dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b). 

PER CURIAM
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 23-0327

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

STEVEN ERIC WALKS,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including March 4, 2024, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

January 25 2024

01/25/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0327
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The
undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of Touchstone Bancshares, Inc. (the Company), each certify that, to his knowledge on the date of this certification:

1. The quarterly report of the Company for the period ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on this date
(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.



|                        |  |  |  |     |  |                      |  |                                                                                     
|----------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | -------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                        |  |  | 
|Date: November 14, 2007 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ William R. Short
|                        |  |  |  |     |  |                      |  | William R. Short President and Chief Executive
Officer (Principal Executive Officer)



|                        |  |  |  |     |  |                        |  |                                                                                        
|----------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | ---------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                        |  |  | 
|Date: November 14, 2007 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Robert D. Koncerak
|                        |  |  |  |     |  |                        |  | Robert D. Koncerak Chief Financial
Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane lunani m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. H U G O Q U E Z A D A -M O N T E R O , a. k. a. H ug o R am i re z, a. k. a. L ou i s P anuco, a. k. a. Q uat em o M er ca do , a. k. a. Javi erL op ez , a. k. a. P edro V as qu ez , D e f

e n d an t - A p p e llan t. N o. 10- 50158 D. C . No . 2 : 0 8 - c r - 0 1 2 0 9 - R GK ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea lfr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e C e n tr a l D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia R . G aryK l aus ne r , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d F e bruary21, 2012 ** B efo re: F E RN A N D E Z , M cK E O W N , an dB Y B E E , C i rcu i tJu d g es. H ug o Q ueza da-M on t er o app ea l s f rom the 77 -m on th sent ence i m po se d fol l ow i ng hi s gui l ty- pl eaconv i ct i on for bei ng an i l l egalal i en foun d i n the U ni t ed 

# FI LED FEB 24 2 012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS10- 50158 2 S t a t e s f ol l ow i ng de port a t i on, i n vi ol a t i on of 8 U . S . C . § 1326. P ur s uantt o A n ders v . Ca lifo rn ia , 38 6 U . S . 73 8 (19 67 ), Q ueza da-M on t er o’ s c ou nselhas f i l ed a bri ef st at i ng there ar e no g roun ds for r el i ef , al on g w i th a m ot i on t o w i thd raw as coun se l o f reco rd . W e h av e p ro v i d edth e ap p el l an tth e o p p o rtu n i ty t o fi l e a p ro se supp l em ent albri ef

. N o p ro se supp l em ent albri ef or answ er i ng bri ef

has bee n f ile d . O uri nde pe nde ntr e vi e w of the r e c or d pur s uantt o P e n s o n v . O h io , 4 8 8 U . S. 7 5 , 8 0 - 8 1 ( 1 9 8 8 ) , d is c lo s e s n o ar g u ab le g r o u n d s f o rr e lie f o n d ir e c t ap p e a l. A cc o rd in g ly, co u n se l’ s m o ti o n to w ith d ra w is g ra n ted , an dth e d istrict co u rt’s ju d g m e n t is a f

f irm e d . I n a c c or danc e w i th U

ni ted States v. R i ve ra-San chez , 222 F . 3d 1057, 1062 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 0 ) , w e r e m an dth e c a s e to th e d is tr ic t c o u rt w ith in s tru c tio n s th a t it d e le te f r o m th e ju d g m e n t th e r e f e r e n c e to s e c tio n 1 3 2 6 ( b ) ( 2 ) . See U ni ted States v. H erre ra-B lan co , 2 3 2 F .3 d7 1 5 , 7 1 9 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 0 ) ( r e m an d in g s u as p o n te to d e le te th e r e f

e r e n c e to s e c tio n 1 3 2 6 ( b ) ) . AF F I RME D; RE MAND E D to c o rr e c t th e ju d g m e n t.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

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

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

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

FRANK KENNETH BENSON,

 Petitioner - Appellee,

 v.

D. K. SISTO,

 Respondent - Appellant.

No. 10-16945

D.C. No. 2:07-cv-02244-JKS

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

James K. Singleton, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted September 27, 2011** 

Before: HAWKINS, SILVERMAN, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

Warden D. K. Sisto appeals from the district court’s grant of Frank Kenneth

Benson’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for habeas corpus. We have jurisdiction under

28 U.S.C. § 2253, and, because of intervening authority, we vacate and remand.

FILED

OCT 5 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 10-16945

The district court granted Benson relief on the ground that the state court’s

decision was contrary to California’s “some evidence” standard, and was based on

an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence. While this

appeal was pending, the Supreme Court decided Swarthout v. Cooke, 131 S. Ct.

859 (2011) (per curiam). In that case, the Court held that the only federal right at

issue in the parole context is procedural, and the only proper inquiry is what

process the inmate received, not whether the state court decided the case correctly. 

See Swarthout, 131 S. Ct. at 863. Because Benson raises no federal procedural

challenges, we vacate and remand.

We decline to address, in the first instance, Benson’s contention that the

Board of Parole’s determination that he was unsuitable for parole was an arbitrary

deprivation of his liberty interest. See Osborne v. Dist. Attorney’s Office for Third

Judicial Dist., 423 F.3d 1050, 1055-56 (9th Cir. 2005).

VACATED and REMANDED.
Dear Mr. Schwarz:

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket 

No. FAA−2015−4528). This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA) to process your petition.

 Describe the aircraft make(s), model(s), and type(s)(i.e., fixed-wing, rotorcraft, 

lighter-than-air) for the proposed UAS operation. The description(s) should include the 

maximum weight (including payload). This information can be located in the 

aircraft manual(s).

Please submit the additional information (non-proprietary) to your docket at 

www.regulations.gov. Once your information has been submitted, please also send a copy of the 

requested information (and any proprietary information), as well as your comment tracking 

number from regulations.gov via e-mail to 333exemptions@faa.gov. If you want us to process 

your request any further, we must receive the information described above by 12/29/15. If we do 

not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267–4549.

Sincerely,

/S/

Michael Cameron

Program Analyst
<PAGE>



                      Amendment to Stock Option Agreements

This Amendment to Stock Option Agreements is entered into as of _________ __,
2001, and amends certain Stock Option Agreements dated as of January 14, 2000
("Agreement 1") and August 1, 2001 ("Agreement 2") by and between Oplink
Communications, Inc. (the "Company") and Joseph Y. Liu (the "Optionee") whereby
the Optionee was granted an option to purchase 5,600,000 shares of the Company's
common stock pursuant to Agreement 1 ("Option 1") and 1,500,000 shares of the
Company's common stock pursuant to Agreement 2 ("Option 2") (collectively
referred to as the "Options").

Whereas, the Board of Directors of the Company has determined that it would be
in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders to modify the terms of
the Options to provide for certain acceleration of vesting and make certain
other changes described herein.

Now, therefore, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency
of which is hereby acknowledged by the parties, the parties hereby agree as
follows:

5.   Effective as of November 7, 2001, Option 1 shall vest in full and become
     fully exercisable.

6.   As of November 7, 2001, all then unvested shares under Option 2 shall be
     cancelled.

7.   Except as amended by this Amendment, the Agreement 1 and Agreement 2 shall
     remain in full force and effect.

8.   This Amendment shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the
     laws of the State of California without giving effect to the conflicts of
     law principles thereof.

In Witness Whereof, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of the
date first above written.

Oplink Communications, Inc.                        Joseph Y. Liu


_____________________________                      _____________________________
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 200 (Wednesday, October 16, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 83496-83497]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-23909]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION


Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m. on October 17, 2024.

PLACE: This Board meeting will be open to public observation only by 
webcast. Visit https://www.fdic.gov/news/board-matters/video.html for a 
link to the webcast. FDIC Board Members and staff will participate from 
FDIC Headquarters, 550 17th Street NW, Washington, DC.
    Observers requiring auxiliary aids (e.g., sign language 
interpretation) for this meeting should email 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#de9ab7adbfbcb7b2b7aaa78eacb1b9acbfb39eb8bab7bdf0b9b1a8"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="bbffd2c8dad9d2d7d2cfc2ebc9d4dcc9dad6fbdddfd2d895dcd4cd">[email protected]</span></a> to make necessary arrangements.

STATUS: Open to public observation via webcast.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation's 
Board of Directors will meet to consider the following matters:

Discussion Agenda

    Briefing: Semi-annual Update on the Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF) 
Restoration Plan.

Summary Agenda

    No substantive discussion of the following items is anticipated. 
The Board will resolve these matters with a single vote unless a member 
of the Board of Directors requests that an item be moved to the 
discussion agenda.
    Designated Reserve Ratio for 2025.
    Delay of Compliance Date for [Certain] [Subpart A] Amendments to 
FDIC Official Sign and Advertising Rule.

[[Page 83497]]

    Minutes of a Board of Directors' Meeting Previously Distributed.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Direct requests for further 
information concerning the meeting to Debra A. Decker, Executive 
Secretary of the Corporation, at 202-898-8748.
    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552b

     Dated at Washington, DC, on October 10, 2024.

    Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
James P. Sheesley,
Assistant Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024-23909 Filed 10-11-24; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6714-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
EXHIBIT 32.2
certification pursuant to 18 u.s.c. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of thesarbanes-oxley act of 2002
The undersigned officer of Veridien Corporation (the “Company”) hereby certifies to my knowledgethat the Company’s annual report on Form 10-KSB/A for the year ended December 31, 2004 (the“Report”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission the on date hereof, fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. This certification isprovided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed to be part of the Report or “filed” for anypurpose whatsoever.       Date: November 2, 2005 Name: /s/ Russell Van Zandt             Russell Van Zandt    Title: Chief Financial Officer  
38
Electronically FiledIntermediate Court of AppealsCAAP-12-000049931-MAY-201308:53 AM
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3621 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3621

   To ensure that Social Security contributions made by workers are 
         available to pay all benefits which they have earned.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 28, 2015

 Mr. Levin (for himself, Mr. Crowley, Mr. Danny K. Davis of Illinois, 
   Mr. Doggett, Mr. Larson of Connecticut, Mr. Lewis, Mr. Neal, Mr. 
     Pascrell, Mr. Rangel, and Ms. Linda T. Sanchez of California) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                             Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To ensure that Social Security contributions made by workers are 
         available to pay all benefits which they have earned.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Social Security Earned Benefits 
Payment Act''.

SEC. 2. ALLOCATIONS TO FEDERAL DISABILITY INSURANCE TRUST FUND.

    (a) Allocation With Respect to Wages.--Section 201(b)(1) of the 
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 401(b)(1)) is amended by striking ``and 
(R) 1.80 per centum of the wages (as so defined) paid after December 
31, 1999, and so reported,'' and inserting ``(R) 1.80 per centum of the 
wages (as so defined) paid after December 31, 1999, and before January 
1, 2016, and so reported, (S) 2.65 per centum of the wages (as so 
defined) paid after December 31, 2015, and before January 1, 2021, and 
so reported, and (T) 1.80 per centum of the wages (as so defined) paid 
after December 31, 2020, and so reported,''.
    (b) Allocation With Respect to Self-Employment Income.--Section 
201(b)(2) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 401(b)(2)) is amended by striking 
``and (R) 1.80 per centum of the amount of self-employment income (as 
so defined) so reported for any taxable year beginning after December 
31, 1999,'' and inserting ``(R) 1.80 per centum of the amount of self-
employment income (as so defined) so reported for any taxable year 
beginning after December 31, 1999, and before January 1, 2016, (S) 2.65 
per centum of the amount of self-employment income (as so defined) so 
reported for any taxable year beginning after December 31, 2015, and 
before January 1, 2021, and (T) 1.80 per centum of the amount of self-
employment income (as so defined) so reported for any taxable year 
beginning after December 31, 2020,''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply with respect to wages paid after December 31, 2015, and self-
employment income for taxable years beginning after such date.
                                 <all>
```
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   We the undersigned, Barry J. Lucas, President (Principal Executive Officer) and Michael J. Malbourne, Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer) of Elray Resources, Inc. (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:  (1) The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended June 30, 2009 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of § 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 as of and for the periods covered in the Report.  /s/Barry J. Lucas Barry J. Lucas President (Principal Executive Officer)  /s/Michael J. Malbourne Michael J. Malbourne 
Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer)  August 12, 2009  A signed original of this written statement required by § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002has 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 Iowa City Bank v. Weber.

1. Fraudulent Conveyance of Note and Mortgage: evidence. Action to subject a note and mortgage lield by defendant to the payment of a debt owing-by defendant’s husband, on the ground that the note and mortgage in equity belonged to the husband; but, upon consideration of the evidence, *held*that it appeared that they had been transferred to the defendant in good faith and for value, to-wit, to repay her for money which she had years before advanced to her husband, with the understanding that it should be repaid; and a decree for plaintiff is reversed.

*Appeal from Johnson District Gourt.*

Wednesday, June 22.

AotioN in equity to subject a certain note and mortgage held by the defendant Frances Weber to an execution issued upon a jndgment rendered in favor of the plaintiff, and against the defendant’s husband, Martin Weber. There was a decree for the plaintiff, and the defendant appeals.

*BaTcer do*Ball, for appellant.

*Milton*Bemley, for appellee.

Adams, Ch. J.—

The note and mortgage were executed for $300, being a part of the purchase-price of a tract of land sold by the defendant’s husband to one King. The plaintiff insists that they are the property of the execution debtor; or, if transferred by him to his wife so as to pass title as between them, the transfer was without consideration, and made to hinder and defraud creditors. The defendant insists that she received the'same byway of reimbursement for money advanced by her to her husband many years before. The evidence seems to be quite clear that the defendant received $500 from her father, which was used by her husband in removing an incumbrance from certain land standing in his name, and in making improvements thereon. The doubt, if any, is as to whether the advancement was not intended as a gift. The court below must have thought that *138it was so intended. We have read 'the evidence separately, and have reached the conclusion that it was not so intended.

The defendant testified that it was understood between her and her husband that she was to have an interest in the land, and her husband testified that she was to have her money back when the land should be sold. The plaintiff insists that they are not worthy of credit, and that their story, as a whole, is disjointed, inconsistent and improbable; but we are unable to think that the plaintiff’s position can properly be sustained. We are not accustomed, in determining questions of fact of this kind, to set out the evidence, or do much more than state our conclusion. It seems more probable to us than otherwise that the transaction in which the defendant acquired the note and mortgage was an honest one, and that the court erred in holding that they should be subjected to the husband’s debt

REVERSED.
<PAGE>


                                                                      EXHIBIT 32


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         The undersigned hereby certifies, in her capacity as an officer of
Proteo, Inc. (the "Company"), for purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to her
knowledge:

(1) the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-KSB/A for the period ended
December 31, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended; and

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


Date:  July 31, 2008


/s/ Birge Bargmann
----------------------------
Birge Bargmann
Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer



A SIGNED ORIGINAL OF THIS WRITTEN STATEMENT REQUIRED BY SECTION 906 HAS BEEN
PROVIDED TO PROTEO, INC. AND WILL BE RETAINED BY PROTEO, INC. AND FURNISHED TO
THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OR ITS STAFF UPON REQUEST.

THIS CERTIFICATION IS BEING FURNISHED PURSUANT TO RULE 15(D) AND SHALL NOT BE
DEEMED "FILED" FOR PURPOSES OF SECTION 18 OF THE EXCHANGE ACT (15 U.S.C. 78R),
OR OTHERWISE SUBJECT TO THE LIABILITY OF THAT SECTION. THIS CERTIFICATION SHALL
NOT BE DEEMED TO BE INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE INTO ANY FILING UNDER THE
SECURITIES ACT OR THE EXCHANGE ACT, EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT THAT THE COMPANY
SPECIFICALLY INCORPORATES IT BY REFERENCE.