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

  Certification of Principal Executive and Principal Financial Officer pursuant
                            to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

         I hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and
belief, that the accompanying Form 10-QSB of Cecil Bancorp, Inc. ("Bancorp") for
the quarterly period ended June 30, 2002, fully complies with the requirements
of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m
or 78o(d)); and that the information contained in this Form 10-QSB fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of Bancorp.

By: /s/ Mary B. Halsey                                          November 5, 2003
   ----------------------------------------------------------   ----------------
    Mary B. Halsey                                                     Date
    President and Chief Executive Officer
    (Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer)


                                    Page 21
* Pursuant to 5th Cir. 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 5th Cir. 

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 00-10423

(Summary Calendar)

 

PATRICIA JOHNSON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

JAMES DAVENPORT,

Defendant-Appellee.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

(3:98-CV-2227-R)

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

November 20, 2000

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Plaintiff-Appellant Patricia Johnson appeals from the district

court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Defendant-Appellant

James Davenport based on qualified immunity. After a de novo

review of the record, we affirm.

We first note that Johnson has briefed only her claim for

illegal arrest. Therefore we do not address the district court's

adverse summary judgment on her claims for malicious prosecution

and abuse of process. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25

(5th Cir. 1993).
2

Johnson argues that her Fourth Amendment right to a reasonable

expectation of privacy in her home did not require her to wake her

husband so that Davenport could serve a civil citation. She

further argues that Davenport lacked probable cause to seek her

arrest under Texas Penal Code § 38.16. We find that although

Johnson may have alleged a violation of a clearly established

constitutional right, a reasonable officer could have believed that

the arrest was lawful under the circumstances. See Hunter v.

Bryant, 502 U.S. 224, 227 (1991); Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U.S.

635, 640 (1987).

Accordingly, the district court's judgment is 

AFFIRMED.
United States of America

**OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION**

**PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW**

Pursuant to Commission Rule 91, 29 C.F.R. 2200.91, Respondent, XYZ Corp. petitions the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission for review of the Administrative Law Judge’s decision in this case.

**Statement Of Portions Of The Decision And Order To Which Exception Is Taken**

1. XYZ Corp. takes exception to that portion of the Decision and Order wherein the Administrative Law Judge held XYZ Corp. in serious violation of the standard published at 29 CFR 1926.28(a) as alleged in Serious Citation 1, Item 1, in finding that XYZ’s employee John Jones was exposed to the alleged violation. (Judge’s Decision at pp. 8 - 12.)

2. XYZ Corp. takes exception to that portion of the Decision and Order pertaining to Serious Citation 1, Item 1, wherein the Administrative Law Judge held that action of employee John Jones was not unpreventable employee misconduct.  (Judge’s Decision at pp. 13 - 17.)

**Statement Of Reasons For Which Exceptions Are Taken**

1. In the Decision, the Administrative Law Judge failed to follow the test set forth for the Fifth Circuit’s Decision in Secretary of Labor v. RPQ Corp. for determining the existence of employee exposure.  The testimony at transcript pages 25-45 clearly shows that John Jones was not in the zone of danger because he was on a work break and outside of the definition of the zone.

2. The evidence of record supports XYZ’s position that the actions taken by employee John Jones were unpreventable.  The Commission has set forth the test for determining unpreventable employee misconduct at Secretary of Labor v. ROM Corp.  The testimony of XYZ’s employees at transcript pp. 46-59 met all of the requirements of ROM Corp. to prove John Jones’s actions were unpreventable.

For the reasons stated herein, XYZ Corp. submits that the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission should direct review of the Decision and Order of the Administrative Law Judge.

Respectfully submitted,

By ________________________Attorney forXYZ Corp.123 StreetCity, State Zip CodeTel. No. (999) 999-9999

2
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

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

In connection with the Annual Report of Aceto Corporation, a New York
corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-K for the period ended June 30, 2005 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Leonard S. Schwartz, Chairman, President and Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and
          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/ Leonard S. Schwartz
-----------------------
    Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
    September 8, 2005

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Aceto Corporation and will be retained by Aceto Corporation and
furnished to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 345 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 345

  Congratulating the North Dakota State University football team for 
 winning the 2015 National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I 
                Football Championship Subdivision title.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 12, 2016

   Mr. Hoeven (for himself and Ms. Heitkamp) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Congratulating the North Dakota State University football team for 
 winning the 2015 National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I 
                Football Championship Subdivision title.

Whereas the North Dakota State University (referred to in this preamble as 
        ``NDSU'') Bison won the 2015 National Collegiate Athletic Association 
        (referred to in this preamble as the ``NCAA'') Division I Football 
        Championship Subdivision title game in Frisco, Texas, on January 9, 
        2016, in a decisive victory over the Jacksonville State Gamecocks by a 
        score of 37 to 10;
Whereas NDSU has now won 13 NCAA Football Championships;
Whereas NDSU has now won 5 consecutive NCAA Division I Football Championships, 
        an extraordinary and record-setting achievement in modern collegiate 
        football history;
Whereas the NDSU Bison have displayed tremendous resilience and skill over the 
        past 5 seasons, with 71 wins to only 5 losses, including a streak of 33 
        consecutive wins;
Whereas an estimated 17,000 Bison fans attended the Championship game, 
        reflecting the tremendous spirit and dedication of Bison Nation that has 
        helped propel the success of the team; and
Whereas the 2015 NCAA Division I Football Championship Subdivision title was a 
        victory not only for the NDSU football team, but also for the entire 
        State of North Dakota: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate--
            (1) congratulates the North Dakota State University Bison 
        football team as the 2015 champions of the National Collegiate 
        Athletic Association Division I Football Championship 
        Subdivision;
            (2) commends the North Dakota State University players, 
        coaches, and staff for--
                    (A) their hard work and dedication on a historic 
                season; and
                    (B) fostering a continuing tradition of athletic 
                and academic excellence; and
            (3) recognizes the students, alumni, and loyal fans that 
        supported the Bison while the Bison sought to capture a fifth 
        consecutive Division I Football Championship Subdivision trophy 
        for North Dakota State University.
                                 <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




In connection with the Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 2011 of AMERCO (the “Company”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 8, 2011 (the “Report”), I, Edward J. Shoen, President and Chairman of the Board of the Company, certify, pursuant to 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 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.







AMERCO,





a Nevada corporation





/s/ Edward J. Shoen


Edward J. Shoen


President and Chairman of the Board


Date:  June 8, 2011
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>





                                  EXHIBIT 27.1


                       PLAY CO. TOYS & ENTERTAINMENT CORP.
                             FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE


This  schedule  contains  summary  information   extracted  from  the  condensed
consolidated  balance  sheet,  statements of operations and cash flows and notes
thereto  incorporated in Part 1, Item 1, of this Form 10-QSB and is qualified in
its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                                                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                 3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                              mar-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                                   dec-31-1999
<CASH>                                                         12,295,195
<SECURITIES>                                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                  985,422
<ALLOWANCES>                                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                                    14,175,841
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                               28,689,217
<PP&E>                                                         12,144,350
<DEPRECIATION>                                                 4,832,093
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                 40,448,964
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                          10,198,081
<BONDS>                                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                          0
<PREFERRED>                                                    7,945,020
<COMMON>                                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                                     8,313,580
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                   16,258,600
<SALES>                                                        30,691,508
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                               0
<CGS>                                                          17,370,835
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                               14,785,816
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                             1,648,089
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                (2,928,213)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                   (2,928,213)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                            (2,928,213)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                0
<CHANGES>                                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                                   (2,928,213)
<EPS-BASIC>                                                    (0.92)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                  (0.92)



</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>
                                           
<ARTICLE>                                       5
                                                 
<S>                                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                    DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                                 1,185,094
<SECURITIES>                                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                          4,420,833
<ALLOWANCES>                                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                               0
<PP&E>                                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       156,207,252
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                          0
<BONDS>                                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                          0
<PREFERRED>                                                    0
<COMMON>                                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                            75,540,485
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         156,207,252
<SALES>                                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                       9,752,780
<CGS>                                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                       7,502,674
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          97,528
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                     1,729,830
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                          422,748
<INCOME-TAX>                                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      422,748
<DISCONTINUED>                                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                0
<CHANGES>                                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                             422,748
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                  0
        

</TABLE>
RYAN EVANS,

Petitioner,

v.

JULIE L. JONES, Secretary, 

Florida Department of Corrections,

Respondent.

___________________________/

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D15-3572

Opinion filed February 3, 2016.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari -- Original Jurisdiction.

Ryan Evans, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee; Kenneth S. Steely, General Counsel, 

Department of Corrections, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari is denied on the merits.

THOMAS, SWANSON, and MAKAR, JJ., CONCUR.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 878 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 878

 To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to permit grants for 
    the national estuary program to be used for the development and 
implementation of a comprehensive conservation and management plan, to 
  reauthorize appropriations to carry out the program, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 26, 1999

   Mr. Torricelli (for himself, Mr. Mack, Mr. Gregg, Mr. Graham, Mr. 
  Moynihan, Mr. Kerry, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Reed, Mrs. Feinstein, and Mrs. 
    Murray) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to permit grants for 
    the national estuary program to be used for the development and 
implementation of a comprehensive conservation and management plan, to 
  reauthorize appropriations to carry out the program, and for other 
                               purposes.

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

SECTION 1. NATIONAL ESTUARY PROGRAM.

    (a) Grants.--Section 320(g) of the Federal Water Pollution Control 
Act (33 U.S.C. 1330(g)) is amended by striking paragraphs (2) and (3) 
and inserting the following:
            ``(2) Purposes.--Grants under this subsection shall be made 
        to pay for assisting activities necessary for the development 
        and implementation of a comprehensive conservation and 
        management plan under this section.
            ``(3) Federal share.--The Federal share of a grant to any 
        person (including a State, interstate, or regional agency or 
        entity) under this subsection for a fiscal year--
                    ``(A) shall not exceed--
                            ``(i) 75 percent of the annual aggregate 
                        costs of the development of a comprehensive 
                        conservation and management plan; and
                            ``(ii) 50 percent of the annual aggregate 
                        costs of the implementation of the plan; and
                    ``(B) shall be made on condition that the non-
                Federal share of the costs are provided from non-
                Federal sources.''.
    (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 320(i) of the Federal 
Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1330(i)) is amended by striking 
``$12,000,000 per fiscal year for each of fiscal years 1987, 1988, 
1989, 1990, and 1991'' and inserting ``$50,000,000 for each of fiscal 
years 2000 through 2004''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section take 
effect on October 1, 1999.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 184 (Tuesday, December 9, 2008)]
[Senate]
[Page S10839]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                              CONFIRMATION

  Executive nomination confirmed by the Senate, Tuesday, December 9, 
2008:

                            IN THE AIR FORCE

       THE FOLLOWING NAMED AIR NATIONAL GUARD OF THE UNITED STATES 
     OFFICER FOR APPOINTMENT AS THE DIRECTOR, AIR NATIONAL GUARD 
     AND FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE GRADE INDICATED IN THE RESERVE OF 
     THE AIR FORCE UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C., SECTIONS 601 AND 10506:

                        To be lieutenant general

MAJ. GEN. HARRY M. WYATT III
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-4172

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

TAVON MCPHAUL, a/k/a Block,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, Senior District 

Judge. (1:12-cr-00616-MJG-3)

Submitted: May 14, 2015 Decided: June 3, 2015

Before WYNN and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Beth M. Farber, HARRIS O’BRIEN, New York, New York, for 

Appellant. Rod J. Rosenstein, United States Attorney, Bonnie S. 

Greenberg, Assistant United States Attorney, Benjamin M. Block, 

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Tavon McPhaul seeks to appeal his conviction and sentence 

after pleading guilty. McPhaul’s attorney has filed a brief 

pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), raising 

the issue of whether McPhaul waived the right to appeal his 

conviction and sentence, but concluding that he knowingly and 

intelligently did so and there are no meritorious grounds for 

appeal. The Government has moved to dismiss the appeal based in 

part on the appeal waiver. McPhaul was notified of his right to 

file a pro se supplemental brief but has not done so.

“Plea bargains rest on contractual principles, and each 

party should receive the benefit of its bargain.” United States 

v. Blick, 408 F.3d 162, 173 (4th Cir. 2005) (citation and 

internal quotation marks omitted). “A defendant may waive the 

right to appeal his conviction and sentence so long as the 

waiver is knowing and voluntary.” United States v. Davis, 689 

F.3d 349, 354 (4th Cir. 2012) (citing United States v. Marin, 

961 F.2d 493, 496 (4th Cir. 1992)). We review the validity of 

an appeal waiver de novo “and will enforce the waiver if it is 

valid and the issue appealed is within the scope of the waiver.” 

Id. at 354-55 (citing Blick, 408 F.3d at 168). 

Upon review of the plea agreement and the transcript of the 

Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 hearing, we conclude that McPhaul knowingly 

and voluntarily waived his right to appeal his conviction and 
3

sentence. Moreover, in accordance with Anders, we have reviewed 

the record for any potentially meritorious issues that might 

fall outside the scope of the waiver and have found none.

Accordingly, we grant the Government’s motion to dismiss 

the appeal. This court requires that counsel inform his or her 

client, in writing, of his or her right to petition the Supreme 

Court of the United States for further review. If the client 

requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that 

such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in 

this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s 

motion must state that a copy thereof was served on the client. 

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.

DISMISSED