alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

ODYSSEY MARINE EXPLORATION, INC.

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

I
hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the annual report on Form 10-K of Odyssey Marine Exploration, Inc. for the period ending December 31, 2005:



| | (1) | 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 aspects, the financial condition and results of operations of Odyssey Marine Exploration, Inc.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                         
|-----------------------------------------
|/S/    MICHAEL J.
HOLMES                 
|Michael J. Holmes Chief Financial Officer

March 14, 2006

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to Odyssey Marine
Exploration, Inc. and will be retained by Odyssey Marine Exploration, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon request.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON

AFRICA N. WHITFIELD, :

: Case No. 3:18-cv-00108 

 Plaintiff, :

: District Judge Thomas M. Rose 

vs. : Magistrate Judge Sharon L. Ovington 

:

COMMISSIONER OF THE SOCIAL : DECISION AND ENTRY 

SECURITY ADMINISTRATION : 

:

 Defendant. :

The Court has conducted a de novo review of the Report and Recommendations of 

United States Magistrate Judge Sharon L. Ovington (Doc. #13), to whom this case was 

originally referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and noting that no objections have been 

filed thereto and that the time for filing such objections under Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) has 

expired, hereby ADOPTS said Report and Recommendations. 

It is therefore ORDERED that: 

1. The Report and Recommendations docketed on September 11, 2019 (Doc. #13) is

ADOPTED in full;

2. The Commissioner’s non-disability decision on December 22, 2016 is vacated;

3. Plaintiff Africa N. Whitfield is under a disability and eligible to receive

Supplemental Security Income based on the application she protectively filed on

February 28, 2014, and this matter is therefore REMANDED to the Social Security

Administration under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for payment of benefits;

and

4. The case is terminated on the Court’s docket.

September 27, 2019 *s/Thomas M. Rose

Thomas M. Rose 

 United States District Judge
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

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Carmike Cinemas, Inc. (the Corporation) for the period ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, the President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Corporation, certifies 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
Corporation.



|                                      
|--------------------------------------
|/s/    MICHAEL W. PATRICK             
|Michael W. Patrick                    
|President, Chief Executive Officer and
|Chairman of the Board of Directors    
|                                      
|March 17, 2008
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Da-Lite Screen Company, Inc. (the Company) for the period ending
April 2, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jerry C. Young, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to and for purposes of 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 results of operations of the Company.



/s/ Jerry C. YoungJerry C. YoungChief Financial OfficerMay 5, 2010




23
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

**Certification of Chief Executive Officer**

I, Clinton H. Severson, Chief Executive Officer of Abaxis, Inc. (the “Registrant”), do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|   | (1)    | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the   Registrant, to which this certification is attached as an exhibit (the “Report”), fully complies with the   requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15   U.S.C. 78m); and |
|--------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         |
|   | (2)    | the information contained in the Report   fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and   results of operations of the Registrant.                                                                                                  |

Dated: November 9, 2006

|   | By:    | /s/ Clinton H. Severson               |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                       |
|   |   | Clinton H. Severson                   |
|   |   | President and Chief Executive Officer |
Exhibit 10.47



 Exhibit 10.47 
 Summary Translation of Chuan East to Chuan West 
 Transferring Gas Pipe Project Product Collective
Contract 
 Contract number: G11CQ-08-MM-0011 
 Signing date:
November 2008 
 Buyer: Southwest Oil Gas Company of SINOPEC 
 Supplier: Jining ENI Energy Technology Co., Ltd. 
 Signing place: Chengdu city of Sichuan province 
 Total sum: RMB1,940,000 
 Product: One unit of analyzer of gas phase
chromatography, one unit of water analyzer and one unit of sulfurated hydrogen analyzer, one unit of analyzer house of chromatogram 
 ENI has not yet
collected full payment or issued an invoice but has recognized this amount as income for 2008.
<PAGE>

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 Aethlon Medical, Inc. Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for
the quarter and nine months ended September 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, James
A. Joyce, Chairman and Chief Executive 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, to the best of my knowledge:

(1) 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB fairly
presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, another
document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to Aethlon Medical, Inc. and will be
retained by Aethlon Medical, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

                                   /S/ JAMES A. JOYCE
                                   --------------------
                                   JAMES A. JOYCE
                                   CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                                   (PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

November 19, 2003
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 31.2


                                 CERTIFICATION

I, James W Dorst, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-QSB of Aethlon Medical, 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;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.

4. The small business issuer's other certifying officers and I are responsible
for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and
have:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Date: November 14, 2007

                              /S/ JAMES W. DORST
                              ------------------------------
                              JAMES W. DORST
                              CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                              (PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING OFFICER)
#### Barbara BELL v. David BELL

85-299

705 S.W.2d 891

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Opinion delivered March 31, 1986

*469
      *Witt Law Firm, P.C.,*by: *Ernie Witt,*for appellant.

*Hixson, Cleveland & Rush,*by: *David L. Rush,*for appellee.

David Newbern, Justice.

The appellee sought enforcement of visitation rights pursuant to a divorce decree issued by a court in the State of Washington and registered in Arkansas. The appellant responded by seeking modification of the visitation provisions. The chancellor held he lacked jurisdiction to modify the Washington decree because of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act, Ark. Stat. Ann. §§ 34-2701 through 34-2725 (Supp. 1985), and he, therefore, did not rule on the merits of the appellee’s modification petition. We reverse because we conclude the chancellor does have jurisdiction to modify the decree. The chancellor did not cite any particular section of the Act as precluding him from taking jurisdiction. Our review of each section of the Act discloses none which would bar him from doing so.

Section 34-2714(a) governs modification of custody decrees rendered by courts of other states. It provides:

> If a court of another state has made a custody decree, a court of this State shall not modify that decree unless: (1) it appears to the court of this State that the court which rendered the decree does not now have jurisdiction under jurisdictional prerequisites substantially in accordance with this Act [§§ 34-2701 — 34-2725] or has declined to assume jurisdiction to modify the decree and (2) the court of this State has jurisdiction.

Whether the Washington court continues to have jurisdiction must be determined by reference to § 34-2703, and we find no provision there which would confer jurisdiction on the Washington court to entertain the appellee’s request for modification. Instead, the record before us shows the two children in question *470have resided in Arkansas with the appellee far longer than the six months mentioned in § 34-2703(a)(l), and thus Arkansas has, according to the Act, become their home state.

Nor is there evidence of any pending custody litigation in Washington or any state other than Arkansas. Thus § 34-2706(a) would not preclude the modification sought here. *See Davis*v. *Davis,*285 Ark. 403, 687 S.W.2d 843 (1985).

Although we must reverse the chancellor’s determination that he lacked jurisdiction to modify the decree, we express no opinion on the merits of the appellant’s request for modification. No hearing was held on that issue, and thus we cannot engage in a de novo review with respect to the merits. Instead, we remand the case for a hearing on the question whether conditions have changed so as to warrant modification of the decree since the parties, by consent decree, registered the Washington court’s decree with the chancery court. *Rains*v. *Alston,*265 Ark. 108, 576 S.W.2d 505 (1979).

Reversed and remanded.

Purtle, J., not participating.
CERTIFICATION
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of PowerSecure International, 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;
 3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;
 4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
     5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
   Date:  August 5, 2010
    /s/ Sidney HintonSidney HintonPresident and Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 32.1

STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
  OF PREMIERE GLOBAL SERVICES, INC.
  PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
  § 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with
  the Quarterly Report of Premiere Global Services, Inc. (the Company)
  on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities
  and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned,
  Boland T. Jones, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifies, 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
        results of operations of the Company.
|

|            |                               
|----------- | ------------------------------
|May 9, 2011 | /s/ Boland T. Jones           
|            |                               
|            | Boland T. Jones               
|            | Chief Executive Officer       
|            | Premiere Global Services, Inc.

---
#### Thomas JOHNSON Jr. *v.*STATE of Arkansas

5327

422 S. W. 2d 417

Opinion delivered January 8, 1968

*James D. Storey,*for petitioner.

*Joe Purcell,*Attorney General; *Don Langston,*Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.

Lyle Brown, Justice.

The petitioner, Thomas Johnson Jr., is serving a ten-year term in a federal penitentiary, having 'been convicted in January 1966. At the time of that conviction there were several felony charges pending against him in the Pulaski Gounty Circuit Court. He filed a pleading in the circuit court on May 6, 1966, asking that he be given a trial on the charges there pending. No action has been taken on his petition and Johnson asks here that the trial court be directed *813to dismiss the charges and remove the detainer filed against him with the federal authorities.

Under the authority of *Pellegrini*v. *Wolfe, Judge,*225 Ark. 459, 283 S. W. 2d 162 (1955), petitioner is entitled to relief. Two full terms of the Pulaski Circuit Court have elapsed since petitioner made his request for a trial. During that period the prosecuting attorney did not see fit to institute proceedings calculated to effect Johnson’s return for trial. The State’s right to prosecute has expired.

Respondent urges that Johnson’s petition to the trial court was not a petition for trial. The handwritten petition was headed “Motion for writ of Habeas Corpus Ad Prosequendum.” Technically, he should have petitioned for a writ, of *procedendo ad, judicium.*Given a literal interpretation, the title of his motion indicated that he was asking for a writ to issue to remove him to Pulaski ¡County so he could be prosecuted. Furthermore, in the text of his motion, he asked that a writ be issued “granting him an immediate transfer to Little Rock, Ark., for the purpose of a fair and speedy trial.” The intent of the petition is clear.

The petition is granted. Johnson is entitled to a dismissal of the charges and a recall of the detainer filed with federal authorities, all arising from cases numbered 63718, 63719, 64268, 64308, and 64471.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                             229
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   411
<PP&E>                                           17518
<DEPRECIATION>                                    7971
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   10035
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             1471
<BONDS>                                           9526
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       (984)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     10035
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  2783
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     1617
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   995
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 905
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (734)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (734)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (734)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.73)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.73)
        

</TABLE>
##### 



EXHIBIT 10.2
 METRETEK TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
 POWERSECURE KEY EMPLOYEE RETENTION PLAN
Adopted as of June 12, 2006
 SECTION 1. Purpose
 SECTION 2. Definitions




---



##### 



SECTION 3. Administration
 Authority of the Committee
 2




---



##### 



Exercise of Authority
 Committee Proceedings .
 Limitation of Liability
 SECTION 4. Eligibility
 SECTION 5. Awards.
 General
 Establishment of Performance Goals 3
      Determination and Payment of Performance Bonuses
 Establishment of Time Goals
 Payment of Bonuses
 Maximum Amount of Bonuses
 SECTION 6. Termination of Employment.
 General Termination of Rights Hereunder
 Termination by PowerSecure without Cause or due to a Change in Control
 SECTION 7. Non-Competition Covenant.
 4
      Covenant Not to Compete
 Competition with PowerSecure .
 Interpretation of Covenant
 SECTION 8. Amendments to and Termination of the Plan and Awards.
 SECTION 9. General Provisions.
 Compliance with Legal and Other Requirements .
 5
      No Transferability
 Designation of Beneficiary
 No Rights to Awards
 Tax Withholding
 No Right to Employment
 Unfunded Status of Awards
 No Limitation on Other Compensatory Arrangements
 6
      Governing Law
 Severability ,
 Headings .
 Indemnification .
 Construction .
 Costs and Expenses
 SECTION 10. Effective Date and Termination.
   7
      8
      POWERSECURE, INC.
PowerSecure Key Employee Retention Plan
 Notice of Grant
 Name of Participant:Time Goals:
    
    December 31, 2010December 31, 2015Time Bonus:
    
    $250,000 per Time Goal
 Performance Goal(s)
 Performance Bonus:
  POWERSECURE, INC.By:Sidney Hinton, President
 PARTICIPANT:SignatureStreet AddressCity                     State                     Zip Code
 9