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 Annual Report of MDU Communications International, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2004, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on December 28, 2004 (the “Report”),
I, Sheldon Nelson, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant
to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:
(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.
 
 A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to and will be retained by MDU Communications International, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
 
 /s/  SHELDON
      NELSONSheldon
      Nelson
      *Chief
      Executive Officer and*
      *Chief
      Financial Officer*
      MDU
      Communications International, Inc.December
      28, 2004Totowa,
      New Jersey
**Exhibit 31.01**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, W. Michael Long, certify that:
     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Homestore, Inc.; and
     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report.
Date: April 29, 2005         /s/ W. MICHAEL LONG   W. Michael Long   *Chief Executive Officer*   
23
fueg_ex1018.htm


EXHIBIT 10.18


 


 


 





 


 




  





1











  




 





	Game Face Gaming, Inc.	 
	 	 
	Name /s/ Felix Elinson	 
	 	 
	Felix Elinson	 
	Title: CEO	 
	 	 
	Agreed and Accepted:	 
	 	 
	By: /s/ Ryan Mendonca	 
	 	 
	Small Cap Consultants	 





 


 


2
Attachment 23  

Stabilizer Compositions
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

____________________

No. 95-31286 Summary Calendar

____________________

EUGENE V. WILLIAMS; FRANK W. RODGERS; MARY BETH O’BRIEN; AUGUSTUS MARKRIS,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

versus

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS, MATES AND PILOTS,

Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 95-CV-2265-D

_______________________________________________________________ August 26, 1996 Before GARWOOD, JOLLY, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The appellants a ppeal the district court’s grant of summary

judgment for the International Organization of Masters, Mates and

Pilots. The appellants contend that the district court abused its

discretion in limiting discovery to that presented at the grievance

hearing and that the district court erred in granti ng summary-2-

judgment because genuine issues of material fact remained as to the

union’s grievance procedures. We have reviewed the record and the

briefs and AFFIRM the district court’s judgment for essentially the

same reasons set forth by the district court. W illiams v.

International Org. of Masters, Mates and Pilots

, 95-CV-2265-D (E.D.

La. Dec. 7, 1995).

A F F I R M E D.
(LOGO) AMERIQUEST
       MORTGAGE
       COMPANY


February 25, 2000


As of and for the year ended December 31, 1999,  Ameriquest Mortgage Company has
complied in all material respects with the minimum servicing standards set forth
in the Mortgage  Bankers  Association of America's  Uniform  Single  Attestation
Program for Mortgage  Bankers.  From January 1, 1999 through  December 31, 1999,
Ameriquest  Mortgage  Company  had in effect a  fidelity  bond in the  amount of
$10,000,000 and for the same period, an errors and omissions policy ranging from
$6,425,000 to $8,025,000.

Kirk Langs
President


Elaine Stangl
Executive Vice President
Loan Servicing

John P. Grazer
Executive Vice President
Cheif Financial Officer
**Exhibit 99.1**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Capital Corp of the West (“theCompany”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2002 As filed withSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (“the Report”), I, ThomasT. Hawker , Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that:

 

(1)                                  TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
| November 6, 2002 |                    |
|------------------|-------------------------|
|             |                    |
|             |                    |
|             | /s/ Thomas T. Hawker    |
|             | Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
SPAR GROUP, INC.

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

              CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly  report on Form 10-Q for the three month period
ended June 30, 2005 (this "report"), of SPAR Group, Inc. (the "registrant"), the
undersigned hereby certifies that, to his 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 registrant.

                                            /s/ Robert G. Brown
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Robert G. Brown
                                            Chairman, President and Chief
                                            Executive Officer

                                            August 15, 2005

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

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6390 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 6390

 To amend the Consumer Credit Protection Act to permit the refusal of 
 credit to aliens who do not have lawful status in the United States, 
                        and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 13, 2023

Mr. Self (for himself, Mr. Brecheen, Mr. Biggs, and Mr. Weber of Texas) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                           Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Consumer Credit Protection Act to permit the refusal of 
 credit to aliens who do not have lawful status in the United States, 
                        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. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Reinforcing Immigration Status for 
Credit Knowledge Act'' or the ``RISK Act''.

SEC. 2. REFUSAL OF CREDIT TO ALIENS WITHOUT LAWFUL STATUS.

    Section 701(b) of the Consumer Credit Protection Act (15 U.S.C. 
1691(b)) is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (4), by striking ``; or'' and inserting a 
        semicolon;
            (2) in paragraph (5), by striking the period at the end and 
        inserting ``; or''; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(6) to refuse to extend credit to an alien who does not 
        have lawful status in the United States under the immigration 
        laws (as such terms are defined in section 101 of the 
        Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101)).''.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

              CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER 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 on Form 10-K of Art Technology Group,
Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, Robert D. Burke, the President and Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, hereby certifies, 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 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/ ROBERT D. BURKE
                                        ----------------------------------------

                                                    Robert D. Burke
                                         President and Chief Executive Officer
                                             (principal executive officer)

Date: March 16, 2005
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 101 (Friday, May 24, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 31520]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-12510]

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

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m., Friday, June 28, 2013.

PLACE: 1155 21st St. NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission 
Conference Room.

STATUS:  Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Surveillance, Examinations, and Enforcement 
Matters. In the event that the time, date, or place of this meeting 
changes, an announcement of the change, along with the new time, date, 
or place of the meeting will be posted on the Commission's Web site at 
http://www.cftc.gov.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Melissa D. Jurgens, 202-418-5516.

Natise Stowe,
Executive Assistant.
[FR Doc. 2013-12510 Filed 5-22-13; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
```
Order filed December 11, 2014

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 14

- 00179

- CR

____________ MATTHEW JOSEPH OLIVE IRA , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the Co unty Crim inal C our t at Law No

. 7

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1934280



### ORDER
Appellant is not represented by counsel. The trial court has previously determined that appellant is not entitled to appointment of counsel on appeal. No reporter’s record or brief has been filed. Rule 38.8 provides that we will not dismiss or consider the appeal without briefs unless it is shown the appellant no longer desires to prosecute his appeal or that he is not indigent and has failed to make necessary arrangements for filing a brief. Tex. R . App. P. 38.8. Th e rule was designed to protect an indigent appellant from the failure of his appointed counselto provide a brief. The rule further provides that under appropriate circumstances,

“the appellate court may consider the appeal without briefs , as justice may require.” T ex. R. App. P. 38.8 (b)(4).
The trial court has already held two hearings at the direction of this court. Despite having received notice from the court coordinator, appellant failed to appear at the most recent hearing scheduled December 1, 2014. Because the trial court has already held one hearing to make the findings required under Rule 38.8, and we can find nothing in the rules or case law that requires this court to once again send this matter back to the trial court, we decl ine to do so.
Therefore, we ORDER appellant to file a brief in this appeal on or before January 12, 2015 . If appellant fails to file his brief as ordered, we will decide this appeal upo n the record before the Court. See Lott v. State , 874 S.W.2d 687, 688 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994) (affirming conviction on record alone where appellant failed to file a pro se brief after being properly admonished); Coleman v. State , 774 S.W.2d 736, 738

– 39 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] 1989, no pet.) (holding that
former rule 74( l )(2) (now Rule 38.8(b)) permitted an appeal to be considered without briefs “as justice may require” when a pro se appellant has not complied with the rules of appellate procedure).

PER CURIAM
EX-10.1






CASTLE BRANDS INC.

122 East 42nd Street

Suite 4700

New York, NY 10168




May 11, 2012



Mr. T. Kelley Spillane


[address]



Dear Kelley:



This letter agreement constitutes an amendment to the Amended and Restated Employment
Agreement dated as of May 2, 2005, as previously amended (the “Agreement”), between Castle Brands
Inc. (the “Company”) and T. Kelley Spillane (the “Executive”). The Company and Executive wish to
amend the Agreement as set forth below. Unless otherwise defined herein, capitalized terms used
herein shall have the meanings ascribed thereto in the Agreement.



A. Section 3 of the Agreement is amended by deleting the date “May 1, 2012” (as previously
amended to be May 1, 2012) and inserting in its place the date “May 1, 2014”.



B. This letter agreement constitutes an amendment to and a modification of the Agreement and
shall for all purposes be considered a part of the Agreement. Except as amended hereby, the
Agreement is confirmed and ratified in all respects and shall remain in full force and effect.



Please indicate your agreement with the foregoing by countersigning two copies of this letter
agreement in the space provided below and returning one of such copies to us.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	Very truly yours,

	 	 	 	 	  

	 	 	 	 	CASTLE BRANDS INC.

	              
	 	          
	 	 

	 	 	 	 	By: /s/ Richard J. Lampen

	 	 	 	 	 

	 	 	 	 	       Richard J. Lampen

	 	 	 	 	       President and Chief Executive Officer







The foregoing letter agreement


is consented and agreed to as


of the date first above written.



By: /s/ T. Kelley Spillane


T. Kelley Spillane
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                            9

<LEGEND>
     THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM THE
     ANNUAL  REPORT ON FORM 10QSB AND IS  QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
     TO SUCH FINANCIAL INFORMATION.
</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000

<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                 3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                  DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          2,883
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                            777
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                1,234
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                    0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    19,016
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         33,292
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           30,782
<LOANS>                                        92,953
<ALLOWANCE>                                       304
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                154,532
<DEPOSITS>                                    118,453
<SHORT-TERM>                                    1,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                               396
<LONG-TERM>                                    20,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                          129
<OTHER-SE>                                     14,554
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                154,532
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 1,772
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                 638
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                  365
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                2,776
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              1,431
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              1,725
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           1,050
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      30
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                   693
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   362
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                        362
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                      223
<EPS-BASIC>                                       .19
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .19
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                   2.47
<LOANS-NON>                                        13
<LOANS-PAST>                                        0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                    0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                 2,120
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                  345
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      71
<RECOVERIES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                 304
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                              304
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                             0



</TABLE>
#### David Gregory LANDECK, Petitioner-Appellant, v. David ZOOK, Warden, Bland Correctional Center, Respondent-Appellee. Christopher Todd Landeck, Petitioner-Appellant, v. I. T. Gilmore, Warden—Coffewood Correctional Center, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 16-7432, No. 16-7514

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 28, 2017

Decided: May 10, 2017

David Gregory Landeck; Christopher Todd Landeck, Appellants Pro Se. Benjamin Hyman Katz, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Before SHEDD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

David Gregory Landeck and Christopher Todd Landeck seek to appeal the magistrate judge’s orders denying relief on their 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petitions.* The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certifícate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of .the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner *236must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that the Landecks have not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appeala-bility, deny leave to proceed in forma pau-peris, and dismiss the appeals. We further deny the motion for a second brief following the certificate of appealability ruling. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED*

*

 The parties consented to the jurisdiction of a federal magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2012),
#### Lleyson Carreto CARRETO Petitioner v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS, III, Attorney General of the United States Respondent

No. 17-1185

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: October 31, 2017

Filed: November 3, 2017

Daniel Scott Reeker, Kendall Law Office, Omaha, NE, for Petitioner

*596Karen Yolanda Drummond, Carl H. McIntyre, Suzanne Nardone, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, for Respondent

Before COLLOTON, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Guatemalan citizen Lleyson Carreto Carreto petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing his appeal from the decision of an immigration judge (IJ), which denied him asylum.1 Carreto Carreto sought immigration relief based on his membership in the particular social group “impoverished Guatemalan males who are victims of gang violence and who would be targeted upon their return based on past experiences,” and on his status as a returnee from the United States who would be perceived as having money.

After careful consideration of Carreto Carreto’s arguments and the record, we conclude that substantial evidence supports the finding that he failed to show past persecution in Guatemala, or a well founded fear of persecution there, due to one of the five protected grounds: race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. See 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1)(B)(i) (listing asylum grounds); De Castro-Gutierrez v. Holder, 713 F.3d 375, 379 (8th Cir. 2013) (standard of review). Specifically, we determine that (1) neither of the proposed groups constituted a particular social group; (2) to the extent Carreto Carreto feared general violence in Guatemala, his fear was not based on a protected ground; and (3) he did not establish the harm inflicted by the gang was on any protected ground for purposes of asylum relief. See id. at 380 (BIA requires particular social group to be defined with particularity and not defined just by fact that its members have been targeted for persecution); Matul-Hernandez v. Holder, 685 F.3d 707, 712-13 (8th Cir. 2012) (Guatemalans returning from the United States who are perceived as wealthy is not particular social group); Gaitan v. Holder, 671 F.3d 678, 682 (8th Cir. 2012) (group—young Salvadoran males who have been subjected to recruitment and have rejected or resisted gang membership based on personal opposition—was not sufficiently narrow to cover discrete class of persons who would be perceived as group by rest of society, so petitioner was no different from any other Salvadoran who has faced gang violence); Krasnopivtsev v. Ashcroft, 382 F.3d 832, 839-40 (8th Cir. 2004) (applicant must demonstrate particularized fear of persecution directed at him, not fear of general violence). The petition is denied. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

. The IJ’s denials of withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture are not before this court. See Chay-Velasquez v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 751, 756 (8th Cir, 2004) (alien waives claim by not meaningfully challenging it in his brief).