alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Mattie McCutcheon, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of David C. McCutcheon, Deceased, Appellant, *v.*National City Bank of New York, Respondent, et al., Defendants.

Argued June 16, 1943;

decided July 20, 1943.

*512
      *Meyer Kreeger, Samuel Seligsohn*and *Lionel Golub*for appellants.

*Joseph S. McCann*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed,.with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Lehman, Ch. J., Loughran, Rippey, Lewis, Conway, Desmond and Thacher, JJ.
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 Quarterly Report of Concierge Technologies, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the Report), I, David W. Neibert, 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)

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



(2)

Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Date:  May 15, 2009



| |     |                                         
| | --- | ----------------------------------------
| | By: | /s/ David W. Neibert                    
| |     | David W. Neibert
Chief Executive Officer



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Concierge Technologies, Inc. and will be retained by Concierge Technologies, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# JEPAHTMENTOF i

# liANSPORTATION 'f\t:v,...t'"! 

# 0°FR 1 \1 

# 101' 1 

# 8

_ './\-·I\ I - f I \1 1400 North Hurstbourne Parkway louisville, KY 40223 502.329.3000 Tel August 6, 2012 

# 1012 AUG - 8 P 

# 2: I**~** U.S. Department ofTransportation Docket Operations, M-30 WestBuilding Ground Floor, Room Wl2-i40 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 SUBJECT:

Reference: NPRM 2010-NM-148-AD DocketNo. FAA-2010-1160 Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-148-AD /A/NPRM 2010-NM-148-AD, DocketNo. FAA-2010-1160 !BIBoeing Service Bulletin**767~28AOI**04 RI dated March 02, 2012. /C/ Boeing Service Bulletin**76~-28A0053** R3 dated November II, 2011 United Parcel Service Co. (UPS) has reviewed the.reference /AFNPRM and offers the following comment: Incorrect reference in paragraph (k): The first sentence ofParagraph (k) ofReference !AI states "Do the inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD at the tiine specified in paragraph (1)(1) or. (1)(2) ofthis AD, as applicable, in accordance withthe Accomplishment Instructions ofBoeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-28A0053, Revision 3, dated November II, 20 11.". HoweverUPS notes that the reference to paragraph (1)(1) or (1)(2) does not exist. Paragraph {1) is related to Terminating Action. UPS believes that the first sentence ofparagraph (k) shouldread "Do the inspection required by paragraph (g) ofthis AD at the time specified in paragraph (k)(1) or (k)(2) ofthis AD, as applicable, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions ofBoeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-28A0053, Revision 3, dated November 11, 2011." We thank you for the opportunity to submit comments to this NPRM and appreciate your consideration of them. UPS appreciates the opportunity to participate in making ADs better while minimizing impact to our service that allows resolution ofthe safety issue. Sincerely,

DH:MN:mkc
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 6827 

To amend the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act to increase 

commodity assistance under the summer food service program. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 14, 2023 

Mr. MOLINARO (for himself and Ms. CLARKE of New York) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the 

Workforce 

A BILL 

To amend the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch 

Act to increase commodity assistance under the summer 

food service program. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. COMMODITY ASSISTANCE UNDER THE SUMMER 

4 FOOD SERVICE PROGRAM. 

5 Section 13(h) of the Richard B. Russell National 

6 School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1761(h)) is amended by 

7 adding at the end the following: ‘‘The value of donated 

8 foods distributed to service institutions pursuant to this 

2 

•HR 6827 IH

1 subsection shall be equal to the national average value of 

2 donated foods determined under section 6(c)(1)(A).’’ 

Æ
* 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. 98-11343

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ROSENDO PEDRAZA-CORDOVA, a/k/a

Rosendo Morales-Cordova,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:98-CR-240-ALL

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

June 17, 1999

Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Court-appointed counsel for Rosendo Pedraza-Cordova

(“Cordova”) has filed a motion to withdraw and a brief pursuant

to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Cordova has moved

this court to dismiss court-appointed counsel and to appoint a

new attorney for appeal. Cordova’s motion for appointment of

substitute counsel is DENIED. Our review of the brief filed by

counsel and of the record discloses no nonfrivolous point for

appeal. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is 
O R D E R

No. 98-11343

- 2 -

GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities, and

the APPEAL IS DISMISSED.
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CEO

STATEMENT FURNISHED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002, 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

The undersigned, Kevin McCarthy is the President, Chief Executive Officer and Director of PFF Bancorp, Inc. (the Company).

This statement is being furnished in connection with the filing by the Company of the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for the period ending June 30, 2007 (the Report).

By execution of this statement, I certify that:



| | A) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o (d)) and
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | B) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the
periods covered by the Report.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This statement is authorized to be attached as an exhibit to the Report so that this
statement will accompany the Report at such time as the Report is filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not intended that this statement
be deemed to be filed for purposes of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

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



|                |  |                                                               
|--------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------
|August 15, 2007 |  | /s/ Kevin McCarthy                                            
|Dated           |  | Kevin McCarthy President, Chief Executive Officer and Director
Exhibit 32 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)   In connection with the Annual Report of Okana Ventures, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the Company), on Form 10-KSB for the year ending December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Ronnie Birch, President/CEO of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), 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 result of operations of the Company.    /s/ Ronnie Birch Ronnie Birch, President, CEO Dated:  March 17, 2008    Exhibit 32 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)   In connection with the Annual Report of Okana Ventures, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the Company), on Form 10-KSB for the year ending December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Michael Upham, Secretary, Treasurer, CFO of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), 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 result of operations of the Company.    /s/ Michael Upham Michael Upham, Secretary, Treasurer, CFO Dated:  March 17, 2008
Date:    July 30, 2014

From:    David Cole, EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards

To:    Docket # EPA‐HQ‐OAR‐2009‐0734

Subject: Suggestions for New Residential Wood Heater NSPS Final Rule

On July 29, 2014, state and industry representatives, at their request, met by conference call

with EPA representatives. The meeting focused on joint state‐industry recommendations for

EPA to consider as the Agency continues to develop the final rule.  

The state‐industry representatives presented five issues:

1. Transition from crib wood to cord wood testing                                                               

2. Implementation: compliance schedule, grandfathering and sell‐through of inventory

3. EPA oversight of lab certification

4. EPA certification process

5. General NSPS enforceability and oversight

Attending the conference call were—

NESCAUM: Lisa Rector (representing Arthur Marin, Executive Director)                                                                   

WESTAR: Dan Johnson, Executive Director; Bob Lebens, Technical Coordinator                                                   

HPBA:    Jack Goldman, President and CEO                                                                                                                 

EPA/OAQPS: Greg Green, Chebryll Edwards, Gil Wood, Amanda Aldridge, David Cole
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 of CytoGenix, Inc. (the Company) on Form 1O-Q for the period ending June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Pam Schertz, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:



(1)

The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



(2)

The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.





/s/Pam Schertz

Pam Schertz

Chief Financial Officer



August 14, 2007
#### VEHICLE INTERFACE TECHNOLOGIES LLC, Plaintiff-Appellant v. JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH AMERICA LLC, Defendant-Appellee

2016-2537

2016-2538

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

June 13, 2017

Robert E. Freitas, Freitas Angelí *&*Weinberg LLP, Redwood City, CA, argued for plaintiff-appellant. Also represented by Daniel J. Weinberg, Joshua Young.

Gabriel Bell, Latham & Watkins LLP, Washington, DC, argued for defendant-appellee. Also represented by Matthew J. Moore, James Bender; Clement J. Naples, New York, NY; Lisa K. Nguyen, Menlo Park, CA.

(Prost, Chief Judge, Taranto and Hughes, Circuit Judges).

JUDGMENT

Per Curiam

This Cause having been heard and considered, it is Ordered and Adjudged:

AFFIRMED. *See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
#### UNITED STATES of America Plaintiff-Appellee v. Byron G. GORMAN Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-4533

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: July 20, 2017

Filed: July 25, 2017

Brent B. Venneman, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Kansas City, MO, for Plaintiff-Appel-lee

Byron G. Gorman, Pro Se

Before GRUENDER, BOWMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Byron Gorman appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after he pled guilty to wire fraud pursuant to a plea agreement that contained an appeal waiver. His counsel has filed a brief under *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), requesting leave to withdraw, and arguing that Gorman’s above-Guidelines-range sentence is unreasonable. Gorman has filed a *pro se*brief, challenging the enforceability of the waiver and the reasonableness of his sentence.

A challenge to the reasonableness of Gorman’s sentence falls within the scope of the plea agreement’s appeal waiver. Upon careful review, we conclude that the waiver is valid and enforceable. *See United States v. Scott,*627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010) *(de novo*review of validity and applicability of appeal waiver); *United States v. Andis,*333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (appeal waiver will be enforced if appeal falls within scope of waiver, defendant knowingly and voluntarily entered into plea agreement and waiver, and enforcing waiver would not result in miscarriage of justice). Having independently reviewed the record pursuant to *Penson v. Ohio,*488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfrivo-lous issues outside the scope of the appeal waiver. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal, and we grant counsel leave to withdraw.

1

. The Honorable Dean Whipple, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jeremy PENA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-6340

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

Filed May 4, 2017

Steven W. Creager, Virginia Loreen Hines, Leslie M. Maye, Office of the United States Attorney, Western District of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Jeremy Pena, Pro Se

Before HARTZ, HOLMES, and BACHARACH, Circuit Judges.

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Robert E. Bacharach, Circuit Judge

Mr. Jeremy Pena was sentenced to 125 months for distributing methamphetamine. In sentencing Mr. Pena, the court applied § 4B1.1 of 4he U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, characterizing a prior crime as a crime of violence based on § 4B1.2(a)’s residual clause.1 Mr. Pena did not appeal, but he moved under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct the sentence. The district court dismissed the motion and denied a certificate of appealability.

Mr. Pena sought a certificate of appeala-bility from our court so that he could appeal the district court’s decision. At the time, our precedent treated § 4B1.2(a)’s residual clause as unconstitutionally vague. *United States v.*Madrid, 805 F.3d 1204 (10th Cir. 2015). Based on this precedent, a member of this panel granted a certificate of appealability. But three days later, the U.S. Supreme Court overruled our precedent in *Beckles v. United States,*rejecting a vagueness challenge to § 4B1.2(a)’s residual clause. — U.S. -, 137 S.Ct. 886, 895, 197 L.Ed.2d 145 (2017). Based on *Beckles,*the government seeks revocation of the certificate of appealability and dismissal of the appeal.

The Court ordered Mr. Pena to respond, and he has not complied. With the *757prior issuance of a certificate of appeala-bility, we have jurisdiction to decide this appeal on the merits. *See Porterfield v. Bell,*258 F.3d 484, 485 (6th Cir. 2001) (stating that the court of appeals obtains jurisdiction even when a certificate of ap-pealability is improvidently granted). Because the underlying claim was potentially meritorious when the certificate of appeal-ability was granted, we decline to revoke the certificate. *See United States v. Marcello,*212 F.3d 1005, 1007-08 (7th Cir. 2000) (stating that the appeals court will only rarely review the issuance of a certificate of appealability, rather than go straight to the merits, to avoid unnecessary complexity in appeals involving collateral attacks). Nonetheless, we agree with the government that *Beckles*precludes relief on Mr. Pena’s claim under § 2255. As a result, we summarily affirm the sentence.2

*

 Because oral argument would not materially aid our decision-making, we are deciding the appeal based on the briefs. *See*Fed. R, App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G).

Our order and judgment does not constitute binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. But the order and judgment may be cited for its persuasive value under Fed. R. App. P. 32.1(a) and 10th Cir. R. 32.1(A).

2

. We grant Mr. Pena’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis.

1

. This residual clause has since been deleted from the guidelines.
#### In the Matter of James H. Ricker, Appellant, against The Village of Hempstead et al., Respondents.

Submitted May 17, 1943;

decided May 27, 1943.

Motion for reargument denied, with ten dollars costs and necessary printing disbursements. (See 290 N. Y. 1.)
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard Brown TAUMOEPEAU, a.k.a. Haumeti, a.k.a. Tiki, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-10301

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 11, 2017 *

Filed April 24, 2017

Marshall H. Silverberg, Assistant U.S. Attorney, DOJ — Office of the US Attorney, Honolulu, HI, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Salina Kanai Althof, Assistant Federal Public Defender, FPDHI — Federal Public Defender’s Office (Honolulu), Honolulu, HI, for Defendant-Appellant

Before: GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM *

Richard Brown Taumoepeau appeals from the district court’s order granting in part his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Taumoepeau contends that the district court abused its discretion by denying him a further sentence reduction under Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. As an initial matter, we reject the government’s argument that this appeal is untimely. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(4). Turning to the merits, we conclude that the district court acted within its discretion when, after considering the nature of Tau-moepeau’s offense and his post-sentencing rehabilitation, it reduced Taumoepeau’s sentence from 480 to 345 months. *See*U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 cmt. n.l(B); *United States v. Lightfoot,*626 F.3d 1092, 1095-96 (9th Cir. 2010). Moreover, contrary to Tau-moepeau’s contention, the record reflects that the district court followed the procedure set forth in *Dillon v. United States,*560 U.S. 817, 130 S.Ct. 2683, 177 L.Ed.2d 271 (2010).

AFFIRMED.

*

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Exhibit 32.3








CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


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


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Anthony J. Branca, Chief Financial Officer of ICON Capital Corp., the Manager of the Registrant, in connection with the Annual Report of ICON Leasing Fund Twelve, LLC (the “LLC”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Annual Report”) certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





1.
The Annual 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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the LLC.







Date: March 29, 2011





/s/Anthony J. Branca__


Anthony J. Branca


Chief Financial Officer


ICON Capital Corp.


Manager of ICON Leasing Fund Twelve, LLC
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 6678 

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide that aliens who 

have been convicted of or who have committed Social Security fraud 

are inadmissible and deportable. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 7, 2023 

Mr. MCCLINTOCK introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide 

that aliens who have been convicted of or who have 

committed Social Security fraud are inadmissible and 

deportable. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Consequences for So5 cial Security Fraud Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 6678 IH

1 SEC. 2. INADMISSIBILITY AND DEPORTABILITY RELATED 

2 TO SOCIAL SECURITY FRAUD. 

3 (a) INADMISSIBILITY.—Section 212(a)(2) of the Im4 migration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(2)) is 

5 amended by adding at the end the following: 

6 ‘‘(J) SOCIAL SECURITY FRAUD.—Any alien 

7 who has been convicted of, who admits having 

8 committed, or who admits committing acts 

9 which constitute the essential elements of an of10 fense under section 208 of the Social Security 

11 Act (42 U.S.C. 408) (relating to social security 

12 account numbers or social security cards), an 

13 offense under section 1028 of title 18, United 

14 States Code (relating to fraud and related ac15 tivity in connection with identification docu16 ments, authentication features, and informa17 tion), or a conspiracy to commit such an of18 fense, is inadmissible.’’. 

19 (b) DEPORTABILITY.—Section 237(a)(2) of the Im20 migration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1227(a)(2)) is 

21 amended by adding at the end the following: 

22 ‘‘(G) SOCIAL SECURITY FRAUD.—Any alien 

23 who has been convicted of, who admits having 

24 committed, or who admits committing acts 

25 which constitute the essential elements of an of26 fense under section 208 of the Social Security 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•HR 6678 IH

1 Act (42 U.S.C. 408) (relating to social security 

2 account numbers or social security cards), an 

3 offense under section 1028 of title 18, United 

4 States Code (relating to fraud and related ac5 tivity in connection with identification docu6 ments, authentication features, and informa7 tion), or a conspiracy to commit such an of8 fense, is deportable.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB