alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT 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 Depomed, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2009 asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, Carl A. Pelzel, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

 

(1)  TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities 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.

 
|   | Date:  August 7, 2009           |
|--------|--------------------------------------|
|   |                                 |
|   |                                 |
|   | /s/ Carl A.  Pelzel                  |
|   | Carl A. Pelzel                       |
|   | President andChief Executive Officer |

 

----
May 8, 2012


 


Bioanalytical Systems,
Inc. 


2710 Kent Avenue


West Lafayette, Indiana
47906


Attn: Jacqueline M.
Lemke, VP Finance


 


Dear Ms. Lemke:


 


Incidental
to that certain Loan Agreement. entered into by and between Bioanalytical Systems, Inc. (“Borrower”) and Regions Bank
(“Bank”) dated December 18, 2007 (such Loan Agreement, as amended, hereinafter referred to collectively as the “Loan
Agreement”), and subject to further conditions set forth herein, Bank hereby waives Borrower’s compliance with the Fixed
Charge Coverage Ratio covenant as set forth in Section 8(b) for the period ending as of March 31, 2012.


 


The waiver
of Borrower’s compliance with the financial covenant as set forth above constitutes a singular waiver and shall not be deemed to
be or to imply Bank’s waiver of Borrower’s strict compliance with
the terms and provisions of the Loan Agreement. The waiver contained herein is also subject to receipt by Bank of such additional
documentation as may be required by Bank to modify the Loan Agreement and other related loan documents and to provide further security
for the loans from Bank to Borrower.


 


The
waiver granted herein shall not be deemed to create a course of conduct or obligation upon Bank to
waive Borrower’s future non-compliance with any of the terms or provisions as set forth in the Loan Agreement. No delay
or omission of Bank to exercise any right or power under the Loan Agreement shall impair such right or power or be construed
as a waiver of any default or as an acquiescence except as expressly set forth herein. All waivers of Borrower’s
noncompliance with the terms and provisions of the Loan Agreement shall not be valid unless in writing and signed by Bank,
and then only  to the extent specifically set forth in such
writing.


 


	 	Sincerely,
	 	 
	 	REGIONS BANK
	 	 
	 	By: 	/s/ Michael F. Zingraf
	 	 	Michael F. Zingraf, Senior Vice President
Exhibit 31(ii)
                                --------------


                                CERTIFICATIONS

I, Steve Bailey, certify that:


      1.    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form
            10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this
            report on Form 10-K of Alternative Loan Trust 2006-J7 (the
            "Exchange Act periodic reports");

      2.    Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as
            a whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing and
            other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the
            period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act
            periodic reports;

      4.    I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
            servicer(s) and based on my knowledge and the compliance review(s)
            conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement(s)
            required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and
            except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the
            servicer(s) have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing
            agreement(s) in all material respects; and

      5.    All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing
            criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation
            reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for
            asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in
            accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules
            13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report,
            except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material
            instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been
            disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

      In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on
      information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: The
      Bank of New York, as Trustee, SunTrust Mortgage Incorporated and
      Washington Mutual Bank, FA.

   Date: March 28, 2007


      /s/ Steve Bailey
      --------------------------------
      Steve Bailey
      Senior Managing Director, Loan Administration
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, *v.*William Wade, Appellant.

Argued June 7, 1943;

decided July 20, 1943.

*575
      *Joseph F. Kosman, Harry Geist, David Sober*and *Charles Forster*for appellant.

*Elbert T. Gallagher, District Attorney (John J. Dillon*of counsel), for respondent.

Judgment affirmed; no opinion.

Concur: Lehman, Ch. J., Loughban, Rxppey, Lewis, Conway, Desmond and Thacheb, JJ.
#### Alejandro Macedo FRUCTUSO, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 16-1976

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 11, 2017

Decided: April 17, 2017

Bradley B. Banias, BARNWELL, WHALEY, PATTERSON, AND HELMS, Charleston, South Carolina, for Petitioner. Chad A. Readier, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Cindy S. Ferrier, Assistant Director, Sunah Lee, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Before TRAXLER, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Alejandro Macedo Fructuso (Macedo), a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing his appeal from the immigration judge’s denial of his application for cancellation of removal. Macedo raises a due process violation for the first time on appeal, arguing that the immigration judge’s conduct at his removal hearing violated his right to a full and fair hearing. We lack jurisdiction over this claim because Macedo failed to exhaust his administrative remedies before the Board.*8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1) (2012); *Massis v. Mukasey,*549 F.3d 631, 638 (4th Cir. 2008). We therefore dismiss the petition for review. 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.

*PETITION DISMISSED*

*

 Although Macedo notes that there is an exception to the exhaustion requirement for certain constitutional claims, *see Farrokhi v. I.N.S.,*900 F.2d 697, 700-01 (4th Cir. 1990); *Gallanosa v. United States,*785 F.2d 116, 120-21 (4th Cir. 1986), we have never extended this exception to “procedural challenges that could have been addressed by the [Board].” *Kurfees*v. *I.N.S., 275*F.3d 332, 337 (4th Cir. 2001).
# Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed December 15, 2021. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________ No. 3D21-0260 Lower Tribunal Nos. 07-7538 CC & 20-0234 AP

________________ 

### United Automobile Insurance Company ,

Appellant, vs. 

### Primary Health Services, a/a/o Odalys Rodriguez , Appellee. An Appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Gloria Gonzalez-Meyer, Judge. Michael J. Neimand, for appellant. Panter, Panter & Sampedro, P.A., and David Sampedro, for appellee. Before FERNANDEZ, C.J., and LINDSEY, and HENDON, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Joseph Dean JAYNE, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-30147

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted July 11, 2017 *

Filed July 17, 2017

Paulette Lynn Stewart, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USHE—Office of the US Attorney, Helena, MT, Leif Johnson, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the US Attorney, Billings, MT, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Joshua Van de Wetering, Van De Wet-ering Law Offices, Missoula, MT, for Defendant-Appellant

*705Before: CANBY, KOZINSKI, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Joseph Dean Jayne, Jr., appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 150-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Jayne contends that the district court erred by imposing a two-level enhancement for his leadership role in the offense under U.S.S.G. § 3Bl.l(c). We review a district court’s determination that a defendant was an organizer or leader for purposes of applying a sentence enhancement for abuse of discretion. *See United States v.*Gasca-Ruiz, 862 F.3d 1167, 1170 (9th Cir. 2017) (en banc). The undisputed facts in the presentence report reflect that Jayne procured the drugs from suppliers for others to transport and distribute, and had another co-conspirator act as his “muscle.” This evidence supported a finding that Jayne had “the ability and influence necessary to coordinate the activities of others to achieve the desired result, whether or not [he had] a superior rank in a criminal hierarchy.” *United States v. Doe,*778 F.3d 814, 824 (9th Cir. 2015).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
#### Sirak MANBEGIROT, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Marie VARGO, Warden, Sussex II State Prison, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 16-7599

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: March 30, 2017

Decided: April 18, 2017

Sirak Manbegirot, Appellant Pro Se. Craig Stallard, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before KING, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Sirak Manbegirot seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate 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 must 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 Manbegirot has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certifícate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauper-is, and dismiss the appeal. 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*
May 28, 2015

Mr. Scott Richard 802 Canyon Avenue Cody, WY 82414

Dear Mr. Richard:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption. It explains why we can not process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can Not Process Your Request

We entered your April 23, 2015, exemption request on behalf into the public docket (No. FAA-2015-1159), but we are unable to pr ocess your request any further. The information you sent does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brenda Robeson Program Analyst, Airmen and Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
#### Charles G. Kellogg, Respondent, *v.*Daniel Pike et al., Appellants.

(Argued. September 25, 1871;

decided January term, 1872.)

Decided upon the facts and the admissions in the answer.

*A. Boa/rdmamj*for the appellants.

*A. H. Dmia*for the respondent.

Hunt and Leonard, CC., read for affirmance.

All concur. Judgment affirmed, with costs.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>5
<MULTIPLIER>1,000





<S>                                                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                                6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                                      DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                                         JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                                           JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                                                      25,544
<SECURITIES>                                                                 6,462
<RECEIVABLES>                                                               27,146
<ALLOWANCES>                                                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                                                      0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                            67,677
<PP&E>                                                                      20,510
<DEPRECIATION>                                                                   0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                             103,534
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                                       22,439
<BONDS>                                                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                            0
<PREFERRED>                                                                      0
<COMMON>                                                                         0
<OTHER-SE>                                                                  79,612
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                               103,534
<SALES>                                                                     40,468
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                            40,468
<CGS>                                                                       14,880
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                               14,880
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                            31,111
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                            (626)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                             (4,897)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                                (1,370)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                         (3,527)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                             (10,857)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                                  0
<CHANGES>                                                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                                               (14,384)
<EPS-BASIC>                                                                (1.22)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                                (1.22)



</TABLE>
**Exhibit 35.2**

** **

**WASHINGTON MUTUAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES CORP.**

** **

**OFFICER’S CERTIFICATEANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE**

 

            I, Barbara Campbell, an authorized officer of Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corp. (the “AdministrativeAgent”), do hereby certify to WaMu Asset Acceptance Corp. (the “Depositor”) and Washington Mutual Bank (the “Servicer”), pursuant to the Administrative Agent Agreement dated as of April 1, 2006 (the “ServicingAgreement”) by and between the Servicer and the Administrative Agent the following with respect to Washington Mutual Asset-Backed Certificates Series 2006-HE4 Trust for the 2006 fiscal year (the “Relevant Year”):

 

1.        A review of the activities of the Servicer during the Relevant Year and of performance under the ServicingAgreement has been made under my supervision.

2.        To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under theServicing Agreement in all material respects throughout the Relevant Year.

 

Dated as of March 1, 2007.

 
|  

__/s/ Barbara Campbell________________

Name:  Barbara Campbell

Title:    First Vice President |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6633 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.6633

                     One Hundred Eighteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
         the third day of January, two thousand and twenty-four

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
9355 113th Street in Seminole, Florida, as the ``Army SSG Ryan Christian 
                 Knauss Memorial Post Office Building''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. ARMY SSG RYAN CHRISTIAN KNAUSS MEMORIAL POST OFFICE 
BUILDING.
    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 9355 113th Street in Seminole, Florida, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Army SSG Ryan Christian Knauss Memorial Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Army SSG 
Ryan Christian Knauss Memorial Post Office Building''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
Exhibit 99.2



                     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 Form 10-Q of Toys "R" Us, Inc. (the "Company") for the
period ended August 3, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Louis Lipschitz, Chief Financial Officer
of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.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, 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 Company.





                                           /s/ Louis Lipschitz____________
                                           -------------------------------
                                           Name:    Louis Lipschitz.
                                           Title:   Executive Vice President
                                                      - Chief Financial Officer
                                            Date:    September 12, 2002
| 1. | The      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)      of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and |
|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | To      my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in      all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations      of the Company as of and for the period covered by the    report. |
|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:      March 31, 2010 | By:   | /s/ Ronen      Zadok                                                                             |
|--------------------------------|-----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                           |            | Ronen      Zadok                                                                                 |
|                           |            | Chief      Financial Officer(Principal      Accounting Officer and Principal Financial  Officer) |

----