alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 13.2

Certification by the Principal Financial 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 of Cellectis S.A. (the Company) on Form 20-F for the fiscal year
ended December 31, 2016 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Eric Dutang, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                            
|------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: March 23, 2017                                        
|                                                            
|/s/ Eric Dutang                                             
|Name: Eric Dutang                                           
|Title: Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)

A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                     BD

<S>                                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                 6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             JAN-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                  JUL-31-1999
<CASH>                                        6,852,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                 8,371,000
<SECURITIES-RESALE>                           0
<SECURITIES-BORROWED>                         0
<INSTRUMENTS-OWNED>                           6,849,000
<PP&E>                                        1,835,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                27,120,000
<SHORT-TERM>                                  0
<PAYABLES>                                    0
<REPOS-SOLD>                                  0
<SECURITIES-LOANED>                           0
<INSTRUMENTS-SOLD>                            1,834,000
<LONG-TERM>                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         0
<PREFERRED>                                   0
<COMMON>                                      1,000
<OTHER-SE>                                    20,751,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  27,120,000
<TRADING-REVENUE>                             94,000
<INTEREST-DIVIDENDS>                          757,000
<COMMISSIONS>                                 20,878,000
<INVESTMENT-BANKING-REVENUES>                 2,403,000
<FEE-REVENUE>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            0
<COMPENSATION>                                16,369,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               493,000
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               0
<CHANGES>                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (1,079,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (0.13)



</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of US Unwired Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2002 (the "Report"), I, Robert W.
Piper, President 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:

         (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/ Robert W. Piper

-----------------------
Robert W. Piper
President and Chief Executive Officer
November 11, 2002
#### Audrel Jack WATSON, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Warden WRIGHT; R. E. Clarke; Mr. Graves; Ms. Jones; Unknown VA DOC Ombudsman; Unknown GEO/LVCC Individuals; Unknown VA DOC Individuals, Defendants-Appellees, and Harold Clarke; Unknown Chief Executive Officer of GEO, Defendants

No. 17-7435

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: February 22, 2018

Decided: February 27, 2018

Audrel Jack Watson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Michael Gordon Matheson, THOMPSON MCMULLAN PC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Before TRAXLER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Audrel Jack Watson, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm .for the reasons stated by the district court. *Watson v. Wright,*No. 1:15-cv-01214-LMB-TCB (E.D. Va. Oct. 10, 2017). 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.

*AFFIRMED*
Order filed, December 02, 2014.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-14-00943-CR

____________

DAVID SIDNEY MCKEAND, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Criminal Court at Law No 7

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1913470

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due November 14, 2014. See Tex. R. 

App. P. 35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the 

record. The record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record 

has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Sandra Powell, the official court reporter, to file the record in this 

appeal within 30 days of the date of this order. 

PER CURIAM
exhibit10-2.htm


Exhibit 10.2










LOAN AGREEMENT







     This Loan Agreement (the “Agreement") is made and entered into as of March 12, 2014, by and between SECUREALERT, INC. ("SecureAlert") and Mr. Eli Sabag (the "Seller").







RECITALS







A.           The parties hereto are contemplating a Share Purchase Agreement of even date herewith, by and among SecureAlert, the Seller and , GPS GLOBAL TRACKING AND SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM LTD (the "Company" and the “Purchase Agreement"), whereby SecureAlert intends to purchase with effect from April 1, 2014 all of the equity of the Company (the "Transaction").







B.           Seller has requested SecureAlert to provide the Seller with a loan in the amount of US$ 311,404.







NOW THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:







1. SecureAlert shall lend the Seller US$ 311,404 to be provided as a loan within two (2) business days from the date hereof (the "Loan"). The Loan shall be repaid by the Seller by way of set off from amounts to be received by the Seller from SecureAlert in accordance with the Purchase Agreement.







2. In the event the closing of the Transaction does not take place by April 1, 2014, then the Seller shall repay the Loan plus interest at the annual rate of 5% by no later than May 15, 2014.







3.            Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed in all respects by the internal laws of the State of Utah.







4.           Interpretation. In the event that any provisions or any capitalized term used herein shall conflict with the terms or conditions of the Purchase Agreement, the terms and conditions of the Purchase Agreement shall govern.







5.           Counterparts.   This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be enforceable against the parties actually executing such counterparts, and all of which together shall constitute one instrument.







IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement the date first written above.







[Signature Page Follows]




















Funding Agreement 







Page 1 of 2












 


































	
SECUREALERT INC.













	
By: /s/ Guy Dubois                      








	Guy Dubois, Chairman
















	
Date: 03/12/2014                         



























By: /s/ Eli Sabag                         





	
Mr. ELI SABAG













	
Date: 03/12/2014                          









 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 




Funding Agreement 







Page 2 of 2
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Angie Renee MORTON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-4323

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: November 30, 2017

Decided: January 8, 2018

Bryan Gates, Jr., Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellant. Anand P. Ramas-wamy, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Angie Renee Morton pleaded guilty to obtaining oxycodone by fraud, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 843(a)(3) (2012). The district court sentenced Morton to 18 months of imprisonment, followed by 1 year of supervised release, and she now appeals. Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), questioning whether the sentence is reasonable. *794Morton was advised of her right to file a pro se supplemental brief, but has not done so. Finding no error, we affirm.

We review a sentence for reasonable' ness, applying an abuse of discretion standard. *Gall v. United States,*552 U.S. 38, 41, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007); *see also United States v. White,*810 F.3d 212, 229 (4th Cir.), *cert. denied.*— U.S. -, 136 S.Ct. 1833, 194 L.Ed.2d 837 (2016). In so doing, we examine the sentence for “significant procedural error,” including “failing to calculate (or improperly calculating) the Guidelines range, treating the Guidelines as mandatory, failing to consider the [18 U.S.C.] § 3553(a) [ (2012) ] factors, selecting a sentence based on clearly erroneous facts, or failing to adequately explain the chosen sentence.” *Gall,*552 U.S. at 51, 128 S.Ct. 586. We then review the substantive reasonableness of the sentence. “Any sentence that is within or below a properly calculated Guidelines range is presumptively reasonable,” *White,*810 F.3d at 230 (internal quotation marks omitted).

We have thoroughly reviewed the record and conclude that the sentence is both procedurally and substantively reasonable. The district court properly calculated the advisory Guidelines range and sufficiently explained the sentence. In addition, Morton’s within-Guidelines sentence is presumptively reasonable and we conclude that Morton has not rebutted that presumption.

We have examined the entire record in accordance with the requirements of *An-ders*and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. This court requires that counsel inform Morton, in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Morton requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on Morton. 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 in the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED*
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

JOSHUA ALBERTO RODRIGUEZ, a.k.a.

Pariente,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 15-30185

D.C. No. 4:14-cr-00096-BMM-15

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Montana

Brian M. Morris, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 30, 2016** 

Before: HUG, FARRIS, and CANBY, Circuit Judges.

Joshua Alberto Rodriguez appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges his guilty-plea convictions and his 270-month sentence for conspiracy

to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute methamphetamine, in violation

FILED

APR 01 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
of 21 U.S.C. § 846, and his concurrent 240-month sentences for conspiracy

involving a firearm and a drug trafficking crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §

924(o), and conspiracy to commit money laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C.§

1956(h). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Rodriguez’s

counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a

motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Rodriguez the

opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or

answering brief has been filed. 

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S.

75, 80 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief as to Rodriguez’s

conviction. We accordingly affirm his conviction.

Rodriguez has waived his right to appeal his sentence. Because the record

discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the appeal waiver, we dismiss the

appeal as to his sentence. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986 (9th Cir.

2009).

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED in part; DISMISSED in part.

2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR PRONET INC. FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED
MARCH 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                           3,087
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   12,653
<ALLOWANCES>                                       996
<INVENTORY>                                      2,305
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                19,988
<PP&E>                                         138,757
<DEPRECIATION>                                  58,676
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 313,375
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           22,596
<BONDS>                                         99,408
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           131
<OTHER-SE>                                     121,440
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   313,375
<SALES>                                         28,933
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                28,933
<CGS>                                            3,539
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   11,156
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                26,595
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,427
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (13,162)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       100
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (13,262)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (13,262)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.05)
        

</TABLE>
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 on Form 10-QSB of Golden River Resources
Corporation (the "Company") for the three months ended December 31, 2007 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"report"), the undersigned, Joseph Gutnick, Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, 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 result of operations of
         the Company.


Date:    February 14, 2008


                                /s/___Joseph I. Gutnick________
                                Joseph I. Gutnick
                                Chairman of the Board, President and
                                Chief Executive Officer

                                                                              23
EXHIBIT 32.1



                  Certification Required by 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350
                 (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

     In  connection  with the filing by Millennia  Inc.  (the  "Company") of the
Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q for the period  ending  September  30,  2008 (the
"Report"), the undersigned hereby certifies:

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

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



                                       Date:  October 15, 2008

                                        /s/  Kevin B. Halter
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Kevin B. Halter, Chief Executive Officer
                                       and Chief Financial Officer
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

mniteb ~tate~ (!Court of ~peaI~

for toe jfeberaI (!Circuit

SHIMANO, INC.,

Appellant,

v.

DAVID J. KAPPOS, DIRECTOR,

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK

OFFICE,

Appellee,

AND

MBI CO., LTD.,

Cross Appellant.

2012-1286, -1294

(Reexamination No. 95/001,051)

Appeals from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences.

ON MOTION

ORDER

Shimano, Inc. moves to include, as an addendum to its

response/reply brief, the original and a certified English

Case: 12-1286 Document: 37 Page: 1 Filed: 09/26/2012
SHIMANO, INC. V. DAVID KAPPaS, DIRECTOR, PTa 2

translation of a February 29, 2012 letter from MBl Co.

LTD ("MBl") charging Shimano with patent infringement.

MBI opposes. The Director of the United States Patent

and Trademark takes no position. Shimano replies.

Upon consideration thereof,

IT Is ORDERED THAT:

The motion is denied.

FOR THE COURT

SEP 26 2012

Date

cc: James A. Deland, Esq.

Raymond T. Chen, Esq.

Richard Wydeven, Esq.

s25

/s/ Jan Horbaly

Jan Horbaly

Clerk

USo COUJt'F'PEALS FOR • THE FEDERAl. CIRCUIT

SEP 262012

JAN HORBAlY

ClERK

Case: 12-1286 Document: 37 Page: 2 Filed: 09/26/2012
III

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. RES. 173

To proclaim the week of September 24 through September 30, 1995, as

‘‘National Dog Week’’.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 19 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 5), 1995

Mr. D’AMATO submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

RESOLUTION

To proclaim the week of September 24 through September

30, 1995, as ‘‘National Dog Week’’.

Whereas dogs play an integral role in our lives, communities,

and Nation, in good and bad times; and their present and

future well-being in society requires education about responsible dog ownership;

Whereas many assistance dogs provide valuable service as

seeing eye dogs; hearing dogs; disabled assistance dogs;

drug, bomb, and arson detection dogs; and for tracking

and locating missing persons and fugitives;

Whereas the public good is advanced when we foster the ideas

of canine good citizens by promoting the positive interaction between dogs and society;
2

SRES 173 IS

Whereas raising a canine good citizen is, first and foremost,

an obligation of the owner;

Whereas dog owners must make conscientious efforts to develop the essential traits and characteristics that comprise responsible dog ownership;

Whereas the decision to become a dog owner is an emotional

and monetary long-term commitment which carries a tremendous responsibility;

Whereas dog owners bear a special responsibility to their canine companions to provide proper care and humane

treatment at all times;

Whereas this proper care and treatment includes an adequate

and nutritious diet, clean water, clean and comfortable

living conditions, regular veterinary care, kind and responsive human companionship, and training in appropriate behavior;

Whereas dog ownership requires honesty about an owner’s

readiness and ability to be responsible for their canine

companion;

Whereas this requires personal questioning about one’s time

commitments, desire for a dog and family situations;

Whereas the next component of choosing a canine companion

involves educating oneself about obtaining a dog or puppy

from a responsible source;

Whereas a responsible source will provide a prospective dog

owner with appropriate information about the breed of

dog, training, feeding, and care;

Whereas the Senate encourages people to be responsible dog

owners and encourages people to recognize the positive
3

SRES 173 IS

ramifications on society of promoting canine good citizens; and

Whereas the Senate encourages people to recognize the contributions that our canine companions make to all of us

throughout the year: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the Senate proclaims the week of Sep2 tember 24–30, as ‘‘National Dog Week’’.

Æ