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




     CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350



I, Howard L. Flanders, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of
All American Semiconductor, Inc., hereby certify, to my knowledge:

          (1)  that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of All American
               Semiconductor, Inc. for the quarterly period ended on September
               30, 2003 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
               date hereof at File No. 0-16207 (the "Report") fully complies
               with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable,
               of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

          (2)  that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
               all material respects, the financial condition and results of
               operations of All American Semiconductor, Inc.

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
document.





Dated: November 13, 2003                        /s/ Howard L. Flanders
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                                Howard L. Flanders
##### 



Exhibit 32.2
 Certification Pursuant To Section 1350 Of Chapter 63 Of 18 U.S.C.
As Adopted Pursuant To Section 906 Of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002/SEC Rule 13a-14(b)
  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) 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.
 Dated: November 13, 2006
    
    /s/ Michael K. GreenMichael K. GreenChief Operating Officer andChief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32.1



     CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350


I, Bruce M. Goldberg, President and Chief Executive Officer of All American
Semiconductor, Inc., hereby certify, to my knowledge:

     (1)  that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of All American Semiconductor,
          Inc. for the quarterly period ended on March 31, 2005 filed with the
          Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof at File No.
          0-16207 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section
          13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
          and

     (2)  that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of All American Semiconductor, Inc.

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
document.




Date:  May 13, 2005                       /s/ BRUCE M. GOLDBERG
                                          -----------------------------
                                          Bruce M. Goldberg
                                          President and Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>

                                                                  Exhibit 32.2

                           CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                            18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350*


In connection with the Annual Report of PGI Incorporated (the "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Laurence A. Schiffer, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbones-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 results of operations
         of the Company.



/s/ Laurence A. Schiffer
---------------------------------------
    Laurence A. Schiffer
    Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)        March 30, 2007


<FN>
*A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company
 and will be retained by the Company and will be furnished to the Securities
 and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### IN RE: Deandre RUSSELL, Debtor. Deandre Russell, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Anthony Ingegneri, Mark Petterson, Mark Griffin, Kelley Askew Gillikin, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-16943 Non-Argument Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

(February 21, 2018)

Deandre Russell, Pro Se

David Edward Avery, III, Jason Cole Paulk, Robert Joseph Stone, III, State of Aabama, Department of Revenue, Legal Division, Montgomery, AL, for Defendants-Appellees

Before MARTIN, JILL PRYOR, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Deandre Russell, proceeding *pro se,*appeals the district court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s dismissal of his adversary proceeding. On appeal, Russell argues that the bankruptcy court erred by dismissing his adversary proceeding instead of *sua sponte*transferring it to a district court.

We review legal conclusions by both the bankruptcy court and the district court *de novo. In re Morris,*950 F.2d 1531 (11th Cir. 1992).

While the dismissal of an underlying bankruptcy case does not automatically strip a federal court of jurisdiction over an adversary proceeding which was related to the bankruptcy case at the time of its commencement, the decision whether to retain jurisdiction over the adversary proceeding is left to the sound discretion of the bankruptcy court or the district court, depending upon where the adversary proceeding is pending. *Id.*at 1534. We have considered three factors in determining whether jurisdiction over the proceeding should be retained: (1) judicial economy; (2) fairness and convenience to the litigants; and (3) the degree of difficulty of the related legal issues involved. *Id.*at 1535.

Here, the district court did not err by affirming the bankruptcy court’s dismissal of Russell’s adversary proceeding. The bankruptcy court correctly applied the *Morris*factors, noting that the underlying bankruptcy had been dismissed, that discovery had not yet occurred on Russell’s claims, that the defendants had not consented to adjudication by the bankruptcy court, and that Russell was seeking a jury trial for his claims.

*992AFFIRMED.1

1

. Russell’s motion for an appeals conference and motion to file an untimely motion for reconsideration of our order denying a stay are DENIED.
# C_2023071EN.01001802.xml

| 27.2.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 71/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.2.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 71/18

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski gradski sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 15 December 2022 — Criminal proceedings against FP, QV, IN, YL, VD, JF and OL

(Case C-760/22)

(2023/C 71/22)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Sofiyski gradski sad

Defendants

FP, QV, IN, YL, VD, JF and OL

Question referred

Is the right of a defendant to be present at his or her trial, as provided for in Article 8(1) of Directive 2016/343, (1) read in conjunction with recitals 33 and 44 of that directive, infringed if, at his or her express request, he or she takes part in the court hearings being conducted in the criminal case in question via an online link, in a situation where he or she is defended by a lawyer mandated by him or her and present in the courtroom, and where that link enables him or her to follow the course of the proceedings and to adduce and be given access to evidence, where he or she can be heard without technical hindrances and he or she is guaranteed an effective and confidential means of conferring with his or her lawyer?

---

(1)  Directive (EU) 2016/343 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on the strengthening of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and of the right to be present at the trial in criminal proceedings (OJ 2016 L 65, p. 1).

---
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 Quarterly Report of JB Oxford Holdings, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2002, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Michael J. Chiodo, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. ss. 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/  Michael J. Chiodo
Chief Financial Officer
November 12, 2002
Submitted March 9,

reversed and remanded April 5, 2017

#### STATE OF OREGON, *Plaintiff-Respondent, v.*MICHAEL JOSEPH DIAZ, *Defendant-Appellant.*

Jackson County Circuit Court

14CR30279; A160171

391 P3d 1014

Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Sara F. Werboff, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant.

Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Jacob Brown, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

Before Duncan, Presiding Judge, and DeVore, Judge, and Garrett, Judge.

*656PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals the trial court’s judgment convicting and sentencing him for driving under the influence of intoxicants. Defendant’s case was tried to the court. In the first of defendant’s three assignments of error, defendant asserts that the trial court erred by conducting a bench trial without having secured a written jury trial waiver from defendant. The state concedes that the trial court erred and that we must reverse and remand. *See*Or Const, Art I, § 11 (requiring that jury trial waivers be “in writing”); *State v. Barber,*343 Or 525, 530, 173 P3d 827 (2007) (holding that the trial court erred by conducting a bench trial in the absence of a written jury trial waiver and that, given the specific, constitutional requirement of a written waiver, this court had no discretion not to correct the error). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for a new trial. Because the record may develop differently on remand, we do not address defendant’s second and third assignments of error.

Reversed and remanded.
No. 11-9968.

#### Caba *v.*United States.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 49 (Thursday, March 13, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 11924]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-6275]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--BHP Petroleum--Study of Dual 10,000 psi Subsea 
TFL Completion Technology

    Notice is hereby given that, on March 12, 1996, pursuant to section 
6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 
15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), BHP Petroleum Inc. has filed 
written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the 
Federal Trade Commission disclosing (1) The identities of the parties 
and (2) the nature and objectives of the venture. The notifications 
were filed for the purpose of invoking the Act's provisions limiting 
the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified 
circumstances. Pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act, the identities of 
the parties are: BHP Petroleum (Americas) Inc., Houston, TX; BP 
Exploration & Oil Inc., Houston, TX; Chevron Petroleum Technology 
Company, San Ramon, CA; and Exxon Production Research Company, Houston, 
TX. The nature and objectives of the joint venture are to perform 
preliminary engineering regarding the subsurface part of 10,000 psi 
Dual Subsea TFL Completion technology and to obtain more information 
about the feasibility, cost, and risks of the technology.
Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 97-6275 Filed 3-12-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
Exhibit 32



Certification of CEO and CFO Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of American Capital, Ltd. (the Company),
for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Malon Wilkus as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and John R. Erickson, as Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his knowledge, respectively, that:



| | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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/    MALON
WILKUS    
|Name:                   |  | Malon Wilkus                                     
|Title:                  |  | Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
|Date:                   |  | November 9, 2009                                 
|                       
|/s/    JOHN R.
ERICKSON
|Name:                   |  | John R. Erickson                                 
|Title:                  |  | Chief Financial Officer                          
|Date:                   |  | November 9, 2009                                 



The
certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 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.
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.4


                   CONSENT OF BROWN, PARKER & LEAHY, L.L.P.
                  CONCERNING FEDERAL INCOME TAX CONSEQUENCES


        We hereby consent to the use of the form of our opinion as herein set
forth as Exhibit 8.1 to the Registration Statement and to the use of our name
under the captions "The Merger - Certain Federal Income Tax Consequences" and
"Legal Matters" in the Proxy Statement/Prospectus forming a part of the
Registration Statement. This consent is not to be construed as an admission that
we are a person whose consent is required to be filed with the Registration
Statement under the provisions of the Securities Act.




Houston, Texas
May 27, 1997
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEETS, THE STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND THE STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          22,866
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   14,006
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,111
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                36,976
<PP&E>                                          15,204
<DEPRECIATION>                                  11,151
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  47,544
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           22,479
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     19,633
<COMMON>                                           164
<OTHER-SE>                                       3,833
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    47,544
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                18,571
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   10,359
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 8,034
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (339)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    517
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                517
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       517
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.02)
        

</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Israel CARMENATE, Defendant-Appellant

No. 17-40298 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed March 6, 2018

■ Carmen Castillo Mitchell, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Israel Carménate, Pro Se

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Israel Carménate, federal prisoner # 82368-179, was convicted of one count of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine and one count of possession with intent to distribute cocaine and was sentenced , to concurrent sentences of 160 months in prison and concurrent five-year terms of supervised release on each count. After granting Carmenate’s 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion based on Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines, the district court reduced his sentence to 144 months. He now moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) from the denial of his second § 3582(c)(2) motion based on Amendment 782. The district court found that a further sentence reduction was not warranted and'certified that Carmenate’s appeal was not taken in good faith.

By moving to proceed IFP, Carménate challenges the district court’s certification that his appeal was not taken in good faith. *See Baugh v. Taylor,*117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997). Our inquiry into a litigant’s good faith “is limited to whether the appeal involves legal points arguable on their merits (and therefore not frivolous).” *Howard v. King,*707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).

Carmenate’s appeal does not involve any “legal points arguable on their merits.” *Howard,*707 F.2d at 220 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). The district court gave due consideration to the arguments Carménate presented in favor of his second motion and implicitly considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553 factors when denying the motion. *See United States v. Henderson,*636 F.3d 713, 717 (5th Cir. 2011); *United States v. Whitebird,*55 F.3d 1007, 1010 (5th Cir. 1995).

Accordingly, Carmenate’s motion to proceed IFP is DENIED, and the appeal is DISMISSED as, frivolous. *See Baugh,*117 F.3d at 202 & n.24; 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 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.
**EXHIBIT 32**

** **

**Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as created by Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the following certifications are being made toaccompany the Registrant’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarterended October 30, 2004:**

 

 

**Certification of Chief ExecutiveOfficer(1)**

** **

Pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002, the undersigned officer of The Neiman Marcus Group, Inc. (the Company)hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that:

 

(i) the Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended October 30, 2004 (theReport) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d),as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

(ii) the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Dated: December 6, 2004 |   |   |  /s/    BURTON  M. TANSKY       |   |
|-------------------------|--------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                    |   |   | Burton  M. Tansky  President and Chief Executive Officer |   |

** **

** **

**Certification of Chief FinancialOfficer(1)**

** **

Pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002, the undersigned officer of The Neiman Marcus Group, Inc. (the Company)hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that:

 

(i) the Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended October 30, 2004 (theReport) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d),as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

(ii) the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Dated: December 6, 2004 |   |   |  /s/    JAMES  E. SKINNER                   |   |
|-------------------------|--------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                    |   |   | James  E. Skinner  Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |   |

** **

----

(1) A signed original for this written statement required by Section906 has been provided to The Neiman Marcus Group, Inc. and will be retained byThe Neiman Marcus Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

 

1

----