alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 10-886.

#### Compton Unified School District, Petitioner v. Starvenia Addison, et al.

565 U.S. 1110, 132 S. Ct. 996,

181 L. Ed. 2d 732,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 175.

January 9, 2012.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 598 F.3d 1181.
No. 11-7449.

#### Hassie Megrave, Petitioner v. California.

565 U.S. 1166, 132 S. Ct. 1113,

181 L. Ed. 2d 995,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 885.

January 17, 2012.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, Fourth Appellate District, Division One, denied.
No. 09-8737.

#### Sudesh Mehta, Petitioner v. Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, et al.

559 U.S. 1015, 130 S. Ct. 1903,

176 L. Ed. 2d 380,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2628.

March 22, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
No. 11-6489.

#### Marshall Lee Gore, Petitioner v. Florida.

565 U.S. 1175, 132 S. Ct. 1139,

181 L. Ed. 2d 1012,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 681.

January 17, 2012.

Petition for rehearing denied.

*1013Former decision, 565 U.S. 1065, 132 S. Ct. 768, 181 L. Ed. 2d 494, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 8504.
No. 09-8792.

#### Robert W. Warrington, Petitioner v. Robert W. Phelps, Warden, et al.

559 U.S. 1016, 130 S. Ct. 1905,

176 L. Ed. 2d 381,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2635.

March 22, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
No. 09-6701.

#### Lorn Laverne Runge, Petitioner v. Minnesota.

559 U.S. 1032, 130 S. Ct. 1943,

176 L. Ed. 2d 407,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2419.

March 22, 2010.

Petition for rehearing denied.

Former decision, 558 U.S. 1054, 130 S. Ct. 751, 175 L. Ed. 2d 525, 2009 U.S. LEXIS 8549.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

  CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                (SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)

         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Quinton Cardiology Systems
(the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael
K. Matysik, Chief Financial 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.

                                           By: /s/ Michael K. Matysik
                                               ----------------------
                                               Michael K. Matysik
                                               Chief Financial Officer

          Date: August 14, 2003

         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to Quinton Cardiology Systems, Inc. and will be retained by
Quinton Cardiology Systems, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
p.1 

OAR Box 1384 

Prepped by Charmelle Mathews 

Document Number: 

185) ll-E-145 

Docket Number: 

A-94-52 

Printed 7/2/2008 8:42:09 AM Sheet 185 of 264 
P.2 

04.08.08 10:28 ©191994102-34 

A 9^5 2 

PES RTP NC • • * £ m 14002/001 

From: 

Date: 

Contact; 

Company: 

Contact Report 

Robert Jemison. Pacific Environmental Services, Inc. (PES) 

April 7,1998 

Mr. Jack Griffiths 

Fiber Pro, Inc. 

Telephone Number: (616) 77S-0197 

Fax Number: (616)775-2524 

%jzzra 

EPA AIR DOCKET 

Contact Summary: 

Mr. Jack Griffiths was contacted on behalf of the U.S. WA to update information provided 

in the 1993 EPA Reinforced Plastic Composites Scrcenujg Survey submined by Great Dane Trailers 

Indiana. Inc. for their facility located in Brazil, Indiano. In response to my questions Mr. Griffiths 

indiuiicd the following: 

Fiber Pro, Inc. purchased die reinforced plastics composites fabrication equipment used by 

Great Dane Trailers Indiana, Inc. Fiber Pro, Inc. does not own nor is it owned hy Great Dane 

Trailers Indiana. Inc. The facility owned and operated by Fiber Pro, Inc. is located in Cadillac 

Michigan. 

The facility produces flat panels which are used in several applications including the 

manufacture of truck trailers. 

The facility uses both the spray lay-up and vacuum bagging processes in the fabrication of 

these flat panels. All panels produced by the facility are fabricated hy the application of a polyester 

resin to an open mold using spray layup followed by the use of the vacuum bagging process. The 

polyester resin used in the fabrication of these panels contains approximately 35% HAP by weight. 

The only HAP initially present in the resin is styrene. No additional HAI* is added to the resin 

during the fabrication processes with th« exception of small amounts of HAP that may (or may not) 

be present in Initiators, promoters, and/or catalysis added to the resin. The resin does nnt contain 

a vapor suppressant. 

The facility uses spray lay-up to apply several pigmented polyester gel coats which contain 

approximately 3VM% HAP by weight (30.31% styrene and 3% methyl methacrylate). No 

additional HAP is added to the gel coats during the fabrication process with the exception of small 

amounts of HAP that may (or may not) be present in initiators, promoters, and/or catalysts added 

to the gel coats. 

All of the resin mixing conducted at this facility is done inside a large miving vat with a high 

volume shear mixer. The mixing vat is covered with a hinged metal cover and no visible gaps exist 

between the hinged metal cover and the rim of the mixing vat. The mixing shaft extends into the 

mixer through an opening in the top of the hinged metal cover. There are no visible gaps between 

the mixing shaft and the hinged metal cover 'Ihe only opening in the hinged metal cover is for the 

mixing shaft. The facility docs nut actively (force) vent emissions from the mixing vat by applying 

a vacuum to the mixing vat. 

INFORMATION IS ACCUKA l"
No. 09-8489.

#### Wilbert Smith, Petitioner v. Virginia.

559 U.S. 1010, 130 S. Ct. 1887,

176 L. Ed. 2d 372,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2619.

March 22, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Virginia denied.
No. 09-888.

#### Leland Graske, Petitioner v. Daniel Doyle, et ux.

559 U.S. 1036, 130 S. Ct. 2064,

176 L. Ed. 2d 415,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2784.

March 29, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 579 F.3d 898.
No. 11-627.

#### Alabama, Petitioner v. Thomas Robert Lane.

565 U.S. 1185, 132 S. Ct. 1144,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 984.

181 L. Ed. 2d 1030,

January 23, 2012.

Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis *1031granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Alabama denied.

Same case below, 80 So. 3d 303.
No. 11-7871.

#### Larry P. Goodyke, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 1172, 132 S. Ct. 1129,

181 L. Ed. 2d 1006,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 625.

January 17, 2012.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 639 F.3d 869.
The Honorable Joe W. Hayes

County Attorney, Hemphill County P. 0. Box 613 Canadian, Tcxaa 79014
Dear Mr. Hayea: Opinion No. H-32 Rc: Is the at-large method of electing County Comminaionera constitutional inlight of Article 5, Section 18of the Texar Conrtitution? You have askedour opinion concerning the election of County Commirrionera of Hemphill County. Your letter atater that one precinct inthe county containr 85 to 90 per cent of the entire county population and that, to avoid having to redistrict the county, the four commiaaionere are elected “at-large” with each voter in the county having one vote for each commissioner to be elected. Article 5. $18 of the Constitution ofthe State of Texas provider, in part: “Each county ahall inlike manner be divided into

four commissionerr precincts in each ofwhich there rhall be elected bythe qualified voters thereof one County Commissioner, who shall hold his office for four year6 and until hia successor shall be alected and qualified.
. . . ” (Emphasis added) This provision leaves no room for interpretation and itmust be obeyed. There must be one commissioner from each of four precincts, elected by the voter8 of each precinct. Your question wa*: “II the at-large method of electing County Commisrioners constitutional inlight of Article 5, Section 18ofthe Texas Constitution? ” We answer that it is not.

p. 135The Honorable Joe W. Hayes, page 2 (H-32)

We would also call toyour attention the decision inAvery v. Midland County, 390 U.S. 474, 20 L. Ed. 2d 45, 88 S.Ct. 1114(1968), holding that the “one man - one vat :e” rule applied to the election of commissioners and that itwas not permissible for members ofthe commissioners court to be apportioned among single-member districts of substantially unequal population. SUMMARY

Article 5, 018ofthe Constitution of the State ofTexas specifically requires thatthere shall be four commissioner’s precincts in each county andthat the county commissioners shall each be elected by the qualified voters of one ofthose precincts - not at-large. Very truly yours,



# v Attorney General of Texas

DAVID M,. KENDALL, Chairman Opinion Committee

p. 136
Montana Thirteenth Judicial District Court. County of Yellowstone.

#### STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff, -vs- CRYSTAL KAY SKINNER, Defendant.

CAUSE NO. DC-08-462

Done in open Court this 8th day of April, 2016.

DATED this 3rd day of May, 2016.

DECISION

On September 14, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to the Department of Corrections for eighteen (18) months for the offense of Burglary, a Felony, in violation of §45-6-204, MCA. In all other respects, the previous Orders, conditions, and reasons of the Court that were entered on March 23, 2009, remained unchanged and were re-imposed. The Court found the Defendant was not entitled to receive credit for elapsed time while not incarcerated pursuant to §46-18-203(7)(b), MCA. Denial of elapsed time was based on Defendant’s failure to comply with terms and conditions of the sentence while under supervision. Defendant was entitled to receive credit for pre-trial incarceration time served from April 7, 2015 through April 10, 2015 and July 23, 2015 through July 27, 2015.

On April 8, 2016, the Defendant’s Application for review of that sentence was heard by the Sentence Review Division of the Montana Supreme Court (hereafter “the Division”).

The Defendant was present and was represented by Peter Ohman, of the Office of the State Public Defender. The State was not represented.

Before hearing the Application, the Defendant was advised that the Division has the authority not only to reduce the sentence or affirm it, but also increase it. The Defendant was further advised that there is no appeal from a decision of the Division. The Defendant acknowledged that she understood this and stated that she wished to proceed.

Rule 12, Rules of the Sentence Review Division of the Supreme Court of Montana, provides that, “The sentence imposed by the District Court is presumed correct. The sentence shall not be reduced or increased unless it is clearly inadequate or clearly excessive.” (Section 46-18-904(3), MCA).

The Division finds that the reasons advanced for modification are insufficient to hold that the sentence imposed by the District Court is clearly inadequate or clearly excessive.

Therefore, it is the unanimous decision of the Division that the sentence is AFFIRMED.

*34Hon. Brenda Gilbert, Chairperson, Hon. Kathy Seeley, Member and Hon. Brad Newman, Member.
No. 11-6437.

#### Donald Dickerson, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 970, 132 S. Ct. 470,

181 L. Ed. 2d 307,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 7588.

October 17, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
China Green Energy Industries, Inc.: Exhibit 10.34 - Filed by newsfilecorp.com






Exhibit 10.34

Loan Agreement of Maximum amount of RMB 26,000,000, between
Changzhou City Wujin Best Appliances Co., Ltd. and Wujin Rural Commercial Bank,
by mortgaging the land. The agreement term is from December 10, 2011 to December
9, 2014.
Exhibit
32.1



Certification
of Chief Executive Officer

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



I,
J. Daniel Moon, IV, President and Chief Executive Officer of SSB Bancorp, Inc., (the “Company”), hereby certify in
my capacity as an officer of the Company that I have reviewed the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31,
2018 (the “Amended Report”) and that to the best of my knowledge:



| | 1. | The
    Amended Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                                  
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |    |                                                                                                                                                                     
| | 2. | The
    information contained in the Amended Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
    of operations of the Company.



|Date:
    June 25, 2019 | /s/
    J. Daniel Moon, IV               
|----------------------- | -----------------------------------------
|                        | J.
    Daniel Moon, IV                   
|                        | President
    and Chief Executive Officer



The
purpose of this statement is solely to comply with Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, as amended by
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.



A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to SSB Bancorp, Inc. and will be retained
by SSB Bancorp, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
No. 09-7953.

#### Javier Castillo Villasana, Petitioner v. Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General.

559 U.S. 946, 130 S. Ct. 1519,

176 L. Ed. 2d 125,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 1373.

February 22, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
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 Annual Report of Venture Lending & Leasing IX, Inc. (the "Fund") on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2017 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Maurice C. Werdegar, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Fund, 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 Fund.





/S/ Maurice C. Werdegar


Maurice C. Werdegar


President and Chief Executive Officer


March 16, 2018
No. 09-731.

#### Jeanne Mount, Petitioner v. United States, et al.

559 U.S. 939, 130 S. Ct. 1527,

176 L. Ed. 2d 115,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 1227.

February 22, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 328 Fed. Appx. 569.
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT**     I, Frank T. Sample, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the registrant, Visicu, Inc.;     2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this quarterly report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, resultsof operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisquarterly report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:          (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;          (b) [paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238 and 34-47986];          (c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this quarterly report based on suchevaluation; and          (d) disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):          (a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and          (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.       Dated: May 8, 2007 By: /s/ Frank T. Sample       Frank T. Sample      President, Chief Executive Officer and      Chairman of the Board of Directors
No. 11-7270.

#### Reginald Matheiw Castel, Petitioner v. Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General.

565 U.S. 1148, 132 S. Ct. 1037,

181 L. Ed. 2d 791,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 470.

January 9, 2012.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.

Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

Same case below, 427 Fed. Appx. 103.
Power of Attorney, dated January 16, 2012, of Shizhou Shen



 Exhibit 4.68 
 [Translation of Chinese Original] 
 Power of Attorney 

Principal: Shizhou Shen 
 Address:
[                    ] 
 Attorney-in-Fact:
Beijing Super TV Co., Ltd. 
 Registered Address: 4-406 Jingmeng High-Tech Building B, No. 5-2 Shangdi East Road, 

Haidian District, Beijing 
 I,
Shizhou Shen, hereby irrevocably authorize Beijing Super TV Co., Ltd. (or its designated third party) to act as my Attorney-in-Fact and exercise the following rights during the term of this Power of Attorney: 

Beijing Super TV Co., Ltd. (or its designated third party) is authorized to exercise, as my plenipotentiary Attorney-in-Fact, all of the
rights to vote as a shareholder at the shareholders’ meetings of Beijing Novel-Super Digital TV Technology Co., Ltd. (“N-S Digital TV”), that I have under laws and the Article of Association of N-S Digital TV, including but not
limited to selling or transferring all or any part of my equity in N-S Digital TV and rights to vote, at the shareholders’ meetings of N-S Digital TV, on the nomination and appointment of directors of N-S Digital TV. 

I, the Principal, will assume all legal effects of all actions performed by the Attorney-in-Fact on my behalf under this Power of
Attorney. 
 The term of this Power of Attorney is 10 years, starting from the date of its execution, unless the Share Pledge
Agreement (Appendix 1) by and between Beijing Super TV Co., Ltd. and Shizhou Shen should terminate early for any reason. If the term of the Share Pledge Agreement (Appendix 1) is extended, that of this Power of Attorney shall be automatically
extended accordingly, always based on the last executed Share Pledge Agreement. All matters under this Power of Attorney shall be governed by laws of China. This Power of Attorney is written in Chinese. 

 

	
	Principal: Shizhou Shen
	
	/s/ Shizhou Shen
	
	January 16, 2012









 Appendix 1 
 Share Pledge Agreement (Omitted)
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Maritime Commission

          - [Docket No. 08-0]

                    In the Notice of Filing of Petition for Docket 08-07, served December 23, 2008 and appearing in the                     **Federal Register**                     on January 5, 2009 (74 FR 288), the citation in paragraph 3 is corrected to read “                    *See*46 CFR 502.68(f)(2).”                

Karen V. Gregory,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. E9-3966 Filed 2-24-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6730-01-P