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

###### Department of State

          - [Public Notice 6482] 

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681,                         *et seq.*; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note,                         *et seq.*), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236 of October 19, 1999, as amended, and Delegation of Authority No. 257 of April 15, 2003 [68 FR 19875], I hereby determine that the objects to be included in the exhibition “The El Peru-Waka Archaeological Project,” imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to loan agreements with the foreign owners or custodians. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at the Kimbell Art Museum, Fort Worth, TX, from on or about July 19, 2009, until on or about December 6, 2009, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. Public Notice of these Determinations is ordered to be published in the                         **Federal Register**                        .                     

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For further information, including a list of the exhibit objects, contact Carol B. Epstein, Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202/453-8048). The address is U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Room 700, Washington, DC 20547-0001. 

Dated: January 6, 2009. 

C. Miller Crouch, 

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.

[FR Doc. E9-660 Filed 1-14-09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
1

The Honorable J. Thomas Ray, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern

District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent

of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 06-2072

___________

Michael Carmie Antonelli, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Eastern District of Arkansas.

Linda Sanders, Warden, FCI, *

Forrest City, Arkansas, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellee. *

___________

Submitted: February 7, 2007

Filed: March 2, 2007

___________

Before SMITH, GRUENDER, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Federal inmate Michael Carmie Antonelli appeals the district court’s1

 dismissal

of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition, in which he had challenged the method by which the

Bureau of Prisons (BOP) calculated his good-conduct time under 18 U.S.C.

§ 3624(b)(1). We reject Antonelli’s arguments. See Bernitt v. Martinez, 432 F.3d

868, 869 (8th Cir. 2005) (per curiam) (§ 3624(b) is ambiguous and BOP’s calculation
-2-

of good-conduct time, based on time actually served, is reasonable interpretation of

§ 3624(b); court will not resort to rule of lenity when ambiguity of statute can be

otherwise resolved).

We agree with the district court that Antonelli’s motion for a stay of transfer is

moot, and we decline his suggestion to construe that motion as an amendment to his

petition.

Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is affirmed.

______________________________
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

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

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



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the undersigned officer
of Medco Health Solutions, Inc. (the Company), hereby certifies, to the knowledge of the undersigned, that the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 24, 2005 (the Report) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.



|                       |  |  |  |     |  |                        |  |                                                
|---------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | ---------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------
|                       |  |  | 
|Date: November 3, 2005 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ David B. Snow, Jr.
|                       |  |  |  |     |  | Name:                  |  | David B. Snow, Jr.                             
|                       |  |  |  |     |  | Title:                 |  | Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer



This certification accompanies this
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended (the Exchange Act). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company
specifically incorporates it by reference.
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, Curtis W. Mewbourne, Chief Executive Officer of Mewbourne Development Corporation, Managing General Partner of Mewbourne Energy Partners 03-A, L.P.(the “Registrant”), certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterlyreport on Form 10-Q of Mewbourne Energy Partners 03-A, L.P. 

 

2. Based on myknowledge, this quarterly report does 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 misleadingwith respect to the period covered by this quarterly report; 

 

3. Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, theperiods presented in this quarterly report; 

 

4. The registrant’s othercertifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have: 

 

(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant is made known to us particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared; 

 

(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of thisquarterly report (the “Evaluation Date”); and 

 

(c)presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date; 

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): 

 

(a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant’s auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and 

 

(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrols; and 

 

6. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I haveindicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date or our most recent evaluation, including anycorrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses. 

 

Date: May 12, 2005
**Exhibit 32.1****WRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER****Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350**     Solely for the purpose of complying with 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of North PointeHoldings Corporation (the “Company”), hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the QuarterlyReport on Form 10-Q of the Company for the three months ended June 30, 2006 (the “Report”) fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 andthat the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.Dated: November 9, 2006                 /s/ James G. Petcoff   James G. Petcoff       Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.1








CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 0F 2002





In connection with the Annual Report of Art Dimensions, Inc.(the Company") on Form 10-K for the period ended herein as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I. Rebecca Gregarek, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to 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 fully presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations or the Company.





Dated:  April 13, 2011





By:
/s/Rebecca GregarekRebecca Gregarek

Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 18(a)

February 18, 2010

Energy Future Competitive Holdings Company

1601 Bryan Street

Dallas, Texas 75201

Dear Sirs/Madams:

We have audited the
consolidated financial statements of Energy Future Competitive Holdings Company as of December 31, 2009 and 2008 (successor), and for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 (successor), the period from October 11, 2007 through
December 31, 2007 (successor) and the period from January 1, 2007 through October 10, 2007 (predecessor), included in your Annual Report on Form 10-K to the Securities and Exchange Commission and have issued our report thereon dated
February 18, 2010 (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph related to Energy Future Holdings Corp. completing its merger with Texas Energy Future Merger Sub Corp on October 10, 2007). Note 1 to
such financial statements contains a description of your change, during the year ended December 31, 2009, in the date for the annual goodwill impairment test for your reporting unit. In our judgment, such change is to an alternative accounting
principle that is preferable under the circumstances.



|                         
|-------------------------
|Yours truly,             
|                         
|/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
|                         
|Dallas, Texas
[717 NYS2d 582]

#### In the Matter of Louis M. Rohrberg (Admitted as Louis Michael Rohrberg), a Suspended Attorney, Respondent. Departmental Disciplinary Committee for the First Judicial Department, Petitioner.

First Department,

December 14, 2000

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Vitaly Lipkansky*of counsel *(Thomas J. Cahill,*attorney), for petitioner.

*129No appearance for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

Respondent, Louis M. Rohrberg, was admitted to the practice of law in the State of New York by the Second Judicial Department on May 24, 1978, as Louis Michael Rohrberg. At all times relevant to this proceeding, until May 1999, respondent maintained an office for the practice of law within the First Judicial Department.

The Departmental Disciplinary Committee (the DDC) moves for an order, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.4 (g), disbarring respondent on the ground that he has been suspended under 22 NYCRR 603.4 (e) (1) (i) and (iii) and has not appeared nor applied in writing to the DDC or the Court for a hearing or reinstatement within six months of the date of the order of suspension. Respondent has not submitted a response to this motion, although it was mailed to his home address by first class mail and certified mail return receipt requested.

Respondent was suspended from the practice of law until further order of the Court on March 28, 2000 *(Matter of Rohrberg,*268 AD2d 180), when this Court granted the DDC’s unopposed motion based on uncontested documentary evidence that respondent commingled a client’s settlement funds with his own funds and then misappropriated all of said funds in violation of Code of Professional Responsibility DR 9-102 (a) and (b) (22 NYCRR 1200.46); that he violated DR 1-102 (a) (4), (5) and (7) (22 NYCRR 1200.3), by giving false deposition testimony concerning the misappropriation; that he failed to remit the funds to his client upon repeated demand in violation of DR 9-102 (c) (4); and that he failed to pay his biennial registration fee.

Accordingly, the DDC’s request for an order disbarring respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.4 (g) should be granted and respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective immediately.

Williams, J. P., Tom, Mazzarelli, Saxe and Friedman, JJ., concur.

Motion granted, respondent disbarred and respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective the date hereof.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN RE: R. WAYNE JOHNSON,

 Relator.

§

§

§

§

No. 08-15-00162-CV

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF

MANDAMUS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, R. Wayne Johnson, a Texas inmate, has filed a petition for writ of mandamus 

against the Honorable Bonnie Rangel, Judge of the 171st District Court of El Paso County, 

Texas. Because Relator has not obtained permission of the local administrative judge to file this 

original proceeding, we dismiss the mandamus petition. 

In this mandamus proceeding, Relator challenges the dismissal of his suit against several 

defendants which we reviewed on direct appeal in Johnson v. Sloan, 320 S.W.3d 388 (Tex.App.-

-El Paso 2010, pet. denied). Relator is on the list of vexatious litigants maintained by the Office 

of Court Administration and he is subject to a pre-filing order. See generally TEX.CIV.PRAC. &

REM.CODE ANN. § 11.051-.057 (West 2002). A clerk of a court may not file a litigation, original 

proceeding, appeal, or other claim presented by a vexatious litigant subject to a prefiling order 

unless the litigant obtains an order from the local administrative judge permitting the filing. 

TEX.CIV.PRAC. & REM.CODE ANN. § 11.103(a) (West Supp. 2014)(emphasis added). The Clerk 

of this Court notified Relator that he was required to obtain permission from the local 
- 2 -

administrative judge to file this original proceeding. The letter gave him ten days to provide the 

Court with a copy of the order or obtain an order permitting him to file the petition for writ of 

mandamus. See TEX.CIV.PRAC. & REM.CODE ANN. § 11.1035(b) (West Supp. 2014). More than 

ten days have elapsed and we have not received a response from Relator or an order granting him 

permission to file the petition for writ of mandamus. Accordingly, we dismiss the mandamus 

petition.

STEVEN L. HUGHES, Justice

June 3, 2015

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ.
Hassen MOHAMMAD, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. ED 106616

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.

Filed: February 13, 2019

FOR APPELLANT: Kevin B. Gau, Missouri Public Defender's Office, 1010 Market Street, Suite 1100, St. Louis, Missouri 63101.

FOR RESPONDENT: Justin A. Moody, Assistant Attorney General, PO Box 899, Jefferson City, Missouri 65102.

Before Philip M. Hess, P.J., Robert G. Dowd, Jr., J. and Mary K. Hoff, J.

*62***ORDER***

PER CURIAM

Movant Hassen Mohammad ("Mohammad") appeals the motion court's denial, without an evidentiary hearing, of his amended motion for post-conviction relief under Mo. Sup. Ct. Rule 24.035.1 Mohammad plead guilty to eight counts of the class C felony of burglary in the second degree, seven counts of the class D felony of stealing, and one count of the class D felony of property damage in the first degree.

Mohammad contends the motion court clearly erred in denying his motion for post-conviction relief without a hearing, claiming he received ineffective assistance of counsel where his attorney did not file and litigate a motion to suppress evidence taken from his impounded Acura as part of a routine inventory search he consented to.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find that the motion court did not clearly err in denying post-conviction relief. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for use of the parties setting forth the reasons for the decision.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

1

All rule citations are to Missouri Supreme Court Rules (2015) unless otherwise indicated.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Keith Foster, Appellant.

[771 NYS2d 902]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Rosato, J.), rendered July 11, 2002, convicting him of assault in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see Anders v California,*386 US 738 [1967]; *People v Paige, 54*AD2d 631 [1976]; *cf. People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606 [1979]). Prudenti, P.J., Florio, H. Miller, Schmidt and Cozier, JJ., concur.
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Charles Edward HENDERSON, Jr., Appellant.

WD 80913

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

ORDER FILED: November 20, 2018

Joshua D. Hawley, Attorney General, and Garrick Aplin, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, Attorneys for Respondent.

Amanda Langenheim, Assistant Public Defender, Kansas City, MO, Attorney for Appellant.

Before Division Four: Karen King Mitchell, Chief Judge, and Victor C. Howard and Lisa White Hardwick, Judges

**Order**

Per Curiam:

Charles Henderson appeals, following a bench trial, his conviction of the class A misdemeanor of violating an order of protection under § 455.085.8, RSMo, Supp. 2014, for which he was sentenced to one year in the county jail with credit for time served. Finding no error, plain or otherwise, we affirm. Rule 30.25(b).
c

o

cn

t

cn

^5zO

5>c:-n

5^f=

f—'Zi

1 •:•! &>

P'o' £^^^s:s'-Ca;-/^cz-^-rA^ ^'Acyzzriff'A^

^yf^i^r-rz-c'^ ^cy/S^ d'AfAo/^^^ooA

^ZcrAf/4rd''A <Z ^

0 O ^

^,///^ ^ y^/ze/a^f-rc A^fy y^^'^cLZjtAfe^ y^^tz/zaS .

y^dituf^ y^^-Aiyy-^z,-^ y^£>z-ryzy^/'^, y:Ccyy^^y>afy y'yy^^cc/<j^

t^y/- yy/y/oeAyy ^y^yAZ/irayyC ^y/^y cyycc/rc^ //A>t^ yy^t^tv— ypcyczr^cC

gryfc<^ yyj^Me/Zd7Ar yy'-y/ys ^yysy. /J yy^^z^eZ-c:

y^/s yZ^- /^^jo^^y yctyy- yy^ff^dZ^ ^ y^-Ai^ yyviyroCe.

^yy /s' yyy y/Z/yy^^ Ziyy^/t^ yyypy- z/^ yy/Lyiyy//' Zi, <jy*yryyy c

yyyvyyeoc/z ^A<r/iy ^yyy^,^^^yy/^ y*yy ZZycy^yc-^y ZPcy/S;, zace^^ •a O

y^'^y-^ftZj cZo-^yj-y-y^/„ ^y-y., y^y!> cZy/zye y^zvyd/fyc^^

—zAyty-ca — ^

y^cy^*^ zrcyyeee. <??-' C'Tyyy/y^S', y^ ^yy*yY cZyifye yyAtAdy^y^o^

^y 'yyfy- yOezyA'^y^t^ aZ^^-e yy^CyjOy^-ncC Zyyyyc^ fyyyy^ y^y^eyry>-**'-Zy

y^yycZydsC —^^yy/zayAyZ^^ yy^Use y<ya. 4::^£^atP~yA -yyy^t aTy^ye Zz-Fenyz^

y/ey^ y^Ayy-^Z-J y^yy^C'~v^y}y^.^yf^ jZ .^yyry'e^ ^y^y^ yy^/yy/f cZ2.

7^ y^ y^- <Z f^X<^ ^--^ iZ'ztyy-z ^ yyyyOA'y*/ yvyZc^z^

yy/tZo^ yAc-ZAyv, Z'f'/ye A> y*^y zyy^ZAzy/^y^

yyiy^yy^y}yyy*<y^ •Xy/^A/ydy y yy^ £/yyya£y/— <??r>V«'y»*c Z-fy^cy/y CjZo =•

/"^PcaZ yji^yay/iyz y^yAZy**y*.-Z- eXc^ //Zyi/^y^e^ cZZzZy y$5«3^^yyw'/*ro^

yf^ZfAZ y^^y z^zaZ yyyy/r/>cZr^ Z^Cc/ryyez y^yf<ry^y^CJ2— y:7y^y^'^

cZcyZey^o'^ zCPy^Ay' ' f/ZZfyy^ y9y9fy.^^yt<yr.^ ^
0^ y^/cTo /S i^^viai'/s/ySsps-^^st^^.^

^/i'/t'/zcf/^y eTy^JoP a> '

a o

,/^y»yyt-/er y^'^ /^ye>y^ y^yP^tz^y^/ziyx. 6^ yi^^y^ d3^-^y9-'^f

A> /!'Uy /yz'y^^y'^c/Z (^zf/y^yz/iryl^Z^f- o

y^y- yy^/yy^a-/ ytfyrof^^ ^^yye yfysyijry/^AzS^

//ytf yd-ey.—' /'yy/^yy/fy y*y1(Pi^ei^z/^ y/^c^e

«. -O ly'yyy/'zecJ^ /0^z/, cf C ^ / ^yytp^yycuf yz^yzyzegzy yctzyp^ ^

y^/zye^z/yzy^ ys^ y^^iy^P^ e^ypez-T^ y^cyyp yiyytyyy-- yy^Ps^^oyyc^C.

y^y y0yyyy^^ y^yz^y-' yy^ yyyyy/^y yoc£je. ^y-yy 
/^!Py*-tP^ Z'^7'y/^.

yp/y yy^yzyzyy/yzy^ ^0yyc/iiryyi^ y!fzi^ayz^>t^ yy>cyyz^ t9

/^crayipyyy, yPz^yz^y^ ^ y^ yy^cyvjizftry /y'Cy yy/ej/^yrryz^yo'-^ y*yyzye:^

yy a y^

y^<N /ci ^'ey'^^dySt^ _____

O ^ O -3

z0/yy^/O /l/Pyrjy^ycoT y<y/y/Lyty^ -yiye^^ y^-fy-yep, .-^ yy,^ y^rrz^C

(^y^^i'yyyyr. 0yy iy^y.yyj z0czy^yp^y^yCy^^c. y^yzyyj^yy/-

y7y~-y^/'yy*<^^ y^ yyyszy^iyy'^yy^ yzyy^y^-cL. y^ cr y/yyz yyy/^yyy^^y <2_

y^Ptzy?^ y^epyaz^z^ yy^z" (^. yPyzyy^-y^yyy^ <=r/yyyy yiyyryzp fi^v'/ey^

^•^^yyy y^ez^y /Z^yy/Cfhyecyi yyi-yf^c<f ycyzyyac^ y-zo yt^y^yz^yz/^-

y^zpPepyy —^'^laCyyyc'Vpy^ —y^zz>yyy- y<yyzy»!z.~^f^ y^yy^y/z-y^ y^(ffy-yfizy^/"y^^

z=' O .

^y~ y0~yjy^yy-e y^Azayue yiyzc^efyczs^ y>P/z^^ /c z^Azs^

-Q

l^yyz^fZcy y/z^ yfz^iC c/y^y^ y/^^ryfyyc.^ yzzczyy- yoy/rc^yyy^-fgf^

y^g-zty z:P/yyy/^y y^^z-eyyzo^^ y^yfyzyz-^zr/y yCPz-zyzz-yzySgj- cTzz/yy^

Qj^^Jy y/yrzyjy^ yz^yy^yze^y-C. yy^czyy^ey^

^ o

y^/y (PyWrzpyyr- y-^yeyz:;^^ Z^lr—yyyzzrz.^e yyyyyyzz^cPl

o ^ ^

^y^cyoyi^czT /^eyyytyeP y/^ y^yjiPy-azm ..yy^-^tpy y<j^. 0yy^y y^yy^tS-

*^z^^yy yyz'CdCzsAea^ y^^caztyhr^

p/^ffyy y/^yz^yz/z^' /f^oCa0^yiycyyz. ^iCcyyzyey yy/^yyyzzzyyoC-^^

/^z^zz^yyz^yyz- ^ ^ zpy- /'S'yj'y<^^.
EXHIBIT 13.1







PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATION


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350





In connection with this Annual Report of Seanergy Maritime Holdings Corp. (the "Company") on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") on or about the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Dale Ploughman, 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 results of operations of the Company.




This certification is made solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and not for any other purpose.  A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request.





Date: March 31, 2011








/s/ Dale Ploughman


Dale Ploughman


Principal Executive Officer