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





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


AS ADDED BY


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of QNB Corp. (the Company) for the period ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Thomas J. Bisko, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as added by § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this periodic report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in this report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the issuer.





Date:
May 16, 2011

By:
/s/ Thomas J. BiskoThomas J. BiskoChief Executive Officer
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
      ( print page 16221)    
*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute on Drug Abuse Special Emphasis Panel; NO1DA-9-8881: GMP Synthesis of Bulk Drug Substances.                    

*Date:*                         May 13, 2009.                    

*Time:*                         9 a.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate contract proposals.                    

*Place:*                         Doubletree Hotel Bethesda, 8120 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Minna Liang, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, Training and Special Projects Review Branch, Office of Extramural Affairs, National Institute on Drug Abuse, NIH, 6101 Executive Blvd., Room 220, MSC 8401, Bethesda, MD 20852, 301-435-1432,                         *liangm@nida.nih.gov*.                    

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.279, Drug Abuse and Addiction Research Programs, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: March 31, 2009.

Jennifer Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. E9-7728 Filed 4-8-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

CELSION CORPORATION

CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO 18 UNITED STATES CODE § 1350

 

The undersigned hereby certifiesthat the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30,2008 of Celsion Corporation (the “Company”) filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that theinformation contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| * *                | *  /s/  Paul B. Susie*         |
|-------------------------|------------------------------------------|
| November 14,  2008 |                                     |
|                    |   Paul  B. Susie               |
|                    |   Chief  Accounting Officer    |
|                    |   Principal  Financial Officer |

 

----
STATE EX REL. James K. DAVIS v. STATE of Louisiana

No. 2016-KH-2128

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 23, 2018

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF ORLEANS**

PER CURIAM:

Denied. The application was not timely filed in the district court, and relator fails *971to carry his burden to show that an exception applies. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8 ; *State ex rel. Glover v. State* , 93-2330 (La. 9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189.

Relator has now fully litigated his application for post-conviction relief in state court. Similar to federal habeas relief, *see*28 U.S.C. § 2244, Louisiana post-conviction procedure envisions the filing of a second or successive application only under the narrow circumstances provided in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4 and within the limitations period as set out in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8. Notably, the legislature in 2013 La. Acts 251 amended that article to make the procedural bars against successive filings mandatory. Relator's claims have now been fully litigated in accord with La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.6, and this denial is final. Hereafter, unless he can show that one of the narrow exceptions authorizing the filing of a successive application applies, relator has exhausted his right to state collateral review. The district court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam.
| 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:  May      14, 2009 | /s/ Gerald G. Barton                      |
|------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|
|                               | Gerald      G. Barton                     |
|                               | Chairman      and Chief Executive Officer |
|                               | Landmark      Land Company, Inc.          |
CERTIFICATION OF FINANCIAL REPORTS PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

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

The undersigned hereby certifies that, to his knowledge, (i) the Form 10-K filed by HOMETOWN BANKSHARES CORPORATION (the Issuer) for the
year ended December 31, 2009, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the information contained in that report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer [on the dates and for the periods presented therein].

HOMETOWN BANKSHARES
CORPORATION



|                     |  |  |  |     |  |                                      
|-------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | -------------------------------------
|Date: April 15, 2010 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Susan K. Still                   
|                     |  |  |  |     |  | Susan K. Still                       
|                     |  |  |  |     |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|                     |  |  | 
|Date: April 15, 2010 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Charles W. Maness, Jr.           
|                     |  |  |  |     |  | Charles W. Maness, Jr.               
|                     |  |  |  |     |  | Executive Vice President             
|                     |  |  |  |     |  | Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF**

**SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, FINANCIAL SERVICES**

**OF TRM CORPORATION**

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

 

Pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, I, Daniel E. O’Brien, Senior Vice President, Financial Services ofTRM Corporation (the “Company”), hereby certify that the accompanying QuarterlyReport of the Company on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2004 (the“Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Dated:  May 12, 2004 | /s/ Daniel  E. O’Brien                |   |
|---------------------------|--------------------------------------------|--------|
|                      | Daniel E.  O’Brien                    |
|                      | Senior Vice  President, Financial Services |

 

1

----
STATE of Louisiana v. Travis BOYS

NO. 2018-KK-0429

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 17, 2018

Denied.
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Estate of Billy Gene Hutchings, Deceased

No. 06-17-00029-CV

Appeal from the County Court at Law of 

Lamar County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. P-18071). 

Memorandum Opinion delivered by Justice 

Moseley, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice 

Burgess participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find that the appeal should be dismissed 

for want of prosecution. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal.

We further order that the appellant pay all costs of this appeal.

RENDERED AUGUST 4, 2017

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-6432

CARLTON L. STEPHENSON,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

RONALD ANGELONE, Director, Virginia Department

of Corrections,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District

Judge. (CA-99-705-2)

Submitted: June 15, 2000 Decided: June 23, 2000

Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Carlton L. Stephenson, Appellant Pro Se. Robert H. Anderson, III,

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
* Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on

March 10, 2000, the district court’s records show that it was

entered on the docket sheet on March 13, 2000. Pursuant to Rules

58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the

date that the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as

the effective date of the district court’s decision. Wilson v.

Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).

2

PER CURIAM:

Carlton L. Stephenson seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254

(West 1994 & Supp. 2000). We have reviewed the record and the

district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a

certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Stephenson v. Angelone, No. CA-99-

705-2 (E.D. Va. Mar. 13, 2000).* We dispense with oral argument

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in

the materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED
David P. BROOME v. Melissa P. PARKER

1151043

Supreme Court of Alabama.

December 9, 2016

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
| 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 on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2013 of All Marketing Solutions, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Annual Report”), I, Nikola Pizurica, Chairman, President and 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 Annual Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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

Date: March 31, 2014

/s/ Nikola Pizurica

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

Nikola Pizurica 

President, Secretary Treasurer, Principal Executive Officer,

Principal Financial Officer and Director

1 |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
E.J.C., a juvenile, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D17-1455

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed December 27, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Byron Bernard BUTLER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-2374

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

January 10, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
STEAM ELECTRIC CBI REPLACEMENT PAGE 

EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819 

DCN: SE02902

THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN REMOVED BECAUSE IT 

CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION 

(CBI) PER 40 CFR PART 2, SUBPART B.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON, DC 

Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2015-3176

IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR EXEMPTION OF: 

POSITION & HOLD INVESTMENTS LLC 

FOR AN EXEMPTION SEEKING RELIEF FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF TITLE 14 OF THE 

CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS SECTIONS 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 

91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), AND 91.417(a) & (b) CONCERNING COMMERCIAL 

OPERATION OF THE DJI PHANTOM 3 UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEM PURSUANT TO 

SECTION 333 OF THE FAA MODERNIZATION AND REFORM ACT OF 2012 

Original Petition Submitted on June 15, 2015

(PUBLIC LAW 11295) 

Supporting Document Submitted on Sep.14,2015 

Tim and Mark Whaling 

Position & Hold Investments, LLC

8641 Old Bee Caves Rd.

Austin, TX 78735
Tim Whaling and Mark Whaling, under the company title, Position & Hold Investments 

LLC, seek exemption from the requirements of 14 C.F.R §§ 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 

91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b), to operate an 

Unmanned Aircraft System pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act 

of 2012 (FMRA). This exemption will permit Tim Whaling, Mark Whaling, and Position & 

Hold Investments LLC to operate an Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) for the commercial 

purpose of conducting aerial video and photography to be used in television and web based 

commercials, educational videos, construction time lines, documentaries, and workplace safety 

over certain areas of the United States.

SUMMARY 

ADDITIONAL SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Both Tim Whaling and Mark Whaling hold FAA Part 61 private pilot certificates, with 

instrument privileges. Additionally both Tim Whaling and Mark Whaling hold a current FAA 

airman medical certificate and a valid U.S. driver’s license issued by the State of Texas. Lastly, 

both Tim Whaling and Mark Whaling also meet the flight review requirements specified in 14 

CFR § 61.56 in an aircraft in which the PIC is rated on his or her pilot certificate.

Tim Whaling - 3760049

Mark Whaling - 3124297
Order entered August 28, 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 13
- 00494
- CR RONNIE DILLARD, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the County Criminal Court of Appeals No. 2

Dallas County, Texas Tri al Court Cause No. MB12
- 63717
- M



### O RDER
The Court ORDERS the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine why appellant’s brief has not been filed. In this regard, the trial court shall make appropriate findings and recommendations and determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal, whether appellant is indigent, or if not indigent, whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeal. See
T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 38.8( b ). If the trial court cannot obtain appellant’s presence at the hearing, the trial court shall conduct the hearing in appellant’s absence. See Meza v. State , 742 S.W.2d 708 (Tex. App.

– Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.) (per curiam). If appellant is indigent, the trial court is ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effe ctive representation, which may include appointment of new counsel.We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record of the proceedings, which shall include

written findings and recommendations, to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this order. Th is appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with the above order. The appeal shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the findings are received, whichever is earlier.

/s/ LANA MYERS JUSTICE
Roosevelt BRADLEY, II, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-134

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed November 7, 2017 Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied December 19, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Dec 20 2010 

Mr. Harford D. Wright 

HDW Florida Helicopters, Inc. 

1745 N.W. 51st Place 

Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33309 

Dear Mr. Wright: 

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from 

Part 141 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can’t process 

your request and what you should do in the next 30 days. 

Why We Can’t Process Your Request 

We reviewed your documentation submitted December 7, 2010, on behalf of HDW Florida 

Helicopters, Incorporated into the public docket (No. FAA-2010-1257, but we are unable to 

process your request any further. The information you sent doesn’t comply with the 

requirements of 14 CFR 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, 

you must send us all of the following: 

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

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief. 

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole. 

 The reasons why the exemption wouldn’t adversely affect safety or how the exemption 

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you 

seek an exemption. 

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

The specific reasons why you need to exercise the privileges of your exemption outside the 

United States. 

What You Should Do 

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. We will consider the docket on your request open until we 
2 

receive this required information from you. Please note that 14 CFR 11.63(d) requires you to 

send your petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the 

exemption. 

If We Don’t Hear From You 

If we don’t hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677. 

Sincerely, 

Ida M. Klepper 

Manager, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure 

14 CFR § 11.81
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 2 (Wednesday, January 3, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 370]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-28345]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL18-46-000]


Notice of Institution of Section 206 Proceeding and Refund 
Effective Date; Allegheny Energy Supply Company, LLC

    On December 27, 2017, the Commission issued an order in Docket No. 
EL18-46-000, pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 
U.S.C. 824e (2012), instituting an investigation into whether Allegheny 
Energy Supply Company, LLC's Rate Schedule for the provision of 
Reactive Service by the Buchanan Facility may be unjust and 
unreasonable. Allegheny Energy Supply Company, LLC, 161 FERC 61,298 
(2017).
    The refund effective date in Docket No. EL18-46-000, established 
pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be the date of publication 
of this notice in the Federal Register.
    Any interested person desiring to be heard in Docket No. EL18-46-
000 must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as 
appropriate, with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First 
Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rule 214 of the 
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.214, within 21 
days of the date of issuance of the order.

    Dated: December 27, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-28345 Filed 1-2-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
EX PARTE Elizabeth F. RIDGE and Donald Ridge

1160118 (2150517)

Supreme Court of Alabama.

December 9, 2016

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Cert. denied.