alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|EXHIBIT 32.2                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
|In connection with the Quarterly Report of FarWest Group, Inc. ("the Company") on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ended March 31, 2001 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Phil Marshall, 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:
|                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              

|(i)  | this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB/A fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and   
|---- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|     |                                                                                                                                                                               
|(ii) | the information contained in this report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Deionization Technology Systems, Inc.
|     |                                                                                                                                                                               

|Dated as of this 13th day of November, 2003.
|--------------------------------------------
|                                            
|/s/ Phil Marshall                           
|Phil Marshall                               
|Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit      32 **

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE      SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

| (1) | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;                and |
|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (2) | The                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of NDS                Group                plc. |
|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| May                1, 2008 | By:    | /s/                Abraham Peled                    |
|----------------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------|
|                       |   | Abraham                Peled                        |
|                       |   | Chairman                and Chief Executive Officer |
|                       |   |                                                |
|                       | By:    | /s/                Alexander Gersh                  |
|                       |   | Alexander                Gersh                      |
|                       |   | Chief                Financial Officer              |

----
[Cite as State v. Cisco, 2023-Ohio-3305.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO

ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

LAKE COUNTY

STATE OF OHIO,

CITY OF PAINESVILLE,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

- vs -

CHRISTOPHER J. CISCO,

Defendant-Appellant.

CASE NOS. 2023-L-082

2023-L-083

2023-L-084

Criminal Appeals from the

Painesville Municipal Court

Trial Court Nos. 2012 CRB 02686 A

2012 CRB 02686 B

2012 CRB 02686 C

M E M O R A N D U M

O P I N I O N

Decided: September 18, 2023

Judgment: Appeals dismissed

Joseph Hada, Painesville City Prosecutor, 1392 Som Center Road, Mayfield Heights, 

OH 44124 (For Plaintiff-Appellee).

Christopher J. Cisco, pro se, 901 Southwind Road, Springfield, IL 62703 (DefendantAppellant).

MARY JANE TRAPP, J.

{¶1} On August 25, 2023, appellant, Christopher J. Cisco, pro se, filed a notice 

of appeal from a January 18, 2023 entry denying his motion to seal his record and a 

February 9, 2023 entry denying his motion to reconsider sealing of his record.

{¶2} A timely notice of appeal from the January 18, 2023 entry was due no later 

than February 17, 2023, and a timely notice of appeal from the February 9, 2023 entry 
2

Case Nos. 2023-L-082, 2023-L-083, 2023-L-084

was due no later than March 13, 2023, which were not holidays or weekends. Both 

appeals are untimely by over 5 months.

{¶3} “* * * [A] party who wishes to appeal from an order that is final upon its entry 

shall file the notice of appeal required by App.R. 3 within 30 days of that entry.” App.R. 

4(A)(1).

{¶4} Because the appeals were untimely filed, this court lacks jurisdiction. Thus, 

the appeals are dismissed, sua sponte, as being untimely.

JOHN J. EKLUND, P.J.,

EUGENE A. LUCCI, J.,

concur.
##### 



Exhibit 13.1 CERTIFICATION OF TERRY G. CLARKE, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF CONVERIUM
HOLDING AG, PURSUANT TO SECTION 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 Converium Holding AG (the Company) on Form 20-F for the
period ending December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
here of (the Report), the undersigned hereby certifies that to the best of my knowledge:  1.

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and2.

The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. Date: June  , 2005 By:
    /s/ Terry G. ClarkeTerry G. ClarkeChief Executive Officer, Converium Holding AG
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Crop water productivity

Filters

              - science_science(2)

## By Location

              - alabama(1)
              - arizona(5)
              - arkansas(2)
              - california(16)
              - colorado(1)
              - florida(1)
              - hawaii(3)
              - idaho(1)
              - illinois(2)
              - indiana(1)
              - iowa(5)
              - (-)kansas(2)
              - louisiana(2)
              - minnesota(1)
              - mississippi(5)
              - missouri(1)
              - nebraska(1)
              - new mexico(2)
              - ohio(1)
              - oklahoma(2)
              - oregon(2)
              - puerto rico(1)
              - south dakota(25)
              - tennessee(1)
              - texas(3)
              - u.s. virgin islands(1)
              - virginia(1)
              - washington(1)

## By Year

Research        August 15, 2016        Parents and Degradation Products of Analysis: OGRL LCEA

Research        August 15, 2016        Acetamide Parents and Degradation Products of Analysis: OGRL LCPD
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

152 CAF 13-00661 PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., FAHEY, CARNI, VALENTINO, AND WHALEN, JJ.

IN THE MATTER OF ANTHONY J. VENETTOZZI, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,

V ORDER
HEIDI L. MANTELLI, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.

ANTHONY VENETTOZZI, PETITIONER-APPELLANT PRO SE.
PETER J. DIGIORGIO, JR., ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILD, UTICA.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Oneida County (Louis P. Gigliotti, A.J.), entered July 2, 2012 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order dismissed the petitions.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Entered: March 21, 2014 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
Ronald K. MAIHLE, Appellant, v. EVERBANK, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-578

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed June 12, 2018 Rehearing Denied July 16, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Gregory Keith THOMPSON, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-1938

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

September 24, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Appeal is dismissed.
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

	NO. 2-07-094-CR

SOLOMAN GALLEGOS, JR.	APPELLANT

	V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS	STATE

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

	FROM THE 371ST DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

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

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

	On June 26, 2006, appellant Soloman Gallegos, Jr. pled guilty pursuant to a plea bargain to felony possession of a controlled substance.  The trial court placed him on three years’ deferred adjudication community supervision and imposed a $300 fine.  On March 2, 2007, appellant pled “true but” to the State’s allegations that he had violated the conditions of his deferred adjudication community supervision by committing the new offenses of assault on a family member and evading arrest, by using controlled substances during his community supervision, by failing to call in for urinalysis testing, and by failing to pay court costs, fees, and fines.  The trial court found the first four allegations to be true, adjudicated appellant guilty of the original offense of possession of a controlled substance, and sentenced him to eight years’ confinement.  

	Appellant’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief in support of that motion.  In the brief, counsel avers that, in his professional opinion, this appeal is frivolous.  Counsel’s brief and motion meet the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for relief.  See Mays v. State, 904 S.W.2d 920, 922-23 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1995, no pet.).  This court afforded appellant the opportunity to file a brief on his own behalf, but he did not. 

	Once an appellant’s court-appointed counsel files a motion to withdraw on the ground that the appeal is frivolous and fulfills the requirements of Anders, we are obligated to undertake an independent examination of the record and to essentially rebrief the case for the appellant to see if there is any arguable ground that may be raised on his behalf.  Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Mays, 904 S.W.2d at 923.  Only then may we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.  See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83-84, 109 S. Ct. 346, 351 (1988).  In appellant’s deferred adjudication case, our independent review for potential error is limited to potential errors not involving the decision to adjudicate and potential errors occurring after adjudication.  See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42.12, § 5(b) (Vernon 2006) (former version)2; Davis v. State, 195 S.W.3d 708, 710 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).

	We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief.  We agree with counsel that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.  We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.  See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

	Consequently, we grant the motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

								PER CURIAM

PANEL F:	LIVINGSTON, GARDNER, and WALKER, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED:  January 10, 2008
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-18-00092-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF I.D.C.,

A CHILD

From the 66th District Court

Hill County, Texas

Trial Court No. CV315-17

ORDER

The Court’s Memorandum Opinion and Judgment in this case were issued on 

November 28, 2018. We affirmed the trial court’s judgment terminating Appellant’s 

parental rights to I.D.C. Appellant then filed a motion to alter or amend judgment and a 

motion to amend or supplement his motion to alter or amend judgment. We granted 

Appellant’s motion to supplement and denied his motion to alter or amend judgment 

that we construed as a motion for rehearing under Rule 49.1 of the Rules of Appellate 

Procedure. TEX. R. APP. P. 49.1. 
In re I.D.C. Page 2

Appellant has now filed a document he entitles “Objection.” It is unclear what 

relief Appellant seeks other than a reversal of our opinion in this case, which request we 

will deny.

Appellant also appears to reiterate his request to have a criminal conviction 

overturned and a judgment in a separate termination proceeding reversed. We also deny 

this request.

Appellant’s remedy from an unfavorable judgment in this Court is to file a petition 

for review with the Texas Supreme Court.

We deny Appellant’s motion entitled “Objection.”

PER CURIAM

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Neill

Motion denied

Order issued and filed March 6, 2019
K. B., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Scott BURGESS, Administrator, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-5057

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

January 09, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5530 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

<DOC>
114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5530

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 12, 2016

     Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, 
                     Education, Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to modify certain provisions 
 relating to the capital financing of historically Black colleges and 
                             universities.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``HBCU Capital Financing Improvement 
Act''.

SEC. 2. BOND INSURANCE.

    Section 343 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1066b) 
is amended--
            (1) by striking ``escrow account'' each place it appears 
        and inserting ``bond insurance fund''; and
            (2) in subsection (b)--
                    (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``an'' and 
                inserting ``a''; and
                    (B) in paragraph (8), in the matter preceding 
                subparagraph (A), by striking ``an'' and inserting 
                ``a''.

SEC. 3. STRENGTHENING TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.

    Paragraph (9) of section 345 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 
(20 U.S.C. 1066d) is amended to read as follows:
            ``(9) may, directly or by grant or contract, provide 
        financial counseling and technical assistance to eligible 
        institutions to prepare the institutions to qualify, apply for, 
        and maintain a capital improvement loan, including a loan under 
        this part; and''.

SEC. 4. HBCU CAPITAL FINANCING ADVISORY BOARD.

    Paragraph (2) of section 347(c) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 
(20 U.S.C. 1066f(c)) is amended to read as follows:
            ``(2) Report.--On an annual basis, the Advisory Board shall 
        prepare and submit to the authorizing committees a report on 
        the status of the historically Black colleges and universities 
        described in paragraph (1)(A). That report shall also include--
                    ``(A) an overview of all loans in the capital 
                financing program, including the most recent loans 
                awarded in the fiscal year in which the report is 
                submitted; and
                    ``(B) administrative and legislative 
                recommendations, as needed, for addressing the issues 
                related to construction financing facing historically 
                Black colleges and universities.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 11, 2016.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
October 28, 2015

Mr. Daryl G. Crouse, Esq.

920 Orizaba Avenue

Long Beach, CA 90804

Dear Mr. Crouse:

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition 

(Docket No. FAA−2015−2791). This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) to process your petition.

• Provide a copy of the Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual (MPTOM) 

which is required by Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, Section 1. If you wish for us to 

proceed without this manual and remove closed-set filming from your proposed operation 

please inform of us of your intention by the requested response date listed below.

Please submit the additional information (non-proprietary) to your docket at 

www.regulations.gov. Once your information has been submitted, please also send a copy of the 

requested information (and any proprietary information), as well as your comment tracking 

number from regulations.gov via e-mail to 333exemptions@faa.gov. If you want us to process 

your request any further, we must receive the information described above by November 11, 

2015. If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267-1538.

Sincerely,

Joshua Parker

Program Analyst, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division
EXHIBIT 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT BY
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         In connection with the Quarterly Report of 1-900 Jackpot, Inc., on Form
10-QSB for the  period  ending May 31,  2006 as filed  with the  Securities  and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "REPORT"),  the undersigned,  Joseph
Batty,  Principal  Financial  Officer of the  Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief:

         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: July 31, 2006


/s/ Joseph Batty
Joseph Batty
Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Director
(Principal Financial Officer)


A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
has been  provided  to the  Company  and will be  retained  by the  Company  and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Daniel GRAY, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D17-2618

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

MAY 24, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Declination

Filters

              - science_science(6)
              - products_data(1)
              - products_publications(114)
              - multimedia_image(7)
              - multimedia_image-141771(6)
              - multimedia_image-141776(1)
              - multimedia_video(8)
              - multimedia_video-149194(4)
              - (-)multimedia_video-149195(2)
              - multimedia_video-149198(2)
              - news_news-149245(2)
              - news_news-149248(2)
              - connect_staff_profiles(1)

## By Location

              - (-)alaska(2)
              - arizona(3)
              - california(1)
              - florida(6)
              - hawaii(3)
              - idaho(1)
              - maryland(1)
              - montana(1)
              - nevada(1)
              - new mexico(1)
              - puerto rico(2)
              - south dakota(1)
              - utah(2)
              - washington(1)
              - wisconsin(1)
              - wyoming(3)

## By Year

Featured Films and Shorts        March 30, 2023        USGS Alaska Science Center Shorebird Research Program

Featured Films and Shorts        June 30, 2014        Time-lapse Photography of Barter Island in Alaska
SOUTHERN FIBER OF MIAMI LLC, etc., Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. EXPRESS SERVICES, INC., etc., Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D16-2422

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

FEBRUARY 28, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
##### 



Exhibit 99.1

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350,
As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended
March 31, 2003 (the Report) of UTEK Corporation (the Registrant), as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Clifford M.
Gross, the Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant certify, to the best of my
knowledge, that:

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

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





| | /s/   Clifford M. Gross                   
| | ------------------------------------------
| |                                           
| | Name: Clifford M. Gross
Date: June 6, 2003

This 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. A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Registrant
and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.