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

House Calendar No. 123 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 646 

[Report No. 113–545] 

Directing the Attorney General to transmit to the House of Representatives 

copies of any emails in the possession of the Department of Justice 

that were transmitted to or from the email account(s) of former Internal 

Revenue Service Exempt Organizations Division Director Lois Lerner 

between January 2009 and April 2011. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 25, 2014 

Mr. STOCKMAN submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

JULY 22, 2014 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

RESOLUTION 

Directing the Attorney General to transmit to the House 

of Representatives copies of any emails in the possession 

of the Department of Justice that were transmitted to 

or from the email account(s) of former Internal Revenue 

Service Exempt Organizations Division Director Lois 

Lerner between January 2009 and April 2011. 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives direct 

2 the Attorney General to transmit to the House of Repmstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HRES 646 RH 

1 resentatives, no later than 14 days after the date of the 

2 adoption of this resolution, copies of any electronic com3 munication in the possession of the Attorney General or 

4 the Department of Justice that was transmitted to or from 

5 any electronic mail account(s) used by former Internal 

6 Revenue Service Exempt Organizations Division Director 

7 Lois Lerner at any time between January 1, 2009, and 

8 April 30, 2011. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

House Calendar No. 123 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 646 

[Report No. 113–545] 

RESOLUTION 

Directing the Attorney General to transmit to the 

tween January 2009 and April 2011. ganizations Division Director Lois Lerner beof former Internal Revenue Service Exempt Orwere transmitted to or from the email account(s) the possession of the Department of Justice that House of Representatives copies of any emails in 

JULY 22, 2014 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, October 23, 2018. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, October 23, 2018 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A19I0071. BELINDA DENISE ANDERSON v. DAP GROUP, LLC.
Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby DENIED.
LC NUMBERS: 17SV938
Exhibit 32.1



INTERVIDEO, INC.



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



I, Steve Ro, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge, the Annual Report of InterVideo, Inc. on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K/A fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of InterVideo, Inc.



Date: May 2, 2005



|                                              
|----------------------------------------------
|/s/ Steve Ro                                  
|Steve Ro Chief Executive Officer and President
George WALKER IV, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 1D18-4794

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

January 28, 2019

George Walker IV, pro se, Petitioner.

Ashley B. Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.

The petition for belated appeal is denied on the merits.

Makar, Winokur, and M.K. Thomas, JJ., concur.
Form of Award Agreement under the Deferred Stock Unit Agreement



 Exhibit 4.7 
  

DEFERRED STOCK UNIT AGREEMENT 
  
 Pursuant to Article Six of the RadioShack Corporation 2004 Deferred Stock Plan for Non-Employee Directors (the “Plan”), [Name of Non-Employee
Director] (the “Grantee”), who as of the date hereof is an Eligible Director of RadioShack Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), is hereby awarded 3,500 Deferred Stock Units (the “Deferred Stock
Units”) upon the terms and conditions set forth below effective June 1, 2004. Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Plan. 
  
 1. Each Deferred Stock Unit represents a hypothetical share of common stock in accordance with the Plan. The Deferred Stock
Units shall be credited to the Grantee in an account established for the Grantee, and an amount equal to the amount of any dividend on the equivalent amount of common stock shall be paid to the Grantee in accordance with the Plan. 
  
 2. The Deferred Stock Units shall vest in accordance with Section 6.3 of the
Plan and shall be paid in shares of common stock in accordance with Article Eight of the Plan. 
  
 3. The Deferred Stock Units shall not be sold, assigned, exchanged, pledged, hypothecated, transferred or otherwise disposed of (whether voluntarily or by operation of law), other than in accordance with the Plan.

  
 4. Grantee shall have no voting rights or any other rights as
a Stockholder with respect to the Deferred Stock Units, and Grantee shall have no rights as a Stockholder with respect to any shares of common stock issuable pursuant to the Deferred Stock Units until the date on which a stock certificate (or
certificates) representing such common stock is issued. 
  
 5. The
number of shares of common stock issuable pursuant to the Deferred Stock Units shall be subject to equitable adjustment as provided in Section 5.1 of the Plan. 
  

6. The laws of the State of Texas shall govern this award and all matters related hereto. 
  
 7. This award is subject to the terms of the Plan, and the Grantee is being delivered a copy of the Plan with this award
agreement. 
  
 8. On demand by the Company, Grantee shall pay to
the Company (or, alternatively, shall instruct the Company to withhold shares of common stock issuable pursuant to the Deferred Stock Units) any taxes the Company reasonably determines it is required to withhold under applicable tax laws, in
accordance with Section 8.2 of the Plan. 
  
 9. This agreement may
be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which will be an original but all of which together will represent one and the same agreement. 
  
 10. This agreement cannot be changed or terminated orally. The agreement and the Plan contain the entire agreement between the parties relating to the
subject matter hereof. 
  

									
	 GRANTEE:
	 	 	 	 RADIOSHACK CORPORATION

				
	 	 	 	 	By:	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 Name:
	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 Title:
	 	Vice President – Benefits and Compensation
Exhibit
      32.2








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


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




In
      connection with the quarterly report of General Steel Holdings, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") on the date hereof (the "Report"),
      I,
      John Chen, Chief Financial Officer and Director 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.





Date:
              March 31, 2008
            By:
            /s/
              John
              ChenJohn
              ChenTitle:
              Director and Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 99.2

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

In  connection  with  the  Quarterly  Report  of  Interactive   Motorsports  and
Entertainment  Corp.  (the  "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the three months ended
March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the Date
hereof (the "Report"), each of the undersigned certifies,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of
2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

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

Date: May 20, 2003         By:       /s/ Mark A. Paul
                           -----------------------------------------------
                           Mark A. Paul
                           Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer


A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to Interactive Motorsports and Entertainment Corp. and will be retained
by  Interactive  Motorsports  and  Entertainment  Corp.  and  furnished  to  the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed March 12 , 2019.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 18

- 00475

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF L .E.B

. , A CHILD

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No . 1 Galveston County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 10FD0110

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This is an appeal from a judgment signed April 25, 2018 . The clerk’s record

was filed July 10, 2018

. No reporter’s record or brief was filed.

On January 10, 2019 , this court issued an order stating that unless appellant

filed a brief on or before February 11, 2019 , the court would dismiss the a ppeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P . 42.3(b).

Appellant filed no brief or other response. T he appeal is orde red dismissed.2 PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Jewell and Bourliot

.
CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Cheryl Messier, Chief Financial Officer of Radius Gold Inc. (the Company) do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



1.

This Annual Report on Form 20-F of the Company for the period ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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.





Date: May 27, 2009



/s/ Cheryl Messier__________

Cheryl Messier

Chief Financial Officer













#
Deltras Ladon JOHNSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-1158

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 12, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of WGNB Corp. (the "Company") on Form
10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, L. Leighton Alston,
President, Chief Executive Officer and Director 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.

Date: May 13, 2003

     /s/ L. Leighton Alston
--------------------------------------
L. Leighton Alston
President, Chief Executive Officer and
Director (Principal Executive Officer)
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

for the Fifth Circuit

_____________________________________

No. 97-40970

_____________________________________

ELVIN BASS, 

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

OXY-CHEM; BRIGGS-WEAVER COMPANY,

Defendants-Appellees.

______________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

(G-96-CV-131)

______________________________________________________

April 13, 1998

Before GARWOOD, DAVIS and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

After reading the briefs and hearing oral argument in this

case and reviewing pertinent portions of the record, we agree with

the district court that Mr. Bass' working conditions were not so

intolerable as to justify a conclusion that he was constructively

discharged. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is

affirmed.

AFFIRMED.
2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF HOMEPLACE OF AMERICA, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
AS OF AUGUST 26, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-03-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-28-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-26-2000
<CASH>                                           2,878
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,789
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    213,005
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               229,542
<PP&E>                                         134,446
<DEPRECIATION>                                  51,829
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 427,800
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           86,609
<BONDS>                                        144,567
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            25
<OTHER-SE>                                     187,405
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   427,800
<SALES>                                        160,333
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               160,333
<CGS>                                          100,179
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   59,635
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   488
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,999
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (1,968)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        27
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (1,995)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1,995)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.08)


</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 23
- 0604 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, vs. BOBBY FRANCIS LOWRY,

Defendant and Appellant
.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including August 5 , 202 4, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 26 2024

06/26/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0604
2083.

#### CATCHINGS *v.*THE STATE.

The charge of the court on the subject of impeachment was somewhat inaccurate, but, under the decision in *MeOollum*v. *State,*119 *Ga.*308 (2), 311 (46 S. E. 413, 100 Am. St. R. 171), the inaccuracy is not such material error as to require a reversal.

Accusation of sale of liquor, from city court of Monticello— Judge Thurman. July 28, 1909.

Argued October 6, —

Decided October 13, 1909.

*Greene F. Johnson,*for plaintiff in error.

*Doyle Campbell, solicitor pro tern., A. 7. Clement,*contra.

Powell, J.

The State relied on the testimony of a single witness. The brief of the evidence does not disclose any formal impeachment of the witness, unless it arose through the conflict between his testimony and what the defendant stated -as to what the witness had previously said. The court charged the jury: “Where a witness is attacked by contradictory evidence or by proof *791of conviction of an offense involving moral turpitude, it is for the jury to say whether or not such witness has spoken the truth. In determining this question you may look to the evidence and say whether or not there are any corroborating circumstances in the case, and, from all, say whether or not such witness has spoken the truth, and if he has you would be authorized to base your verdict on the same.” The objection is that the charge was not authorized by the evidence, — that there was no corroboration of the testimony of the State’s witness. A comparison of the case of *McCollum*v. *State,*119 *Ga.*308 (46 S. E. 413, 100 Am. St. R. 171), with the one at bar, discloses such a similarity as to make the decision in that case directly applicable and controlling.

*Judgment affk'med.*
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 246 (Monday, December 23, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 104532]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-30564]

[[Page 104532]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2459-000]

Lake Lynn Generation, LLC; Notice of Authorization for Continued 
Project Operation

    The license for the Lake Lynn Hydroelectric Project No. 2459 was 
issued for a period ending November 30, 2024.
    Section 15(a)(1) of the FPA, 16 U.S.C. 808(a)(1), requires the 
Commission, at the expiration of a license term, to issue from year-to-
year an annual license to the then licensee(s) under the terms and 
conditions of the prior license until a new license is issued, or the 
project is otherwise disposed of as provided in section 15 or any other 
applicable section of the FPA. If the project's prior license waived 
the applicability of section 15 of the FPA, then, based on section 9(b) 
of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 558(c), and as set forth 
at 18 CFR 16.21(a), if the licensee of such project has filed an 
application for a subsequent license, the licensee may continue to 
operate the project in accordance with the terms and conditions of the 
license after the minor or minor part license expires, until the 
Commission acts on its application. If the licensee of such a project 
has not filed an application for a subsequent license, then it may be 
required, pursuant to 18 CFR 16.21(b), to continue project operations 
until the Commission issues someone else a license for the project or 
otherwise orders disposition of the project.
    If the project is subject to section 15 of the FPA, notice is 
hereby given that an annual license for Project No. 2459 is issued to 
Lake Lynn Generation, LLC for a period effective December 1, 2024, 
through November 30, 2025, or until the issuance of a new license for 
the project or other disposition under the FPA, whichever comes first.
    If issuance of a new license (or other disposition) does not take 
place on or before November 30, 2025, notice is hereby given that, 
pursuant to 18 CFR 16.18(c), an annual license under section 15(a)(1) 
of the FPA is renewed automatically without further order or notice by 
the Commission, unless the Commission orders otherwise.
    If the project is not subject to section 15 of the FPA, notice is 
hereby given that Lake Lynn Generation, LLC is authorized to continue 
operation of the Lake Lynn Hydroelectric Project under the terms and 
conditions of the prior license until the issuance of a subsequent 
license for the project or other disposition under the FPA, whichever 
comes first.

    Dated: December 17, 2024.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024-30564 Filed 12-20-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
```
ASSOCIATION OF POINCIANA VILLAGES, INC., Petitioner, v. GURSKY RAGAN, P.A., etc., et al., Respondents.

No. 3D18-1267

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed November 28, 2018

Patsko Law Group, and Joseph T. Patsko (Tampa) and Michael J. Bayern (Tampa), for petitioner.

Kluger, Kaplan, Silverman, Katzen & Levine, P.L., and Abbey L. Kaplan and Josh M. Rubens, Miami, for respondents.

Before SALTER, EMAS and FERNANDEZ, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Petition dismissed. *See**Reeves v. Fleetwood Homes of Fla., Inc.*, 889 So.2d 812, 822 (Fla. 2004) (holding that "to obtain a writ of certiorari, there must exist (1) a departure from the essential requirements of the law, (2) resulting in material injury for the remainder of the case (3) that cannot be corrected on postjudgment appeal") (quoting *Bd. of Regents v. Snyder*, 826 So.2d 382, 387 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) ). *See**also**Williams v. Oken*, 62 So.3d 1129, 1132 (Fla. 2011) (recognizing that "[t]he last two elements are jurisdictional and must be analyzed before the court may even consider the first element").
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

OSCAR GONZALEZ-LOPEZ,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 07-75123

Agency No. A077-985-991

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted November 16, 2010** 

Before: TASHIMA, BERZON, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.

Oscar Gonzalez-Lopez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review

of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an

immigration judge’s decision denying his application for cancellation of removal. 

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of

FILED

NOV 30 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 07-75123

law, Mielewczyk v. Holder, 575 F.3d 992, 994 (9th Cir. 2009), and we deny the

petition for review.

The agency properly concluded that Gonzalez-Lopez is statutorily ineligible

for cancellation of removal because his conviction for violation of California Penal

Code § 273.5 is categorically a crime of domestic violence under 8 U.S.C.

§ 1227(a)(2)(E)(i). See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(C); Banuelos-Ayon v. Holder, 611

F.3d 1080, 1083 (9th Cir. 2010); see also 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(3)(B) (listing

permissible documents for proof of conviction).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.