alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 Annual Report of Tektronix, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended May 27, 2006 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Colin L. Slade,
Senior Vice 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 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.

Dated: August 2, 2006


/s/ COLIN L. SLADE
-------------------------------------
Colin L. Slade
Senior Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7379

SHON CONNER WILLIAMS,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

WARDEN FCI WILLIAMSBURG MED,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Florence. Mary G. Lewis, District Judge. 

(4:14-cv-00011-MGL)

Submitted: December 30, 2014 Decided: January 7, 2015 

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Shon Conner Williams, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Shon Conner Williams, a federal prisoner, appeals the 

district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the 

magistrate judge and dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) 

petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible 

error. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma 

pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district 

court. See Williams v. Warden FCI Williamsburg Med, No. 4:14-

cv-00011-MGL (D.S.C. Sept. 5, 2014). We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-6497

WILLIAM HENRY HARRISON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

VANESSA P. ADAMS, Warden, Petersburg Federal

Correctional Complex; JOSEPH BROOKS, Former

Warden, Petersburg Federal Correctional

Complex; JAMES CROSS, Former Acting Warden,

FCC Petersburg; CORNELIA JANZEN, Legal Liaison

& Administrative Remedy Coordinator, FCC

Petersburg; HARLEY G. LAPPIN, Director,

Federal Bureau of Prisons; HARRELL WATTS,

General Counsel/Administrative Remedy

Coordinator, B.O.P.; KIMBERLEY WHITE, MidAtlantic Region Admin. Remedy Coordinator,

B.O.P.; DENISE M. GOTTLIEB, Mid-Atlantic

Region Admin. Remedy Coordinator, B.O.P., D.

PARKER, Unit Manager, FCC Petersburg Medium;

MR. CRENELL, Counselor, Petersburg FCC Medium;

DOCTOR LAYBOURNE, M.D., Petersburg FCC;

PHYSICIAN’S ASSISTANCE PANAGUITON, P.A. at

Petersburg FCC; J. FAJARDO, P.A. at Petersburg

FCC; P.A. NEGRON, P.A. or Former P.A. at

Petersburg FCC; MR. WYRICK, Unit Manager, Lee

Hall, Petersburg FCC; M. T. HARDING, Case

Manager, Lee Hall, Petersburg FCC; M. C.

SPEIGHTS, Counselor, Lee Hall, Petersburg FCC;

MR. WHEELER, Counselor, Lee Hall, Petersburg

FCC; JANET MORRIS, Supervisor of Education,

Petersburg FCC, DAWN RANKE, Former Associate

Warden for Programming, Petersburg FCC Low;

LIEUTENANT DESROCHES, Petersburg FCC Low;

OFFICER BLEVINS, Corrections Officer

Petersburg FCC; LORRAINE HILL, Secretary, BOP;

ANNETTE BAILEY, Secretary, BOP; OFFICER

MILLEMAC, C.O.,
- 2 -

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, Senior

District Judge. (1:06-cv-00501-TSE)

Submitted: October 31, 2007 Decided: December 11, 2007

Before MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit

Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William Henry Harrison, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 3 -

PER CURIAM:

William Henry Harrison appeals the district court’s

orders: (1) dismissing under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2000) his

complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of

Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971); and (2) denying his

motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find

no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated

by the district court. Harrison v. Adams, No. 1:06-cv-00501-TSE

(E.D. Va. Feb. 8, 2007; filed Mar. 19, 2007, entered Mar. 20,

2007). 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.

AFFIRMED
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 315 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 315

 To authorize testimony and representation in United States v. Bozell.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 26, 2023

  Mr. Schumer (for himself and Mr. McConnell) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 To authorize testimony and representation in United States v. Bozell.

Whereas, in the case of United States v. Bozell, Cr. No. 21-216, pending in the 
        United States District Court for the District of Columbia, the 
        prosecution has requested the production of testimony from Daniel 
        Schwager, a former employee of the Office of the Secretary of the 
        Senate;
Whereas, pursuant to sections 703(a) and 704(a)(2) of the Ethics in Government 
        Act of 1978, 2 U.S.C. Sec. Sec.  288b(a) and 288c(a)(2), the Senate may 
        direct its counsel to represent current and former officers and 
        employees of the Senate with respect to any subpoena, order, or request 
        for evidence relating to their official responsibilities;
Whereas, by the privileges of the Senate of the United States and Rule XI of the 
        Standing Rules of the Senate, no evidence under the control or in the 
        possession of the Senate may, by the judicial or administrative process, 
        be taken from such control or possession but by permission of the 
        Senate; and
Whereas, when it appears that evidence under the control or in the possession of 
        the Senate may promote the administration of justice, the Senate will 
        take such action as will promote the ends of justice consistent with the 
        privileges of the Senate: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That Daniel Schwager, a former employee of the Office of 
the Secretary of the Senate, is authorized to provide relevant 
testimony in the case of United States v. Bozell, except concerning 
matters for which a privilege should be asserted.
    Sec. 2.  The Senate Legal Counsel is authorized to represent Mr. 
Schwager, and any current or former officer or employee of the 
Secretary's office, in connection with the production of evidence 
authorized in section one of this resolution.
                                 <all>
```
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JUNE 30, 2021

NO. 03-21-00094-CV

Athens Gate Limited, Appellant

v.

Carolyn Baldwin, Individually and a/n/f Her Minor Child, J. D. B., Jr., Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 126TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE BYRNE, JUSTICES BAKER AND SMITH

DISMISSED ON APPELLANT’S MOTION -- OPINION BY JUSTICE SMITH

This is an appeal from the interlocutory order signed by the trial court on February 9, 2021. 

Athens Gate Limited has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, and having considered the motion, 

the Court agrees that the motion should be granted. Therefore, the Court grants the motion and 

dismisses the appeal. Each party shall bear their own costs relating to this appeal, both in this 

Court and in the court below.
##### Table of Contents



UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 WASHINGTON, DC 20549
 FORM 8-K
 CURRENT REPORT
PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
  Date of  report (Date of earliest event reported)
    
    May 31, 2006 Delphi Corporation
 (Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
 Delaware
    
    1-14787
    
    38-3430473(State or Other Jurisdiction of
Incorporation)
    
    (Commission File Number)
    
    (IRS Employer Identification No.)
 5725 Delphi Drive, Troy, MI
    
    48098(Address of Principal Executive Offices)
    
    (Zip Code)
 (248) 813-2000
 
  see
 o
    
    Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)o
    
    Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)o
    
    Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))o
    
    Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))




---



TABLE OF CONTENTS  ITEM 7.01 REGULATION FD DISCLOSUREITEM 9.01 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND EXHIBITSSIGNATUREEXHIBIT INDEXMonthly Operating Report    Table of Contents  
 ITEM 7.01 REGULATION FD DISCLOSURE
 Operating Report
   www.delphidocket.com
 Limitation on Incorporation by Reference
  FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS




---



##### Table of Contents



ITEM 9.01 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND EXHIBITS
  ExhibitNumber
    
    Description99(a)
    
    Delphi Corporations Monthly Operating Report for the Month Ended April 30, 2006
 
 SIGNATURE
  DELPHI CORPORATION(Registrant)Date: May 31, 2006By: /s/ JOHN D. SHEEHAN(John D. Sheehan,
Vice President and Chief Restructuring Officer,
Chief Accounting Officer and Controller)




---



##### Table of Contents



EXHIBIT INDEX
 ExhibitNumber
    
    Description99(a)
    
    Delphi Corporations Monthly Operating Report for the Month Ended April 30, 2006
Roque Esteban CALAFELL, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D18-2350

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed January 9, 2019.

Roque Esteban Calafell, in proper person.

Ashley Brooke Moody, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before SALTER, EMAS and FERNANDEZ, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court's order, which denied appellant's motion seeking additional credit for time spent in custody in an Argentine jail awaiting extradition to Florida to face charges in the instant case. *See* § 921.161(1), Fla. Stat. (2006) (providing: "A sentence of imprisonment shall not begin to run before the date it is imposed, but the court imposing a sentence shall allow a defendant credit for all of the time she or he spent in the county jail before sentence. The credit must be for a specified period of time and shall be provided for in the sentence"); *Kronz v. State*, 462 So.2d 450, 451 (Fla. 1985) (holding that section 921.161(1), Florida Statutes, requires a trial judge to give credit for time served in *Florida* county jails pending disposition of criminal charges, but does not require awarding such credit for time spent in jails in other jurisdictions; further noting that "[t]he trial judge does, however, have the inherent discretionary authority to award credit for time served in other jurisdictions while awaiting transfer to Florida. In this latter circumstance, the trial judge should consider the appropriateness of an award of credit for time served when the defendant was incarcerated in another state solely because of the Florida offense for which he or she is being sentenced") (emphasis added).

The order on appeal expressly provides that the trial court considered the facts and circumstances surrounding appellant's request, and exercised its discretion in denying same. We find no abuse of that discretion. *Howey v. State*, 813 So.2d 1030 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) ; *Gomez v. State*, 984 So.2d 577 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008).

Affirmed.
POORNIMA & AVINASH CHARITABLE FOUNDATION, INC., Appellant, v. RIVER CLUB ASSOCIATION, INC., Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-2410

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed December 26, 2018

Diego Handel, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Therese A. Savona and Kathryn L. Ender, of Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A., Miami, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

HARRIS, and GROSSHANS, JJ., and BLECHMAN, M.S., Associate Judge, concur.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of IWO Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 (the "Report"), I, Robert W.
Piper, President and 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 result of operations of the
Company.

/s/ Robert W. Piper
-----------------------------------------
Robert W. Piper
President and Chief Executive Officer
August 9, 2002
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 Quarterly Report of Digital Network Alliance International, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ended June 30, 2005 (the "Report"), I, Edward Chan, COO, CEO, and a 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 requirement 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 Company's
> financial position and results of operations.

/s/Edward Chan



Edward Chan, COO, CEO and

 a director

December 28, 2006
Richard Lee HARDERS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-768

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[December 20, 2018]

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Christine C. Geraghty, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Maryellen M. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

Per Curiam.

*Affirmed* .

Warner, Ciklin and Levine, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No.
333-46402 and 333-59388 of Inrange Technologies Corporation on Form S-8 of our
report dated February 14, 2003 relating to the consolidated financial statements
of Inrange Technologies Corporation as of and for the year ended December 31,
2002 (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes explanatory
paragraphs relating to the application of procedures relating to certain
reclassifications and restatements of certain disclosures in the 2001 and 2000
financial statements that were audited by other auditors who have ceased
operations and for which we have expressed no opinion or other form of assurance
other than with respect to such disclosures, restatements and reclassifications)
appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Inrange Technologies Corporation
for the year ended December 31, 2002.


                                                  /s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
March 27, 2003


                                     70
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the Court has determined th a t

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-50240

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

VERSUS

JOSE LUIS GRANADOS,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Western District of Texas

(EP-96-CV-237)

November 20, 1998

Before DAVIS, DUHÉ, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

José Luis Granados, a federal prisoner, appeals the denial of

his motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence, pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 2255. Granados contends that his guilty-plea

conviction for using a firearm in connectio n with a drugtrafficking offense is invalid under Bailey v. United States , 516

U.S. 137 (1995).2

The government contends that Granados’ Bailey claim is

procedurally barred under United States v. Bousley

, 118 S. Ct.

1604, 1610-11(1998). However, because the government did not raise

the procedural bar in the district court, it has been waived. S ee

United States v. Drobny , 955 F.2d 990, 995 (5th Cir. 1992).

Although Granados contends that he did not actively employ the

firearm and thus did not “use” it within the meaning of Bailey

, he

does not contest that he displayed a firearm to an undercover

officer, telling him that he “was ready if something was going to

happen” and that the gun was for protection. Such action is

sufficient to sustain a conviction under the “use” prong of 18

U.S.C. § 924(c). S ee Bailey

, 516 U.S. at 148 (defining use as,

among other things, “brandishing” or “displaying” a firearm).

Granados argues that his act of showing the gun to the

undercover officer was both temporally and physically distant from

the actual drug transaction and his arrest since he stowed the gun

in his car before proceeding to the motel room in which the sale of

drugs was to take place. Thus Granados’ argument is that he did

not use the firearm “during and in relation to” the predicate drug

offenses as i s required under § 924(c). This argument fails to

persuade. The record reflects that Granados brought the gun with

him for the purpose of facilitating his possession of the marijuana

and the drug conspiracy. S ee United States v. Polk

, 118 F.3d 286,

293 ( 5th Cir.), c ert. denied

, 118 S. Ct. 456 (1997); see also

United States v. Tolliver

, 116 F.3d 120, 124-26 (5th Cir. 1997).

Thus he used the gun “during and in relation to” the predicate3

offenses.

The district court’s denial of Granados’ § 2255 motion is

affirmed.

AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit
32.1**
 
 **STATEMENT
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF**
 **KERYX
BIOPHARMACEUTICALS, INC.**
 **PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**
 **AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**
 **SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
 
 In
connection with the annual report of Keryx Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Michael S. Weiss, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as
adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on my
knowledge:
 
 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 Company.
 
 Date:
      March 14, 2005
    
    /s/
      Michael S. WeissMichael
      S. Weiss
      Chief
      Executive Officer
      (Principal
      Executive Officer)
Isaac FORH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-1404

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed December 31, 2018

O.H. Eaton, Office of Criminal Conflict & Civil Regional Counsel, Casselberry, for Appellant.

Isaac S. Forh, Crawfordville, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Allison L. Morris, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

WALLIS, LAMBERT and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

,

Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

November 30 , 2016 

# Order

Clerk November 30 , 2016

152035

CITY OF HUNTINGTON WOODS and CITY

OF PLEASANT RIDGE,

Plaintiffs/

Counter

- Defendants

- Appellants,

SC: 152035

v COA: 321414

Oakland CC: 2013

- 135842

- CZ

CITY OF OAK PARK,

Defendant/

Counter

- Plaintiff

- Appellee,

and

45TH DISTRICT COURT,

Defendant

- Appellee.

_________________________________________/

On order of the C hief Justice

, at the request of the special mediator, Court of

Appeals Chief Judge Michael J. Talbot, the briefing periods shall begin to run from the

date of the special mediator’s final report con cluding that settlement efforts have

concluded without successfully resolving all of the issues raised in the application for

leave to appeal.