alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Trend Mining Company (the "Company")
      on
      Form 10-QSB/A for the quarter ended June 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Thomas A. Loucks,
      Principal 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, 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: September 20, 2005/s/ Thomas A. LoucksThomas
              A. LoucksPrincipal Executive Officer
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  PracticeXpert,  Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Michael Manahan,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350,
as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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


                                                /s/ Michael Manahan
                                                -------------------------
                                                Michael Manahan,
                                                Chief Financial Officer
                                                April 15, 2005



A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to PracticeXpert,  Inc. and will be retained by PracticeXpert, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
J-A18017-17

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA

Appellee

v.

JAHAUN MAURICE JONES

Appellant No. 1685 WDA 2016

Appeal from the Order Entered October 6, 2016

In the Court of Common Pleas of Erie County

Criminal Division at No(s): CP-25-CR-0001499-2016

BEFORE: BOWES, J., LAZARUS, J., and OTT, J.

JUDGMENT ORDER BY LAZARUS, J.: FILED JULY 07, 2017

Jahaun Maurice Jones appeals from the trial court’s order denying his 

writ of habeas corpus. On appeal, Jones contends that his due process 

rights were violated where the Commonwealth was permitted to use only 

hearsay evidence to establish a prima facie case regarding the identity of the 

criminal suspect at his preliminary hearing. We affirm. 

Initially, we note that “it is firmly established that the denial of a 

habeas corpus claim, based upon the insufficiency of the evidence presented 

to the issuing authority, without a showing of exceptional circumstances[,] 

will not provide a basis for immediate appellate review.” Commonwealth 

v. Hess, 414 A.2d 1043, 1048 (Pa. 1980). Such interlocutory orders, 

generally, are not appealable. Id.
J-A18017-17

- 2 -

Here, Jones avers that exceptional circumstances exist because a 

challenge to the procedure allowing hearsay evidence alone to establish a 

prima facie case would be capable of repetition and likely to evade review if 

this Court were to await a final order. See Commonwealth v. Ricker, 120 

A.3d 349, 354 (Pa. Super. 2015) (“Not only is Appellant’s claim capable of 

evading review, it presents an important constitutional question regarding 

whether a powerful state governmental entity violates federal and state 

constitutional principles in allowing a defendant to be restrained of his liberty 

and bound over for trial based solely on hearsay evidence.”). This exact 

issue, however, has been squarely addressed and rejected in 

Commonwealth v. McClelland, 2017 Pa Super 163 (filed May 26, 2017) 

(where use of hearsay testimony was sole basis upon which Commonwealth 

established prima facie case at preliminary hearing, defendant’s inability to 

“subject the primary accuser to adversarial examination [did not] violate[] 

due process”). Accord Commonwealth v. Dolan, 2509 EDA 2016 (Pa. 

Super. filed July --, 2017). See also Ricker, supra (confrontation clause 

did not prohibit Commonwealth from establishing prima facie case solely 

through the use of hearsay). 

Instantly, the purported error raised is no longer capable of being 

repeated and evading review, as definitive review has been achieved by this 

Court. Furthermore, Ricker, Dolan, and McClelland constitute binding 

precedent on the issues presented, which prevents a finding of exceptional 
J-A18017-17

- 3 -

circumstances such as to warrant immediate review of the instant order. 

Hence, we quash this appeal.

Appeal quashed.

Judgment Entered.

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.

Prothonotary

Date: 7/7/2017
**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 Smart Online, Inc. (the "Company") on
        Form
        10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and
        Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Nicholas
        Sinigaglia, Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer
        of the
        Company, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
        to
        Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to 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; and
  (2)
        The
        information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
        the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 
 
 **_** /s/
        Nicholas A. Sinigaglia **________________________**
 Nicholas
        Sinigaglia
 Principal
        Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer
 March
        30,
        2007
 
 A
        signed
        original of this written statement required by Section 906 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.
Exhibit 12.1CERTIFICATIONI, Antonio Garcés, certify that:1) I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006,of Grupo Financiero Galicia S.A.;2) Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;3) Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4) The company’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e))and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and15d-15(f)) for the company and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared; (b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internalcontrol over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to providereasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparationof financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally acceptedaccounting principles, (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the company’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the company’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the company’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5) The company’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the company’s auditors and theaudit committee of the company’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the company’s internal control over financial reporting.     Date:June 28, 2007      /s/ Antonio Garcés
PANTHER TRACE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., Appellant, v. Thomas THOMPSON; Deidre Thompson ; and Deutsche Bank National Trust Co., as Trustee for the Registered Holders of New Century Home Equity Loan Trust, Series 2005-B Asset Backed Pass-Through Certificates, Appellees.

Case No. 2D17-4676

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed January 9, 2019.

Leslie M. Conklin, Clearwater, for Appellant.

Paul M. Messina, Jr. and Michelle M. Gervais of Blank Rome LLP, Tampa, for Appellee Deutsche Bank National Trust Co.

No appearance for remaining Appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

LaROSE, C.J., and KELLY and BLACK, JJ., Concur.
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, ON BEHALF OF Jessica Ashley Cheyenne COLLINS, Appellant, v. Bradley Jacob HARRIS, Appellee.

No. 1D18-2776

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

January 8, 2019

Ashley Brooke Moody, Attorney General, and Toni C. Bernstein, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Robert L. Sirianni Jr., Brownstone, P.A., Winter Park, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED .

Wolf, Lewis, and Wetherell, JJ., concur.
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-10636

Conference Calendar

 

JAMES ERIC LOFTON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE ET AL.,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:97-CV-93-C

- - - - - - - - - -

December 10, 1997

Before BARKSDALE, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

James Eric Lofton, Texas prisoner # 616132, appeals the

judgment of the district court in a civil rights action against

the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and several of its

employees. “This court must examine the basis of its

jurisdiction, on its own motion, if necessary.” Mosley v. Cozby,

813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir. 1987). The time limitation for

filing a notice of appeal is jurisdictional, and the lack of a
No. 97-10636

-2-

timely notice mandates dismissal of the appeal. Robbins v.

Maggio, 750 F.2d 405, 408 (5th Cir. 1985).

Lofton’s notice of appeal from the district court’s May 5,

1997, judgment was filed in the district court on June 11, 1997. 

There is no support for Lofton’s contention that he filed his

notice of appeal in this court on May 12, 1997. Accordingly, the

appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. The motion for

appointment of counsel is DENIED as unnecessary.

APPEAL DISMISSED.
Ana C. LORENZO, Appellant, v. FOREVER 21 RETAIL, INC., Appellee.

No. 3D17-2497

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed December 19, 2018

Rubenstein Law, and Miriam Fresco Agrait ; Burlington & Rockenbach, P.A., and Adam Richardson (West Palm Beach), for appellant.

Mintzer, Sarowitz, Zeris, Ledva & Meyers, LLP, and Allison C. Heim, Tampa, and Nicole M. Sarasua, Miami, for appellee.

Before EMAS, FERNANDEZ and LOGUE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *See**Encarnacion v. Lifemark Hospitals of Florida*, 211 So.3d 275, 278 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (affirming summary judgment in favor of defendant and holding that plaintiff's testimony that the substance on the floor was "oily," "dirty," and "dark" was "insufficient to create a jury issue. For such testimony to create a jury issue, the testimony must be accompanied by ... some additional fact or facts from which the jury can reasonably conclude that the substance was on the floor long enough to have become discolored without assuming other facts, such as the substance, in its original condition, was not 'oily,' 'dirty' and 'dark' "); *Wilson-Greene v. City of Miami*, 208 So.3d 1271, 1273 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (reversing summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff, despite evidence that the soup upon which plaintiff slipped and fell was "not hot," because such evidence was insufficient to establish defendant's constructive notice without requiring the fact-finder to impermissibly stack inferences in order to conclude that the soup had been on the floor long enough to cool); *Wilson v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc.*, 559 So.2d 263 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) (holding jury may not speculate as to whether grocery store should have known about a dangerous condition where there was no evidence *546of how long the substance had been on the floor prior to the plaintiff's fall); *Publix Super Markets, Inc. v. Schmidt*, 509 So.2d 977 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987) (judgment in favor of plaintiff reversed when jury would have had to stack inferences to conclude that a dinner tray had been overfilled, causing gravy to spill on the floor, later causing plaintiff to slip).
##### Table of Contents



UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 Washington, D.C. 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 5, 2006
 VALLEY BANCORP
    (Commission File Number)
    
    (IRS Employer Identification No.)000-50950
    
    88-0493760
 1300 S. Jones Blvd., Las Vegas, Nevada 89146
 (702) 821-4100
   o
 o
 o
 o




---



TABLE OF CONTENTS  Item 7.01 Regulation FD DisclosureItem 9.01 Financial Statements and ExhibitsSIGNATURESEXHIBIT 99.1EXHIBIT 99.2    Table of Contents  
 Item 7.01 Regulation FD Disclosure
    
 Item 9.01 Financial Statements and Exhibits
   99.1
    
    Press Release dated May 5, 2006 announcing Bancorps
participation in the conference.99.2
    
    Copy of the slide presentation.




---



##### Table of Contents



SIGNATURES
  Dated: May 5, 2006VALLEY BANCORPBy
    
    /s/ Barry L. HulinBarry L. HulinPresident and Chief Executive Officer
Jarvis HARMON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-2466

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed November 6, 2018 Rehearing Denied December 31, 2018

Jarvis Harmon, Perry, pro se.

No Appearance for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

EVANDER, LAMBERT and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Geology General

Filters

              - products_maps(2)
              - (-)products_publications(3)
              - multimedia_video(3)
              - multimedia_video-149194(1)
              - multimedia_video-149195(1)
              - multimedia_video-149197(1)

## By Location

              - alabama(8)
              - alaska(43)
              - arizona(13)
              - arkansas(3)
              - california(45)
              - colorado(19)
              - connecticut(4)
              - district of columbia(1)
              - florida(7)
              - georgia(6)
              - guam(2)
              - hawaii(7)
              - idaho(11)
              - illinois(3)
              - indiana(5)
              - iowa(6)
              - kansas(1)
              - kentucky(5)
              - louisiana(2)
              - (-)maine(3)
              - maryland(3)
              - massachusetts(7)
              - michigan(7)
              - minnesota(2)
              - mississippi(6)
              - missouri(4)
              - montana(13)
              - nebraska(4)
              - nevada(14)
              - new hampshire(3)
              - new jersey(4)
              - new mexico(9)
              - new york(4)
              - north carolina(6)
              - north dakota(7)
              - ohio(1)
              - oklahoma(3)
              - oregon(8)
              - pennsylvania(7)
              - puerto rico(3)
              - rhode island(3)
              - south carolina(5)
              - south dakota(2)
              - tennessee(3)
              - texas(16)
              - u.s. virgin islands(1)
              - utah(25)
              - vermont(1)
              - virginia(4)
              - washington(11)
              - wisconsin(6)
              - wyoming(10)

## By Year

publication        March 23, 2016        Surface water-quality activities of the U.S. Geological Survey in New England

publication        March 19, 2012        Watershed scale response to climate change--Cathance Stream Basin, Maine

publication        January 1, 2002        Lithogeochemical character of near-surface bedrock in the New England coastal basins
Johnathan BERRY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-1861

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed October 24, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
##### 



Exhibit 31.1 CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Douglas W. Kohrs, certify that: 1.     I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of American Medical
Systems Holdings, Inc.; 2.      Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 3.      Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects
the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant
as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4.      The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:  (a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused
such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known
to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this report is being prepared;(b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions
about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,
as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such
evaluation; and(c)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrants internal control over financial reporting; and 5.      The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):  (a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal control over financial reporting
which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants
ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; and(b)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management
or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting. Date: March 17, 2004By:
    
    /s/ Douglas W. KohrsDouglas W. KohrsTitle:
    
    Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
##### 



EXHIBIT 99.9
  LETTER TO
    DTC PARTICIPANTS
    REGARDING THE OFFER TO EXCHANGEUnregistered
    93/4% Senior
    Notes Due 2011
    for
    93/4% Senior
    Notes Due 2011
    which have been registered under the Securities Act of 1933
    ofThe
    Majestic Star Casino, LLCandMajestic
    Star Casino Capital Corp. IIPursuant to the Prospectus
    dated          ,
    2006
   THE EXCHANGE OFFER WILL EXPIRE
    AT 5:00 P.M., NEW YORK CITY TIME,
    ON          ,
    2006, UNLESS EXTENDED (SUCH TIME AND DATE, AS THE SAME MAY BE
    EXTENDED FROM TIME TO TIME, THE EXPIRATION DATE).
    TENDERS MAY BE WITHDRAWN AT ANY TIME PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION
    DATE.
        3 4 3 4




---



##### 



Form W-9
    PLEASE NOTE THAT THE EXCHANGE OFFER WILL EXPIRE AT
    5:00 P.M., NEW YORK CITY TIME,
    ON          ,
    2006, UNLESS EXTENDED BY THE ISSUERS. WE URGE YOU TO CONTACT
    YOUR CLIENTS AS PROMPTLY AS POSSIBLE.
      
  THE MAJESTIC STAR CASINO, LLC
  MAJESTIC STAR CASINO CAPITAL CORP. II
    NOTHING HEREIN OR IN THE ENCLOSED DOCUMENTS SHALL CONSTITUTE
    YOU OR ANY PERSON AS AN AGENT OF THE ISSUERS OR THE EXCHANGE
    AGENT, OR AUTHORIZE YOU OR ANY OTHER PERSON TO MAKE ANY
    STATEMENTS ON BEHALF OF EITHER OF THEM WITH RESPECT TO THE
    EXCHANGE OFFER, EXCEPT FOR STATEMENTS EXPRESSLY MADE IN THE
    PROSPECTUS AND THE LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL.
 2
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

                         Consent of Independent Auditors


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 No. 333-43536 and 333-75314) pertaining to the Employee Stock Purchase
Plan and 2000 Equity Incentive Plan of our report dated January 25, 2002, with
respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of American
Medical Systems Holdings, Inc. included in its Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the
year ended December 29, 2001.

Our audits also included the financial statement schedule of American Medical
Systems Holdings, Inc. included in Item 14(a). This schedule is the
responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion based on our audits. In our opinion, the financial statement schedule
referred to above, when considered in relation to the basic financial statements
taken as a whole, presents fairly in all material respects the information set
forth therein.

Minneapolis, Minnesota                                    /s/ Ernst & Young LLP
March 26, 2002