alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.2 (1)

     Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

      Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss. 1350 as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  the  undersigned  officer  of  Systems  Management
Solutions, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the "Company"), hereby certifies that:

      To my knowledge,  the  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for
the  quarter  ended  March  31,  2005 (the  "Report")  fully  complies  with the
requirements  of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange Act of 1934
and that information  contained in the Report fairly  presents,  in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: June 7, 2005


                                       BY: /s/ Morris Kunofsky
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           MORRIS KUNOFSKY
                                           CHIEF  FINANCIAL OFFICER
Ricardo DUNCAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-0334

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

January 7, 2019

Ricardo Duncan, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Steven E. Woods, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED.

Wetherell, Bilbrey, and M.K. Thomas, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

                             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 Annual Report of WGNB Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-K
for the year ending December 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Steven J. Haack, Treasurer 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 4, 2004

     /s/ Steven J. Haack
----------------------------------
Steven J. Haack
Treasurer
(Principal Financial Officer)
Hugh Oscar KUNSELMAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-153

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed June 29, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
##### 



UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
  FORM 8-K
 CURRENT REPORT
 Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
  VALLEY BANCORP
    (Commission File Number)000-50950
    
    (IRS Employer Identification No.)88-0493760
 1300 South Jones Blvd., Las Vegas, Nevada 89146
 (702) 821-4100
  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 of (17 CFR
240.14d-2(b))
 o
    
    Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act of (17 CFR
240.13e-4(c))




---



##### 



Item 2.02 Results of Operations and Financial Condition
   Item 9.01 Financial Statements and Exhibits




---



##### 



SIGNATURES
   VALLEY BANCORPBy     /s/ Barry L. HulinBarry L. HulinPresident and Chief Executive Officer
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Geology General

Filters

              - multimedia_image(6)
              - multimedia_image-141771(6)

## By Location

              - (-)alaska(6)
              - colorado(1)
              - minnesota(1)

## By Year

              - 2024(1)
              - (-)2022(6)

Photography  Geologic Studies on Sitkinak Island, Alaska

Photography  Geologic Studies on Sitkinak Island, Alaska

Photography  Geologic Studies on Sitkinak Island, Alaska

Photography  Geologic Studies on Sitkinak Island, Alaska

Photography  Geologic Studies on Sitkinak Island, Alaska

Photography  Geologic Studies on Sitkinak Island, Alaska
Matthew L. FAISON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Verell Martin, et al., Appellees.

No. 1D18-3354

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

December 14, 2018 Rehearing Denied January 29, 2019

Matthew L. Faison, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Leslie A. Healer, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellees.

Per Curiam.

Appellant's motion, filed on November 6, 2018, is treated as a response to the Court's order of October 26, 2018. Upon consideration of the response, the Court has determined that the order denying Appellant's motion to alter or amend judgment is not an appealable order. Fla. R. App. P. 9.130(a)(4). To the extent that Appellant may be seeking review of the underlying Order of Dismissal, the appeal is untimely. Fla. R. App. P. 9.020(i) ; *see**Pennington v. Waldheim* , 669 So.2d 1158, 1160 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996).

DISMISSED .

Wolf, Kelsey, and M.K. Thomas, JJ., concur.
John Walton Alexander

Appellant

Vs. No. 11-84-263-CR

State of Texas

Appellee

laEBM@iR>gMq

llth Court of Appeals

Eastland, Texas

Opinion

— Appeal from Erath County

ON REMAND

The jury convicted John Walton Alexander of aggravated sexual assault of a child

[TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. sec. 22.021 (Vernon Supp. 1988)] and assessed his punishment at

confinement for 75 years and a fine of $10,000. The facts are set forth in this Court's

original opinion dated May 30, 1985 [692 S.W.2d 563] and in the Court of Criminal

Appeals opinion dated June 29, 1988 [753 S.W.2d 401].

The trial court and this Court relied upon the holdings in McDonald v. State,

513 S.W.2d 44 (Tex.Cr.App.1974), and Johnston v. State, 418 S.W.2d 522 (Tex.Cr.App.

1967), in overruling appellant's objection to proof before the jury of an extraneous

sexual offense involving another small child. McDonald and Johnston were subsequently

overruled in Boutwell v. State, 719 S.W.2d 164 at 179 (Tex.Cr.App.1985), and the Court

of Criminal Appeals vacated the judgment of this Court and remanded the cause for this

Court to determine whether the trial court erred in permitting proof of the extraneous

offense and whether this was harmful to appellant under TEX.R.APP.P. 81(b)(2).

Under Boutwell we find error, and we are unable [under Rule 81(b)(2)] to

determine "beyond a reasonable doubt that the error made no contribution to the
conviction or to the punishment." See also Turner v. State, 754 S.W.2d 668 (Tex.

Cr.App.1988).

The judgment of the trial court is reversed, and the cause is remanded.

PER CURIAM

October 6, 1988

Do not publish. See TEX.R.APP.P. 90.
S.H., Mother of A.B., a Child, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-3555

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Opinion filed February 14, 2019

Elliott R. Ambrose, of Law Office of E.R. Ambrose, Brooksville, for Appellant.

Kelley Schaeffer, of Children's Legal Services, Bradenton, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We have carefully reviewed the record and conclude that clear and convincing evidence supports the trial court's ruling that the termination of Mother's parental rights is in A.B.'s manifest best interest and is *307the least restrictive means for protecting A.B.

AFFIRMED.

COHEN, GROSSHANS, and SASSO, JJ., concur.
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 249 (Monday, December 30, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 106514]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-31298]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2024-N-0846]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of Office 
of Management and Budget Approval; National Agriculture and Food 
Defense Strategy Survey

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing 
that a collection of information entitled ``National Agriculture and 
Food Defense Strategy Survey'' has been approved by the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 
(PRA).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amber Sanford, Office of Operations, 
Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601 
Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852, 301-796-8867, 
PR[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 15, 2024, the Agency submitted a 
proposed collection of information entitled ``National Agriculture and 
Food Defense Strategy Survey'' to OMB for review and clearance under 44 
U.S.C. 3507. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays 
a currently valid OMB control number. OMB has now approved the 
information collection and has assigned OMB control number 0910-0855. 
The approval expires on November 30, 2027. A copy of the supporting 
statement for this information collection is available on the internet 
at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.

    Dated: December 16, 2024.
P. Ritu Nalubola,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2024-31298 Filed 12-27-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
```
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION

File Name: 05a0906n.06

Filed: November 17, 2005

No. 04-2423

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

LARRY TAYLOR,

Petitioner-Appellant,

v.

CAROLE HOWES,

Respondent-Appellee.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED

STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

Before: MARTIN, NELSON and ROGERS, Circuit Judges.

ROGERS, Circuit Judge. Larry Taylor appeals the district court’s denial of his writ of

habeas corpus. After reviewing the record, the parties’ briefs, and the applicable law, this court

determines that no jurisprudential purpose would be served by a panel opinion and affirms the lower

court’s decision for the reasons stated in Part IV of Magistrate Judge Whalen’s recommendation,

as adopted by Judge Tarnow’s October 22, 2004 order. The district court properly denied the writ

of habeas corpus. Its judgment is therefore AFFIRMED.
Arlister S. RUSH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-2307

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[November 21, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32(B)
 Section 1350 Certification
By Principal Financial Officer
    /s/ Craig R. JonesCraig R. JonesChief Financial Officer
Richard EHRET, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-3669

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

January 22, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
CITY OF MORGAN CITY v. Tager ROSSON

No. 2017-KP-1260

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

December 3, 2018

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE CITY COURT OF MORGAN CITY, PARISH OF ST. MARY**

Writ denied.

HUGHES, J., additionally concurs and assigns reasons.

I respectfully concur with the denial of the application as moot given that relator has undoubtedly served his six-month misdemeanor sentence by now.

However, I find the conduct of the city court judge disturbing.

The city court's sentence appears to have been indeterminate because of its attempt to suspend the execution of sentence by retaining jurisdiction over it until after relator's Assumption Parish proceedings had been completed. Under the language of Article 894(A)(1), the city court *1252did not have the authority to suspend the execution of relator's simple battery sentence without also placing him on probation. Without this grant of probation, the city court sentence likely should have begun to run on the day following its imposition. Therefore, relator appears to have presented a meritorious claim of illegality.

Just as the judge in the 23rd Judicial District cannot tell the city court judge what his sentence is going to be, the city court judge has no authority over the district judge. He cannot "wait and see" in order to modify his sentence if he doesn't like the district court's sentence.

Counsel's objections were well taken. Hopefully this scenario will not come again to the attention of this court.
Michael GALLUCCIO, Appellant, v. COUNCIL ON AGING OF ST. LUCIE, INC., Appellee.

No. 4D18-3005

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[February 27, 2019]

Michael Galluccio, Stuart, pro se.

No brief filed for appellee.

Per Curiam.

*Affirmed* . *See* Fla. R. App. P. 9.315(a).

Gross, May and Damoorgian, JJ., concur.
Darrel Earl DAISE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-1598

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 8, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Exhibit 13.2

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 on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012, of Grupo Financiero Galicia S.A. (the Company) as filed with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission (the Commission) on the date hereof (the Report) and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, José Luis Gentile, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify 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 Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: April 29, 2013



/s/ José Luis GentileJosé Luis Gentile
(principal financial officer) Chief Financial
Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Grupo Financiero Galicia S.A. and will be retained by Grupo Financiero Galicia S.A. and furnished to the Commission or its staff upon request.
Jason JOSEPH and Kristina Joseph, Appellants, v. U.S. ROF III LEGAL TRUST 2015-1, BY U.S. BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Legal Trustee, Appellee.

No. 4D18-380

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[January 31, 2019]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Floods

Filters

              - science_science(19)
              - products_data(1)
              - (-)products_maps(1)
              - products_publications(59)
              - products_web_tools(3)
              - multimedia_audio(1)
              - multimedia_audio-141767(1)
              - multimedia_image(5)
              - multimedia_image-141771(3)
              - multimedia_image-141775(2)
              - multimedia_video(5)
              - multimedia_video-149194(1)
              - multimedia_video-149195(3)
              - multimedia_video-149225(1)
              - multimedia_webcam(10)
              - multimedia_webcam-141785(10)
              - news_news-149245(5)
              - news_news-149248(3)
              - news_news-149250(4)

## By Location

              - alabama(1)
              - arizona(2)
              - arkansas(2)
              - california(1)
              - colorado(4)
              - connecticut(1)
              - georgia(5)
              - illinois(2)
              - indiana(12)
              - iowa(2)
              - kentucky(2)
              - michigan(1)
              - mississippi(2)
              - missouri(3)
              - new hampshire(1)
              - new jersey(3)
              - new york(1)
              - pennsylvania(1)
              - (-)south carolina(1)
              - texas(1)
              - utah(4)
              - wisconsin(1)

## By Year

map        March 11, 2013        Flood-inundation maps for the Saluda River from Old Easley Bridge Road to Saluda Lake Dam near Greenville, South Carolina
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 12**  **- 6308** 

ERNEST DWIGHT PERRY , Petitioner

- Appellant ,
v. WARDEN BROAD RIVER CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION , Respondent

– Appellee, and STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Respondent.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Orangeburg
. Timothy M. Cain , District Judge. ( 5:10

- cv - 02346

- TMC )

Submitted : June 19, 2012 Decided: August 7, 2012

Before WYNN and DIAZ , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge
.
Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Ernest Dwight Perry, Appellant Pro Se. Brendan McDonald, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.2 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.3 PER CURIAM: Ernest Dwight Perry seeks to appeal the district
court ’ s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The orde r is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1) (A) (2006) . A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “ a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. ” 28 U .S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006)
. When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Perry has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal4 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSE D
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 Camelot Entertainment Group, Inc.
(“Camelot”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2008 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
I, Robert P. Atwell, President and Chief Executive Officer of Camelot
Entertainment Group, Inc. and a member of the Board of Directors, certify,
pursuant to s.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 represents, the financial
condition and result of operations of Camelot Entertainment Group,
Inc..









May 15,
2008




/s/ Robert P. Atwell


Robert P.
Atwell


Chief
Executive Officer
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Geology General

Filters

              - (-)connect_staff_profiles(2)

## By Location

              - massachusetts(1)

## By Year

              - 2024(2)
              - (-)2023(2)
              - 2022(2)

staff profileMichael Pribil

staff profileClaudia Flores
Jasson A. YOUNG, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-3191

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

January 22, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 246 (Monday, December 23, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 104554]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-30562]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health

National Institute on Aging; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Aging Special Emphasis 
Panel; SWAN.
    Date: February 28, 2025.
    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Address: National Institute on Aging, 5601 Fishers Lane, Suite 
8B, Rockville, MD 20892.
    Meeting Format: Virtual Meeting.
    Contact Person: Rajasri Roy, Ph.D., MPH, Scientific Review 
Officer, National Institute of Aging, National Institute of Health, 
5601 Fishers Lane, Room 100, Rockville, MD 20852, (301) 496-9666, 
[email protected].

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.866, Aging 
Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: December 17, 2024.
Miguelina Perez,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2024-30562 Filed 12-20-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
```
Erik Deshawn BENSTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-5167

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

January 7, 2019

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Kevin Steiger, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED.

Lewis, Ray, and M.K. Thomas, JJ., concur.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-7793
JOSEPH E. LOUIS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus EARL D. BESHEARS, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND, Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge. (CA-96-1426-JFM) Submitted: February 13, 1997 Decided: February 27, 1997 Before WIDENER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.Joseph E. Louis, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Ann Norman Bosse, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1994), amended by Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104- 132, 110 Stat. 1214. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no revers ible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Louis v. Beshears , No. CA-96-1426- JFM (D. Md. Sept. 30, 1996). We dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED