alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Proguard Acquisition Corp.
(the "Company"), on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2006
(the ?Report?), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof, I, Frank Bauer, Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant
to the Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     1.   the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the three
months ended March 31, 2006 (the "Report") fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended

     2.  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.

                                 /s/ Frank Bauer
                                 ----------------------
                                 Frank Bauer
                                 Chief Executive Officer

November 13, 2006




                             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 Proguard Acquisition Corp.
(the "Company"), on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2006
(the ?Report?), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof, I, Norman Becker, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant
to the Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     1.   the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the three
months ended March 31, 2006 (the "Report") fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended

     2.  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.


                                 /s/ Norman Becker
                                 ----------------------
                                 Norman Becker
                                 Chief Financial Officer

November 13, 2006
Case 2:05-cv-00235-J-BB Document 19 Filed 08/18/15 Page 1 of 2 PageID 65
 

 Case 2:05-cv-00235-J-BB Document 19 Filed 08/18/15 Page 2 of 2 PageID 66
IN RE: COMMITTEE ON BAR ADMISSIONS CFN-517749

NO. 2019-BA-0502

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 24, 2019

BAR ADMISSIONS PROCEEDING

PER CURIAM

After reviewing the evidence and considering the law, we conclude petitioner is immediately eligible to be conditionally admitted to the practice of law in Louisiana, subject to the following conditions:

> 1. Petitioner shall continue to comply with the terms of the recovery agreement he signed with the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program ("JLAP") on February 26, 2019.

> 2. The period of this conditional admission shall coincide with the period of petitioner's JLAP agreement. However, petitioner's conditional admission status shall not be terminated until this court so orders.

> 3. Petitioner shall authorize the Executive Director of JLAP to report any violations of the JLAP agreement to the Office of Disciplinary Counsel ("ODC").

> 4. Upon the expiration of the term of petitioner's JLAP agreement, the Executive Director of JLAP shall forward to the ODC (a) a final report of petitioner's progress and participation in JLAP, and (b) a recommendation regarding the need for petitioner's continued participation in JLAP.

> 5. Following receipt of the report from JLAP, the ODC shall file a report in this court in which it shall recommend whether the conditional admission shall be allowed to terminate or shall be extended.

> 6. Petitioner shall cooperate with JLAP and the ODC, and shall comply with any and all requirements imposed upon him by JLAP and the ODC.

Should petitioner fail to make a good faith effort to satisfy these conditions, or should he commit any misconduct during the period of probation, his conditional right to practice may be terminated or he may be subjected to other discipline pursuant to the Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement.

**CONDITIONAL ADMISSION GRANTED.**
EXHIBIT 32.1

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

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

 

I, Cary M. Grossman, Chief Executive Officer of Coastal Bancshares Acquisition Corp. (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: 

 

| **•** | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, 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 |
|------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| **•** | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

Date: November 14, 2006

 

/s/ Cary M. Grossman

Cary M. Grossman

Chief Executive Officer

(Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer)
Case 3:05-cr-00075-N Document 390 Filed 03/13/06 Page 1 of 1 PageID 699
# C_2018408EN.01003401.xml

| 12.11.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 408/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.11.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 408/34

---

Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 12 September 2018 — Holistic Innovation Institute, SLU v Research Executive Agency

(Case C-241/17 P) (1)

((Appeal - Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Projects financed by the European Union in the area of research - Seventh Framework programme for research and technological development (2007-2013) - Inachus and ZONeSEC projects - Decision not to allow the appellant to take part - Action for annulment and declaration of liability))

(2018/C 408/44)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Appellant: Holistic Innovation Institute, SLU (represented by: J.J. Marín López, abogado)

Other party to the proceedings: Research Executive Agency (represented by: S. Payan-Lagrou, V. Canetti, acting as Agents, and J. Rivas Andrés, abogado)

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The appeal is dismissed as being, in part, manifestly inadmissible and, in part, manifestly unfounded. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The appeal is dismissed as being, in part, manifestly inadmissible and, in part, manifestly unfounded.

| 2. | Holistic Innovation Institute SLU shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Holistic Innovation Institute SLU shall pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 221, 10.7.2017.

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

TERRENCE THION COLER, )

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) No. 3:05-CV-878-D

)

TIFFANY L. LEWIS. )

Defendant. )

ORDER

After conducting a de novo review, the Court finds that the Findings, Conclusions and

Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and they are adopted as the findings and

conclusions of the Court.

Signed August 4, 2005.

_________________________________

SIDNEY A. FITZWATER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 Case 3:05-cv-00878-D Document 7 Filed 08/04/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 25
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

MARTY LANE DUE )

)

v. ) 3:05-CV-853-P

)

DAN JOSLIN )

ORDER

After making the review required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), the Court finds that the

Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and they are

adopted as the findings and conclusions of the Court.

Signed this 11 day of October 2005. th

_________________________________

JORGE A. SOLIS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 Case 3:05-cv-00853-P Document 6 Filed 10/11/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 49
STATE of Louisiana v. Karl DAVIS

No. 2018-KH-1154

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 6, 2019

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF ORLEANS**

PER CURIAM:

Denied; moot. The district court has acted. *See* Dist. Ct. Ruling, 9/28/18 (Landrum-Johnson, J.).

*694Though this court originally had exclusive appellate jurisdiction over defendant's pre-1982 felony conviction and sentence, *see* La. Const. art. V, § 5 (E), following his resentencing in 2016, pursuant to La.C.Cr.P. art. 878.1 and *State v. Montgomery* , 13-1163 (La. 6/28/16), 194 So.3d 606, appellate jurisdiction is now vested in the intermediate court of appeal. *See* La. Const. art. V, § 10 (A) (eff. July 1, 1982, "[A] court of appeal has appellate jurisdiction of ... all criminal cases triable by a jury," except when a law has been declared unconstitutional or when the death penalty has been imposed).

Thus, to the extent that defendant desires to seek review of his new judgment of sentence, the law envisions him pursuing an appeal (or an out-of-time appeal) before filing in this court. *See* La.C.Cr.P. art. 912(C)(1) ; *cf.**State v. Counterman* , 475 So.2d 336, 339 (La. 1985) (acknowledging "constitutional right to appeal (or to other review on the record) in criminal cases in Louisiana when the defendant is to be subjected to imprisonment or fine" under La. Const. art. I, § 19 ).
EX PARTE Robert W. KELLEY

CR-17-0217

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 20, 2017

Mand. pet. denied.
**EXHIBIT 15.2**

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

The Supervisory Board 

ING Groep N.V.: 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-92220,333-81564,333-108833,333-125075,333-137354,333-149631,333-158154,333-158155,333-165591,333-168020,333-172919,333-172920,333-172921 and 333-215535) and in the registration statement on Form F-3 (No. 333-202880)of ING Groep N.V. of our reports dated March 13, 2017, with respect to the consolidated statement of financial position of ING Groep N.V. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2016, and the related consolidated statements of profit and loss,comprehensive income, cash flows and changes in equity for the year ended December 31, 2016, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2016, which reports appear in the December 31, 2016annual report on Form 20-F of ING Groep N.V. 

Our report refers to a change in accounting and changes inpresentation, and to our audit of the adjustments that were applied to reflect such changes in the 2015 and 2014 consolidated financial statements, as more fully described in Note 1a and 1b to the consolidated financial statements. However, wewere not engaged to audit, review, or apply any procedures to the 2015 and 2014 consolidated financial statements other than with respect to such adjustments. 

/s/ KPMG Accountants N.V. 

Amstelveen, theNetherlands 

March 16, 2017
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

CARNELL CORNELIUS ROLLINS, §

 §

Plaintiff, §

 § Civil Action No. 3:05-CV-1207-D

VS. §

 §

BRYAN COLLIER, Director, Board of §

Pardons and Paroles, § 

 §

Defendant. §

ORDER

I

After making an independent review of the pleadings, files, and records in this case, and the

conclusions and recommendation of the magistrate judge, the court concludes that the conclusions

and recommendation are correct and are therefore adopted.

Accordingly, defendant Bryan Collier’s August 10, 2005 motion to dismiss is granted, and

plaintiff’s action against him is dismissed with prejudice.

II

In his conclusions and recommendation, the magistrate judge notes that plaintiff added as

defendants in his third amended petition defendant Bryan Collier’s successors in office and present

officials in their official and individual capacities who participated in labeling, classifying,

supervising, and publishing the false information. The magistrate judge excludes these parties from

his recommended dismissal. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b), the court directs that plaintiff identify

these persons no later than January 5, 2006 by filing an amended complaint that states their names.

If he fails without good cause to do so, the court will dismiss this action without prejudice as to any

such persons who remain unnamed.

 

 Case 3:05-cv-01207-D Document 41 Filed 12/05/05 Page 1 of 2 PageID 145
- - 2

SO ORDERED.

December 5, 2005.

_________________________________

SIDNEY A. FITZWATER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 

 Case 3:05-cv-01207-D Document 41 Filed 12/05/05 Page 2 of 2 PageID 146
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 3 (Monday, January 6, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 739-741]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-31655]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Foreign Assets Control

Notice of OFAC Sanctions Action

AGENCY: Office of Foreign Assets Control, Treasury.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets 
Control (OFAC) is publishing the names of one or more persons that have 
been placed on OFAC's Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked 
Persons List (SDN List) based on OFAC's determination that one or more 
applicable legal criteria were satisfied. All property and interests in 
property subject to U.S. jurisdiction of these persons are blocked, and 
U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions 
with them.

DATES: This action was issued on December 31, 2024. See SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION for relevant dates.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: OFAC: Associate Director for Global 
Targeting, 202-622-2420; Assistant Director for Sanctions Compliance, 
202-622-2490 or https://ofac.treasury.gov/contact-ofac.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Electronic Availability

    The SDN List and additional information concerning OFAC sanctions 
programs are available on OFAC's website: https://ofac.treasury.gov.

Notice of OFAC Action

    On December 31, 2024, OFAC determined that the property and 
interests in property subject to U.S. jurisdiction of the following 
persons are blocked under the relevant sanctions authorities listed 
below.
BILLING CODE 4810-AL-P

[[Page 740]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN06JA25.006

[[Page 741]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN06JA25.007

Lawrence M. Scheinert,
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Foreign Assets Control.
[FR Doc. 2024-31655 Filed 1-3-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-AL-C
```
Christopher Curtis MANLEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-2272

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed May 1, 2019

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and James Dickson Crock, Special Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Cerese Crawford Taylor, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

*276In 2014, the State charged Christopher Curtis Manley with one count of second-degree murder with a firearm and two counts of aggravated battery with a firearm. Manley unsuccessfully moved to dismiss the information, claiming immunity from prosecution under Florida's Stand Your Ground law, section 776.032, Florida Statutes (2013). He was tried before a jury in 2016 and found guilty of all three charges. Manley has appealed the resulting judgment and sentences, arguing among other things that the 2017 amendment to section 776.032, *see* ch. 2017-72, § 1, Laws of Fla., applies retroactively to pending cases and that therefore the trial court should reconsider his immunity claim in light of that amendment.

In *Martin v. State*, 43 Fla. L. Weekly D1016, D1017, --- So.3d ----, ----, 2018 WL 2074171 (Fla. 2d DCA May 4, 2018), *review pending*, No. SC18-789, this court held that the 2017 amendment to section 776.032 applies retroactively to pending cases. *See also* *Drossos v. State*, 43 Fla. L. Weekly D2764, --- So.3d ---- (Fla. 2d DCA Dec.14, 2018), *review pending*, No. SC19-83. As we did in *Martin*, here we reverse Manley's judgment and sentences and remand for a new immunity hearing under the 2017 statute. If, following the hearing, the trial court determines that Manley is entitled to statutory immunity, it shall enter an order to that effect and dismiss the information with prejudice. *See* *Martin*, --- So.3d at ----, 43 Fla. L. Weekly at D1018. If the court determines that Manley is not entitled to immunity, it shall enter an order so reflecting and reinstate Manley's conviction and sentences. *See* *id.* We find no merit to the other issues raised in Manley's appeal.

The Third and Fourth District Courts of Appeal have held that section 776.032, as amended, does not apply retroactively to pending cases. Accordingly, we certify that this decision is in direct conflict with *Hight v. State*, 253 So.3d 1137 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018), *review pending*, No. SC18-1653, and *Love v. State*, 247 So.3d 609 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018), *review granted*, No. SC18-747, 2018 WL 3147946 (Fla. June 26, 2018).

Reversed and remanded with instructions; conflict certified.

NORTHCUTT, SLEET, and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur.
Case 3:05-cr-00158-M Document 123 Filed 04/23/20 Page 1 of 2 PageID 793Case 3:05-cr-00158-M Document 123 Filed 04/23/20 Page 2 of 2 PageID 794
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 this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Language Line Holdings, Inc. (the Company) for the
quarter ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael Schmidt, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



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



|(iv) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Language Line Holdings, Inc.
|---- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: September 13, 2007



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ Michael Schmidt                  
|Michael Schmidt                      
|Chief Financial Officer and Secretary

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being
filed as part of this Report.
# C_2018094EN.01000801.xml

| 12.3.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 94/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.3.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 94/8

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo (Portugal) lodged on 11 December 2017 — Paulo Nascimento Consulting — Mediação Imobiliária Lda v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

(Case C-692/17)

(2018/C 094/10)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Referring court

Supremo Tribunal Administrativo

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Paulo Nascimento Consulting — Mediação Imobiliária Lda

Applicant:

Defendant: Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

For the purposes of application of the exemption provided for in Article 135(1)(b) of the VAT Directive (1), do the terms ‘granting’, ‘negotiation’ and ‘management of credit’ encompass the assignment for consideration to a third party of the positon held by a taxable person liable for VAT in enforcement proceedings for recovery of a debt, recognised by a judgment and resulting from the breach of a property agency agreement, plus VAT at the rate in force on the date of payment and the default interest already accrued or which may accrue until full payment?

1

---

(1)  Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax

1

OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1.

---
Case 3:04-cv-01861-B Document 20 Filed 11/04/04 Page 1 of 25 PageID 151
Case 3:04-cv-01861-B Document 20 Filed 11/04/04 Page 2 of 25 PageID 152
Case 3:04-cv-01861-B Document 20 Filed 11/04/04 Page 3 of 25 PageID 153
Case 3:04-cv-01861-B Document 20 Filed 11/04/04 Page 4 of 25 PageID 154
Case 3:04-cv-01861-B Document 20 Filed 11/04/04 Page 5 of 25 PageID 155
Case 3:04-cv-01861-B Document 20 Filed 11/04/04 Page 6 of 25 PageID 156
Case 3:04-cv-01861-B Document 20 Filed 11/04/04 Page 7 of 25 PageID 157
Case 3:04-cv-01861-B Document 20 Filed 11/04/04 Page 8 of 25 PageID 158
Case 3:04-cv-01861-B Document 20 Filed 11/04/04 Page 9 of 25 PageID 159
Case 3:04-cv-01861-B Document 20 Filed 11/04/04 Page 10 of 25 PageID 160
Case 3:04-cv-01861-B Document 20 Filed 11/04/04 Page 11 of 25 PageID 161
Case 3:04-cv-01861-B Document 20 Filed 11/04/04 Page 12 of 25 PageID 162
Case 3:04-cv-01861-B Document 20 Filed 11/04/04 Page 13 of 25 PageID 163
Case 3:04-cv-01861-B Document 20 Filed 11/04/04 Page 14 of 25 PageID 164
Case 3:04-cv-01861-B Document 20 Filed 11/04/04 Page 15 of 25 PageID 165
Case 3:04-cv-01861-B Document 20 Filed 11/04/04 Page 16 of 25 PageID 166
Case 3:04-cv-01861-B Document 20 Filed 11/04/04 Page 17 of 25 PageID 167
Case 3:04-cv-01861-B Document 20 Filed 11/04/04 Page 18 of 25 PageID 168
Case 3:04-cv-01861-B Document 20 Filed 11/04/04 Page 19 of 25 PageID 169
Case 3:04-cv-01861-B Document 20 Filed 11/04/04 Page 20 of 25 PageID 170
Case 3:04-cv-01861-B Document 20 Filed 11/04/04 Page 21 of 25 PageID 171
Case 3:04-cv-01861-B Document 20 Filed 11/04/04 Page 22 of 25 PageID 172
Case 3:04-cv-01861-B Document 20 Filed 11/04/04 Page 23 of 25 PageID 173
Case 3:04-cv-01861-B Document 20 Filed 11/04/04 Page 24 of 25 PageID 174
Case 3:04-cv-01861-B Document 20 Filed 11/04/04 Page 25 of 25 PageID 175
Barbara Ann ROBERTS v. STATE

CR-16-0404

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 8, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Case 2:05-cv-00083-J Document 6 Filed 07/05/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 19