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 this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Language Line Holdings, Inc. (the Company) for the
quarter ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Dennis G. Dracup, Chief Executive 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:



|(i) | 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
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(ii) | 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: May 12, 2008



/s/ Dennis G. DracupDennis G. DracupChief Executive Officer and Director(Principal Executive Officer)


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.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

LUBBOCK DIVISION

LORI P. PEPPERS, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, )

Commissioner of Social Security, )

) Civil Action No. 5:05-CV-157-C

Defendant. ) ECF

ORDER

Plaintiff is appealing an adverse decision of the Defendant, Jo Anne B. Barnhart,

Commissioner of Social Security, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The United States Magistrate

Judge filed her Report and Recommendation on March 22, 2006. No written objections have

been filed. It is, therefore,

ORDERED that the findings and conclusions in the Report and Recommendation are

hereby ADOPTED as the findings and conclusions of the Court and that the above-styled and

-numbered cause is hereby reversed and remanded to the Commissioner for further proceedings.

Dated this 19th day of April, 2006.

_________________________________

SAM R. CUMMINGS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 

 Case 5:05-cv-00157-C-BG Document 15 Filed 04/19/06 Page 1 of 1 PageID 64
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

CHRISTINE M. SCULLY, §

Plaintiff, §

§

v. § Civil Action No. 3:05-CV-0574-B

§ ECF

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, §

COMMISSIONER OF THE SOCIAL §

SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, §

Defendant. §

Findings and Recommendation

The District Court previously referred Plaintiff’s Application for Attorney’s Fees Pursuant

to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412 to this Court for findings and recommendation.

The matter now comes before this Court on Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion to Lift the Stay on

Plaintiff’s Application for Attorney’s Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C.

§ 2412 (Doc. No. 37). Plaintiff requests that the stay on her EAJA application be lifted and that she

be awarded attorney’s fees in the amount of $5,913.54 for attorney hours and paralegal hours.

After consideration of the record, the Court recommends that the stay be lifted, that

Defendant’s position was not substantially justified, that Plaintiff is entitled to fees under the Equal

Access to Justice Act, and that the requested attorney fees are reasonable. Therefore, the Court

hereby recommends that the District Court:

Lift the stay on the application for EAJA fees and award to Plaintiff attorney’s fees under

the Equal Access to Justice Act in the amount of $5,913.54. This amount should be made payable

directly to Plaintiff’s attorneys, Troutman & Troutman, P.C., Tax ID No. 73-1487089, who will

reimburse Plaintiff for the smaller of either the EAJA award or a subsequent award under 42 U.S.C.

 

 Case 3:05-cv-00574-B Document 39 Filed 02/20/07 Page 1 of 2 PageID 201
2

§ 406(b), should one ultimately be authorized, as required by law.

Recommended this 20th day of February, 2007.

_____________________________________

PAUL D. STICKNEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

 

 Case 3:05-cv-00574-B Document 39 Filed 02/20/07 Page 2 of 2 PageID 202
Case 3:05-cv-01445-R Document 13 Filed 12/20/05 Page 1 of 6 PageID 86
 

 Case 3:05-cv-01445-R Document 13 Filed 12/20/05 Page 2 of 6 PageID 87
 

 Case 3:05-cv-01445-R Document 13 Filed 12/20/05 Page 3 of 6 PageID 88
 

 Case 3:05-cv-01445-R Document 13 Filed 12/20/05 Page 4 of 6 PageID 89
 

 Case 3:05-cv-01445-R Document 13 Filed 12/20/05 Page 5 of 6 PageID 90
 

 Case 3:05-cv-01445-R Document 13 Filed 12/20/05 Page 6 of 6 PageID 91
Case 3:05-cv-00800 Document 20 Filed 05/19/2005 Page 1 of 3

GW Equity LLC et al v. PBS Global Inc et al Doc. 20

Dockets.Justia.com
Case 3:05-cv-00800 Document 20 Filed 05/19/2005 Page 2 of 3
Case 3:05-cv-00800 Document 20 Filed 05/19/2005 Page 3 of 3
EXHIBIT 31.2

         CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
         ---------------------------------------------------------------

     I, David F. Knapfel, hereby certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10Q-SB/A-1 of Sockeye
Seafood Group, Inc.

2. Based on my knowledge, the quarterly 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 the quarterly report.

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in the quarterly report, fairly present in all
material respects our financial condition, results of operations and
cash flows as of, and for, the periods presented in the quarterly report.

4. The other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing
and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) and we have:

a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
    material information relating to Sockeye Seafood Group, Inc.,
    including subsidiaries, if any, is made known to us by others within
    those entities, particularly during the period in which this
    quarterly report is being prepared;

b)  evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and
    procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the
    filing date of this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

c)  presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
    effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on
    our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5.  The other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to our auditors and the audit committee of our
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a)  that there were no significant deficiencies in the design or
    operation of internal controls which could adversely affect our
    ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data
    and have further advised our auditors that there we are not aware
    of any material weaknesses in our internal controls; and

b)  that there was no fraud, whether or not material, that involved
    our management or other employees who have a significant role in
    our internal controls; and

6.  The other certifying officers and I have indicated in this quarterly
that there were no significant changes in internal controls or in other
factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to
the date of our most recent evaluation.

                                   Sockeye Seafood Group, Inc., Registrant

Dated: July 25, 2005                /s/ David F. Knapfel
                                   ---------------------------------------
                                   By: David F. Knapfel, Chief Financial
                                   Officer and Principal Accounting Officer
# C_2017269EN.01001002.xml

| 14.8.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 269/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.8.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 269/10

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Varhoven kasatsionen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 6 June 2017 — Neli Valcheva v Georgios Babanarakis

(Case C-335/17)

(2017/C 269/15)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Referring court

Varhoven kasatsionen sad

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Neli Valcheva

Applicant:

Defendant: Georgios Babanarakis

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Is the concept of ‘rights of access’ used in Article 1(2)(a) and Article 2(10) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 (1) of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility to be interpreted as encompassing not only access between the parents and the child but also the child’s access to relatives other than the parents, that is to say the grandparents?

1

---

(1)  OJ 2003 L 338, p. 1.

1

---
**EXHIBIT 32.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

     **18 U.S.C. 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of DYNAMIC ALERT LIMITED (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Bradley Hawkings, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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: April 30, 2008

By: ***/s/ Bradley Hawkings***

Bradley Hawkings

Chief Financial Officer, principal financial officer and principal accounting officer

----
Rodney Devin ROTHSTEIN, M.D. v. MEDICAL LICENSURE COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF ALABAMA

2160828

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

December 15, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

DEDRIC SHUNTE BEAVER )

)

v. ) 3-05-CV-1343-D

)

DAN JOSLIN, Warden )

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.

SO ORDERED.

September 20, 2005.

_________________________________

SIDNEY A. FITZWATER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 Case 3:05-cv-01343-D Document 8 Filed 09/20/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 79
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0212

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

LOUIS TED CAYE,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including February 17, 2023, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

January 9 2023

01/09/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0212
BTXN 104b/105b (rev. 09/11)

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

In Re: §

§

§

§

Milan Sai Joint Venture, LLC Case No.: 24−33560−mvl11

 Chapter No.: 11

Debtor(s)

ORDER FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE

 The Court, having considered the Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice of David S. Catuogno, to represent

Super 8 Worldwide, Inc., related to document 31, ORDERS this application be:

 Granted − The Clerk of the District Court for the Northern District of Texas shall deposit the application fee to

the account of the Non−Appropriated Fund.

 Denied − The Clerk of the District Court for the Northern District of Texas shall return the admission fee to the

applicant.

# # # End of Order # # #

United States Bankruptcy Judge

______________________________________________________________________

Signed November 15, 2024

The following constitutes the ruling of the court and has the force and effect therein described.

Case 24-33560-mvl11 Doc 33 Filed 11/15/24 Entered 11/15/24 16:32:17 Desc

Page 1 of 1
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 21-2444

___________________________

Jamie L. Wright

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

v.

Kilolo Kijakazi,1 Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee

 ____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Western District of Arkansas - Hot Springs

 ____________

 Submitted: February 1, 2022

Filed: February 10, 2022

[Unpublished]

____________

Before GRUENDER, ERICKSON, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

1Kilolo Kijakazi has been appointed to serve as Acting Commissioner of Social

Security, and is substituted as appellee pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate

Procedure 43(c).
Jamie Wright appeals the district court’s2

 order affirming the denial of

disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. We find that the

Commissioner’s decision is supported by substantial evidence in the record as a

whole. See Twyford v. Comm’r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 929 F.3d 512, 516 (8th Cir. 2019)

(standard of review). Specifically, the evidence supports the administrative law

judge’s (ALJ’s) finding that Wright’s back impairment did not meet listing 1.04(A),

as he did not have the requisite positive straight-leg raise testing. See id. at 517

(substantial evidence supported determination that listing 1.04(A) was not met, as

claimant did not have objective finding required by listing). Further, the ALJ

properly evaluated Wright’s subjective complaints. See McDade v. Astrue, 720 F.3d

994, 998 (8th Cir. 2013) (no error in evaluating complaints of disabling pain where

medical evidence and claimant’s daily activities were not fully consistent with

complaints). Finally, the ALJ did not err in declining to include residual functional

capacity (RFC) limitations arising from Wright’s alleged mental conditions, see

McGeorge v. Barnhart, 321 F.3d 766, 769 (8th Cir. 2003) (ALJ properly limited RFC

to only impairments he found supported by record); Black v. Apfel, 143 F.3d 383,

386 (8th Cir. 1998) (ALJ correctly found that no objective medical findings supported

alleged mental condition); or arising from his alleged medication side effects, see

Zeiler v. Barnhart, 384 F.3d 932, 936 (8th Cir. 2004) (as record did not document

impaired concentration due to pain medication, RFC excluding such limitation was

supported by substantial evidence).

The judgment is affirmed.

______________________________

2The Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate Judge for the

Western District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by

consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

-2-
Exhibit 31.2



CERTIFICATIONS



I, Matthew T. Gibbs II, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of Language Line, 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 quarterly 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 officers 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 we 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 (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) 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 officers 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: May 12, 2005



|    |  |                                     
|--- |  | ------------------------------------
|By: |  | /s/ Matthew T. Gibbs II             
|    |  | Matthew T. Gibbs II                 
|    |  | Chief Financial Officer and Director



19
# C_2019025EN.01000601.xml

| 21.1.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 25/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.1.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 25/6

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 22 November 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the High Court of Justice (England & Wales), Queen’s Bench Division (Administrative Court) — United Kingdom) — Swedish Match AB v Secretary of State for Health

(Case C-151/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Approximation of laws - Manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco products - Directive 2014/40/EU - Article 1(c) and Article 17 - Prohibition on the placing on the market of tobacco products for oral use - Validity))

(2019/C 25/07)

Language of the case: English

Referring court

High Court of Justice (England & Wales), Queen’s Bench Division (Administrative Court)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Swedish Match AB

Defendant: Secretary of State for Health

Intervener: New Nicotine Alliance

Operative part of the judgment

Consideration of the question referred has disclosed nothing capable of affecting the validity of Article 1(c) and Article 17 of Directive 2014/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco and related products and repealing Directive 2001/37/EC.

---

(1)  OJ C 161, 22.5.2017.

---
---

Exhibit 32.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Sound Revolution
  Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended November 30,
  2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on January 14, 2005
  (the "Report"), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates
  indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
  pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his 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: January 14, 2005 | /s/ Heather Remillard                        | 
|----------------------- | -------------------------------------------- | 
|                        | Heather Remillard                            | 
|                        | President & Chief Executive Officer          | 
|                        |                                              | 
|Dated: January 14, 2005 | /s/ Penny Green                              | 
|                        | Penny Green                                  | 
|                        | Chairman, Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer | 

---
#### E. O. Carver et al., *Appellants,*v. City of Auburndale, a Municipal Corporation, *Appellee.*

Division B.

Decision Filed July 20, 1927.

*John S. Edwards*and *Walter J). Oakley,*for Appellants;

*Huffaker & Edwards,*for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the decree herein, and briefs and argument o£ counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said decree; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said decree of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.