alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER



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 MHI Hospitality Corporation (the Corporation) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30,
2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, William J. Zaiser, Chief Financial Officer of the Corporation, 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 result of operations of the Corporation.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: November 10, 2005



By:

/s/ William J. ZaiserName:

William J. ZaiserTitle:

Chief Financial Officer
# FCA

# Sheet3
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-1761

DAW MANG CINGH HUAI, Petitioner,

v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Submitted: July 14, 2009 Decided: August 20, 2009

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Daw Mang Cingh Huai, Petitioner Pro Se. Gregory G. Katsas, Assistant Attorney General, Richard M. Evans, Assistant Director, Marshall Tamor Golding, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.PER CURIAM: Daw Mang Cingh Huai, a native and citizen of Burma, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing her appeal from the Immigration Judge’s denial of her applications for relief from removal. Huai first challenges the determination that she failed to establish eligibility for asylum. To obtain reversal of a determination denying eligibility for relief, an alien “must show that the evidence he presented was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.” INS v. Elias-Zacarias , 502 U.S. 478, 483-84 (1992). We have reviewed the evidence of record and conclude that Huai fails to show that the evidence compels a contrary

result. Having failed to qualify for asylum, Huai cannot meet the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. Chen v.

INS , 195 F.3d 198, 205 (4th Cir. 1999); INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca , 480 U.S. 421, 430 (1987). Finally, we uphold the finding below that Huai failed to demonstrate that it is more likely than not

that she would be tortured if removed to Burma. 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2) (2009). We therefore deny the petition for review. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

23 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
Samuel E. IVORY v. ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

CR-16-0930

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 8, 2017

Affirmed.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

In accordance with title 41 of the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, section 102-3.65(a), notice is hereby given that the charter for the National Toxicology Program Special Emphasis Panel was renewed for an additional two-year period on January 7, 2025.

It is determined that the National Toxicology Program Special Emphasis Panel, is in the public interest in connection with the performance of duties imposed on the National Institutes of Health by law, and that these duties can best be performed through the advice and counsel of this group.

                    Inquiries may be directed to Claire Harris, Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy, Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Democracy Boulevard, Suite 1000, Bethesda, Maryland 20892 (Mail code 4875), Telephone (301) 496-2123, or                     *harriscl@mail.nih.gov.*

Dated: January 13, 2025.

Patricia B. Hansberger,

Deputy Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2025-01053 Filed 1-15-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
i

Cumulative Cash Receipts

(FY 1994 - 2016)

$95.3 Billion 

FY 2016 Expenditures

$103.1 Million

0.11%

Cumulative 

Expenditures 

(FY 1994 - 2015)

$1.515 Billion

1.59%

Cash Receipts is the total net winning bids collected for the federal government. Over this 23 year period, the average cash receipts Cumulative Expenditures (FY 1994 – 2015) does not include administrative cost of the Spectrum Credit Reform Program.
Compensation: (1100 – 1300 BOCC Series)

1) Personnel Compensation2) Personnel Benefits3) Benefits for Former Personnel

Travel & Transportation of Persons: (2100 BOCC Series)

1) Domestic Travel2) Foreign Travel3) Leased Passenger Vehicles

Transportation of Things: (2200 BOCC Series)

1) Parcel Post2) Non-Passenger GSA & Commercial Truck

Rent, Communications, Utilities, and Mail: (2300 BOCC Series)

1) GSA Space Rent2) Non-GSA Space Rent3) Non-GSA Telephone/Fax4) GSA Telephones5) Mail Services – Postage6) Gas/Electric/Other Utilities7) Messenger Services8) Other Equipment Rental9) Copier Rental

Printing and Reproduction: (2400 

1) Printing/Reproduction

2) Printing/Binding/Federal Reg

Other Contractual Services: (2500 

1) Contracts Services – Non Fe2) ADP* Retrieval Service3) Training/Tuition/Fees4) Security Investigations – Fed5) Interagency Contracts6) Space Repair/Interior/Exterio7) ADP* Software Maintenance8) ADP* Equipment Maintenan9) Repair Office Equipment/Fur

10) ADP* Service Contracts

Supplies and Materials: (2600 BOC

1) Supplies & Materials2) Periodicals & Subscriptions

Equipment: (3100 BOCC Series)

1) Technical Equipment

2) ADP* Equipment 3) ADP* Software4) Office Furniture/Equipment5) Telecommunications Equipm6) Books

ii 
iii

Budget 

Object 

Class Code 

11 Personnel Compensation 12 Personnel Benefits 13 Benefits for Former Personnel 21 Travel and Transportation of Persons 22 Transportation of Things 23 Rents, Communications, Utilities, and Mail 24 Printing and Reproduction 25 Other Contractual Services 26 Supplies and Materials 31 Equipment 

TOTAL1 

Budget Object Class Code Description

SPECTRUM AUCTION EXPENDITURES REPOR

1Does not include obligations for Spectrum Credit Reform Program Administrative Costs to support loan activities. These a

General Fund of Treasury as provided in the Credit Reform Act. These costs are identified on page 15 of this report.

Fiscal Year 2016
The HONORABLE SUSAN WEBBER WRIGHT, United States District 1

Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

___________

No. 95-3544

___________

Loyd William Brody, Jr., *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Eastern District of Arkansas.

United States of America, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellee. *

___________

 Submitted: May 7, 1996

 Filed: May 10, 1996

___________

Before BEAM, LOKEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Loyd Brody pleaded guilty to one count of conspiring to possess with

intent to distribute one pound of methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C.

§§ 841 and 846, and consented to one count of criminal forfeiture of the

drug proceeds under 21 U.S.C. § 853. Accordingly, in November 1994 the

district court ordered forfeiture of $10,595.00, and in December 1994

1

sentenced Brody to 78 months imprisonment and four years supervised

release. The district court denied Brody's subsequent 28 U.S.C. § 2255

motion claiming ineffective assistance of counsel, and this appeal

followed.

Upon de novo review, we are convinced that the motion, files,
-2-

and records conclusively show Brody is not entitled to relief. See United

States v. Duke, 50 F.3d 571, 576 (8th Cir.) (standard of review), cert.

denied, 116 S. Ct. 224 (1995); Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688,

694 (1984) (ineffectiveness standard). Because the government brought the

criminal forfeiture count in the criminal indictment, and Brody pleaded

guilty to the methamphetamine count and consented to the forfeiture during

the same proceeding, Brody was not subjected to double jeopardy. See

United States v. Smith, 75 F.3d 382, 384 (8th Cir. 1996) (double jeopardy

concerns do not arise when congressionally-authorized multiple punishments

are imposed in single proceeding). Thus, Brody's counsel was not

ineffective for failing to raise this issue. Nor was counsel ineffective

for failing to challenge the type of methamphetamine used in calculating

Brody's sentence: the base offense level to which Brody agreed was clearly

based on D-methamphetamine, and he has neither alleged nor shown that the

drug was in fact L-methamphetamine.

Accordingly, we affirm.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Tony Curtis BROACH v. STATE

CR-16-0889

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

October 6, 2017 Reh. denied November 17, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Statement on the Young, Beginning, and Small 

Farmers and Ranchers Proposed Rule

Glen R. Smith

FCA Board Chairman and CEO

Farm Credit Administration Board Meeting

May 12, 2022

The passage of today's proposed YBS rule is an exciting day for the Farm Administration, 

the Farm Credit System, and America's future generations of young, beginning, and small

(YBS) farmers and ranchers.

I would like to first thank my fellow board member, Jeff Hall, for his support and early 

recognition of the important role of data in agency business, including YBS, well before I 

came to FCA. This led to the creation of the new Office of Data Analytics and Economics,

which has been instrumental in modernizing the collection of YBS data in recent years.

YBS has long been cited as an important reason the Farm Credit System is worthy of its 

government-sponsored enterprise (or GSE) status and the important benefits assigned to it. 

The System has been telling this story, and it's a great story to tell. But today's political and 

business climate demands more than just a good story; it demands facts backed up by data

— more importantly progress backed up by data.

In time, I firmly believe this linkage of data with best practices and growth will become a 

valuable tool — actually more of a tool rather than a rule — in helping System institutions to 

advance their YBS programs.

This is a proud day for our YBS workgroups here at FCA and represents an impressive 

collaborative effort between the Office of Regulatory Policy, the Office of Examination, the 

Office of the General Counsel, and the Office of Data Analytics and Economics. The board 

thanks you, and tomorrow's farmers and ranchers will thank you, for your hard work and 

dedication.
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 1**  **1 -**  **7704**

BROOKS JAMES TERRELL ,
P laintiff

- Appellant ,

v. MR. RUPERT, Disciplinary Hearing Officer (DHO), Lee County USP, VA; HARRELL WATTS, Administrator National Inmate Appeals , Defendants

– Appellees , and

FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS , Defendant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia , at Roanoke

. James C. Turk , Senior District Judge. ( 7 :11

- cv
- 00 024

- JCT

- RSB )

Submitted : April 19, 2012 Decided: April 25, 2012

Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Affirm ed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Brooks James Terrell , Appellant Pro Se. Sara Bugbee Winn, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia , for Appellee s .

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Brooks James Terrell appeals the district court ’ s order denying relief on his complaint filed pursuant to Biven s v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics , 403
U.S. 388 (1971). We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated
by the district court. Terrell v. Rupert , No. 7:11

- cv
- 00024

-
JCT

- RSB (W.D. Va. Dec. 5, 2011) . We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Fidel Perez GONI, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-964

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 26, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUTPUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
**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**

|   | (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 the operation of                the                Company. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/                Lincoln M.                Dastrup                        |   |   |   |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|
| Lincoln                  M. DastrupChief                  Financial Officer |   |   |        |
| September                  26, 2007                                         |   |   |   |
# C_2018142EN.01001801.xml

| 23.4.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 142/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.4.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 142/18

---

Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 7 February 2018 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione — Italy) — Manuela Maturi and Others v Fondazione Teatro dell’Opera di Roma, Fondazione Teatro dell’Opera di Roma v Manuela Maturi (C-142/17), Catia Passeri v Fondazione Teatro dell’Opera di Roma (C-143/17)

(Joined Cases C-142/17 and C-143/17) (1)

1

((References for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Social policy - Equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation - Directive 2006/54/EC - National rules providing for the temporary possibility for performing artists having reached retirement age to continue to perform until the age previously laid down for entitlement to a pension, fixed at 47 years old for women and 52 years old for men))

(2018/C 142/23)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Corte suprema di cassazione

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Manuela Maturi, Laura Di Segni, Isabella Lo Balbo, Maria Badini, Loredana Barbanera, Fondazione Teatro dell’Opera di Roma (C-142/17), Catia Passeri (C-143/17)

Applicants:

Defendants: Fondazione Teatro dell’Opera di Roma, Manuela Maturi, Laura Di Segni, Isabella Lo Balbo, Maria Badini, Loredana Barbanera, Luca Troiano, Mauro Murri (C-142/17), Fondazione Teatro dell’Opera di Roma (C-143/17)

Defendants:

Re:

Re:

Article 14(1)(c) Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation and Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as meaning that national rules, such as those laid down in Article 3(7) of Decree-Law No 64 of 30 April 2010, converted into Law No 100, of 29 June 2010, in the version in force at the material time, pursuant to which workers employed as dancers having reached the retirement age laid down by those rules of 45 years old for both women and men, have the option for a transitional period of two years to continue to work until the working age limit laid down by the previous rules, set at 47 years old for women and 52 years old for men, establishes direct discrimination based on sex which is prohibited by that directive.

---

(1)  OJ C 249, 31.7.2017.

1

---
|   | (a) | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the three months ended March 31, 2011 filed on the date hereof 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 |
|--------|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

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

| By:    |  /s/ EDWARD W. MARTIN, III                    |     |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------|---------------|
|   | Edward W. Martin, III                              |          |
|   | Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of           |          |
|   | American Casino & Entertainment Properties LLC |          |

----
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 Annual Report of China Expert Technology Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), 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, as amended; and 2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company. Date: April 12, 2007By: /s/ Zhu XiaoxinName: Zhu XiaoxinTitle:
Chief Executive Officer   A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authentications, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version 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 United States Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Judith RABITO v. MCCLAIN INVESTMENTS, LLC, Sylvia McClain, Douglas Cook Enterprises, ABC Subcontractor, John Doe and XYZ Insurance Company

No. 2019-C-0314

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 15, 2019

**ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH CIRCUIT, PARISH OF ORLEANS**

Writ denied.

Crichton, J., would grant the writ and reinstate the judgment of the trial court.
# C_2017014EN.01004502.xml

| 16.1.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 14/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.1.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 14/45

---

Action brought on 4 November 2016 — Isocell v EUIPO — iCell (iCell.)

(Case T-776/16)

(2017/C 014/54)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Isocell GmbH (Neumarkt am Wallersee, Germany) (represented by: C. Thiele, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: iCell AB (Älvdalen, Sweden)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: EU figurative mark containing the word element ‘iCell.’ — Application No 12 877 676

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 September 2016 in Case R 2496/2015-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | amend the contested decision by declaring that the opposition is upheld in its entirety and that EU trade mark application No 12877676 is refused; |
| --- | --- |

—

amend the contested decision by declaring that the opposition is upheld in its entirety and that EU trade mark application No 12877676 is refused;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
Timothy Justin TACY, Sr., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Mark INCH, Secretary D. O. C., Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-1550

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 14, 2019

**FLORIDA DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
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 Swinging Pig Productions, Inc. a Florida corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Michael Davis, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifies to the best of her knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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.





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





/s/ Michael DavisMichael Davis

Chief Executive Officer

November 22, 2010







19