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

     I, Elena Pochapski, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant  to  Section  906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly
Report  of  Siberian  Energy  Group Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period
ended  September 30, 2005, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or  15(d)  of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained
in  such  Form  10-QSB  fairly  presents  in all material respects the financial
condition  and  results  of  operations  of  Siberian  Energy  Group  Inc.

Date:  November 21, 2005

                                        By: /s/ Elena Pochapski
                                            -------------------
                                            Elena Pochapski
                                            Chief Financial Officer

<PAGE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

ALLEN ROBERT SCOTT, §

Petitioner, §

 §

VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO.4:05-CV-448-Y

 §

DOUGLAS DRETKE, Director, §

T.D.C.J., Correctional § 

Institutions Division, §

Respondent. § 

 ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

Before the Court is the petition for writ of habeas corpus

under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 of petitioner Allen Robert Scott, along with

the September 15, 2005, findings, conclusions, and recommendation

of the United States Magistrate Judge. The magistrate judge gave

the parties until October 6, 2005, to file written objections to

the findings, conclusions, and recommendation, and the Court

extended that deadline until November 1, 2005. As of the date of

this order, written objections have not been timely filed.

On November 7, 2005, the clerk of Court received and filestamped petitioner Scott’s written objections to the magistrate

judge’s findings, conclusions, and recommendation. As noted above,

this Court extended the deadline for Scott to file written

objections only until November 1, 2005, and expressly warned him

that “failure to file written objections within the specified time

will bar a party, except upon grounds of plain error or manifest

injustice, from attacking on appeal any unobjected-to proposed

factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the district

court.” But Scott did not sign and file his objections until

 

 Case 4:05-cv-00448-Y Document 16 Filed 11/09/05 Page 1 of 2 PageID 186
1

As Scott hand delivered his objections to the Court, no issue arises

relating to the placement of the document in the mail. Further, as Scott is not

incarcerated, the “mailbox rule” does not apply.

2

November 7, several days after the extended deadline.1 As Scott

certified that he did not complete the objections until November 7,

and since they were not filed until that date, six days after the

extension provided by the Court, the objections are untimely and

will not be considered. 

The Court has reviewed the pleadings and the record in this

case, and has reviewed for clear error the proposed findings,

conclusions and recommendation of the United States Magistrate

Judge filed on September 15, 2005. The Court concludes that the

petition for writ of habeas corpus should be dismissed as a

successive petition filed without the permission of the Court of

Appeals as required by 28 U.S.C. §2244(b)(1), for the reasons

stated in the magistrate judge’s findings and conclusions. 

 Therefore, the findings, conclusions and recommendation of the

magistrate judge are ADOPTED.

Petitioner Scott's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is

DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to his right to file a motion under 28

U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A) in the United States Court of Appeals for

the Fifth Circuit for leave to file a successive petition.

SIGNED November 9, 2005.

 

 Case 4:05-cv-00448-Y Document 16 Filed 11/09/05 Page 2 of 2 PageID 187
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A17A1504. HOWARD ANDERSON LEE v. RICHARD T. ALEXANDER.

Inmate Howard Anderson Lee appealed directly to this Court from a superior

court order dismissing his civil case against Richard T. Alexander, who Lee alleged

had failed to perform certain duties as Clerk of Gwinnett County Courts. Because

Lee is a prisoner, his appeal is controlled by the Prison Litigation Reform Act of

1996, OCGA § 42-12-1 et seq. Under OCGA § 42-12-8, an appeal of a civil action

filed by a prisoner “shall be as provided in Code Section 5-6-35.” And under OCGA

§ 5-6-35, the party wishing to appeal must file an application for discretionary appeal

to the appropriate appellate court. Because a prisoner has no right of direct appeal

in civil cases, we lack jurisdiction to consider this direct appeal from the superior

court’s order. See Jones v. Townsend, 267 Ga. 489, 490 (480 SE2d 24) (1997). This

appeal is therefore DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

June 19, 2017

06/19/2017
Michael SCHUMACHER v. STATE

CR-16-1000

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

October 6, 2017 Reh. denied November 9, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
---

EXHIBIT 31.2





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULES 13a-14(a) AND 15d-14(a) UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Roy O. Estridge, certify that:





1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the six months ended June 30, 2009 of Valley Commerce Bancorp;





2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;





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





4. The registrant’s other certifying officer 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)) and have:





(a.) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which
this report is being prepared;





(b.) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and





(c.) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter of 2009 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and





5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):





(a.) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls 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: August 14, 2009





/s/ Roy O. EstridgeRoy O. EstridgeChief Financial Officer
Ricardo NORONA, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D18-1878

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed February 20, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

JOHN RICE, )

Plaintiff, )

vs. ) No. 3:05-CV-0959-P 

)

PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT )

CORPORATION, et al., )

Defendants. )

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

After reviewing all relevant matters of record in this case, including the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge and any objections thereto, in

accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the undersigned District Judge is of the opinion that the

Findings and Conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct and they are accepted as the Findings

and Conclusions of the Court.

SIGNED this 28 day of June 2005. th

_________________________________

JORGE A. SOLIS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 Case 3:05-cv-00959-P Document 9 Filed 06/28/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 16
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 on Form 10-Q of Comstock Homebuilding Companies, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended
September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of Christopher Clemente, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company and Bruce Labovitz, Chief Financial Officer
of the Company, certify, to our best knowledge and belief, 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 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); 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: November 14, 2008 |  | /s/ Christopher Clemente            
|                        |  | Christopher Clemente                
|                        |  | Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
|                        | 
|Date: November 14, 2008 |  | /s/ Bruce J. Labovitz               
|                        |  | Bruce J. Labovitz                   
|                        |  | Chief Financial Officer             

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating,
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 Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 23

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT Registered Public Accounting Firm

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-84826, 333-99693 and 333-129949) and on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-59281, 333-64389, 333-78317, 333-64300, 333-103752, 333-120393, 333-123424, 333-134607 and 333-144135) of L-3 Communications Holdings, Inc. and subsidiaries of our report dated February 28, 2008 relating to the financial statements and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
New York, New York
February 28, 2008

---
Raymond Luis COLON, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-1279

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 04, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
Exhibit
32.2
 
  CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO
 18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
 AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Swinging Pig Productions, Inc. a
Florida corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending
March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), Daniel Mirman, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certifies to the best of his 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/
      Daniel MirmanDaniel
      Mirman
                Chief
      Financial Officer
                May
      14, 2009
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED
FROM  THE  CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS OF KDSM, INC
FOR   THE  YEAR  ENDED DECEMBER 31,  1997 AND  IS  QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY  BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0001039583
<NAME>                        KDSM, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     US DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                          1
<CASH>                                                  11
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        2,180
<ALLOWANCES>                                            30
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     4,367
<PP&E>                                               3,753
<DEPRECIATION>                                         545
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     258,540
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                3,216
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              200,000
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                                          53,749
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       258,540
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     8,538
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        7,485
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 (2,226)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      3,279
<INCOME-TAX>                                         1,384
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  1,895
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                         1,895
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       18,950
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       18.950
                                          

</TABLE>
CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


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





In
      connection with the Annual Report of NetSol Technologies, Inc. on Form 10-KSB
      for the period ending June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
      Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Tina Gilger,
      Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
      1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      that:





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





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





Date:
      November 10, 2008





/s/
      Tina
      Gilger


Tina
      Gilger, Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 240.13a-14

OF GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE SECURITIES

EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

I,Bernard Geller, certify that:

 

1.     I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-Kof Anvil Holdings, Inc.;

 

2.     Based on my knowledge, this annual reportdoes not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respectto the period covered by this annual report;

 

3.     Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, and other financial information included in this annual report,fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this annual report.

 

4.     The registrant’s other certifying officersand I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:

 

a)     designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report isbeing prepared.

 

b)    evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this annual report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,as of the end of the period covered by this annual report based on suchevaluation;

 

c)     disclosed in this annual report any change inthe registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred duringthe registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting;

 

5.     The registrant’s other certifying officersand I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent function):

 

a)     all significant deficiencies in the design oroperation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and

 

b)    any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal controls over financial reporting.

 

 
| */s/*Bernard Geller         | * *             |
|-----------------------------|----------------------|
| Chairman of the Board and   |
| Principal Executive Officer |
|                        |
| Date:                  | April 21,  2005 |   |
|                             |                      |  |  |

 

----
Case 3:05-cv-01455-K Document 63 Filed 09/19/06 Page 1 of 1 PageID 566
Robert BAISE, Jr. v. STATE

CR-16-1082

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 8, 2017

Affirmed.
Solomon STEVENS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D19-372

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Opinion filed June 7, 2019

Solomon Stevens, Clermont, pro se.

No Appearance for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We issued a *Spencer*1 show cause order directing Appellant to demonstrate why he should not be prohibited from filing any appeal, petition, pleading, or motion pertaining to the conviction and sentence rendered in Case No. 35-1989-CF-001711 unless reviewed and signed by an attorney licensed to practice in the State of Florida. Having failed to file a response and thus failing to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed, we conclude that Appellant is abusing the judicial process and should be barred from further pro se filings.

Therefore, in order to conserve judicial resources, we prohibit Appellant from filing with this Court any further pro se pleadings concerning Lake County Fifth Judicial Circuit case number 35-1989-CF-001711. The Clerk of this Court is directed not to accept any further pro se filings concerning this case and not to accept any telephone or in-person communications. Any further pleadings regarding this case will be summarily rejected by the Clerk, unless they are filed by a member in good standing with The Florida Bar. *See**Isley v. State*, 652 So. 2d 409, 411 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) ("Enough is enough.").

FURTHER PRO SE FILINGS PROHIBITED.

HARRIS, GROSSHANS and SASSO, JJ., concur.

1

*State v. Spencer*, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1999).