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 the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Pacific Coast National
Bancorp (the “Company”) for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2008, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
each of the undersigned hereby certifies, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:




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




(2)
            The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company
      as of the dates and for the periods presented in the financial statements
      included in the Report.




PACIFIC
COAST NATIONAL BANCORP




Dated:
May 15,
2008                                                                                      By:
/s/ Colin M.
Forkner


Colin M.
Forkner


Chief
Executive Officer




Dated:
May 15,
2008                                                                                      By:
/s/ Terry
Stalk


Terry
Stalk


Chief
Financial Officer














A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 (“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 Pacific Coast National Bancorp and will be retained by Pacific Coast
National Bancorp and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANDRE JUSTE,

Plaintiff,

 v.

MARTINEZ et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 16-07399 WHA

ORDER DENYING

PERMISSION TO APPEAL IN

FORMA PAUPERIS

On May 4, an order dismissed plaintiff Andre Juste’s action on the grounds that he filed

in an inappropriate venue, and the allegations in his complaint were not comprehensible and did

not form the basis of a cognizable claim (Dkt. No. 9 at 2). On July 5, Juste filed a notice of

appeal in which he seeks to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. No. 11). 

Section 1915(a)(3) of Title 28 of the United States Code provides that “[a]n appeal may

not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good

faith.” Good faith is demonstrated when an appellant seeks “review of any issue not frivolous.” 

Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444 (1962). An appeal is frivolous “where none of

the legal points [are] arguable on the merits.” Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989)

Here, Juste’s appeal is frivolous. He has not stated any viable legal theory on which to

appeal, and his complaint was filed in the wrong venue. Because the appeal is not taken in

good faith, the motion to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 2, 2017. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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 Education Realty Trust, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
Randall H. Brown, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, in my
capacity as an officer of the Company, 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 results of operations of the
      Company.





Date:
November 6, 2009





/s/
      Randall H. BrownRandall
      H. BrownChief
      Financial Officer, Executive Vice
                President,
      Treasurer and Secretary





In
accordance with SEC Release No. 34-47986, this Exhibit is furnished to the
SEC as an accompanying document and is not deemed “filed” for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or otherwise subject to
the liabilities of that Section, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by
reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933.
EX PARTE Jason ELKINS and Paula Elkins

1161127 (2160745)

Supreme Court of Alabama.

November 17, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Cert. denied.
Jeffrey AMMEEN, as Guardian and Father of Jade Ammeen and Aja Ammeen, Appellant, v. Wade SJOGREN, Individually and as Co-Trustee of the Kirsten Ammeen and Issue Year 2002 Trust and Jeffrey Ammeen, as Administrator of the Estate of Kirsten Ammeen, Appellees.

No. 1D19-0294

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 18, 2019 Rehearing Denied April 25, 2019

Markus A. Sermons of Sermons Law, PLLC, Orange Park, for Appellant.

No appearance for Appellees.

Per Curiam.

Because the notice of appeal was not timely filed, this case is hereby dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. *See* Fla. R. App. P. 9.110(b) ; *Peltz v. Dist. Court of Appeal, Third Dist.* , 605 So.2d 865, 866 (Fla. 1992).

Wetherell, Osterhaus, and Winokur, JJ., concur.
EX PARTE Brandon JOHNSON

CR-16-0197

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

November 22, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. granted.
----

|                       |                                                             |   |
|----------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                       | /s/      Thomas A. Vento                                         |   |
|                       | Name:      Thomas A. Vento                                       |   |
|                       | Title:      President and Chief Executive Officer                |   |
|                       |                                                             |   |
| Date:      August 14, 2009 |                                                             |   |
|                       |                                                             |   |
|                       | /s/      Joseph R. Corrato                                       |   |
|                       | Name:      Joseph R. Corrato                                     |   |
|                       | Title:      Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |   |
|                       |                                                             |   |
| Date:      August 14, 2009 |                                                             |   |
Farra L. Cassidy SHERIDAN v. James P. CASSIDY, Jr.

2017-CT-00960-COA

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Filed: April 4, 2019 Closed: June 6, 2019

Motion Desc: Petition for Writ of Certiorari.

Certiorari - Denied.
Cortez Deontae BASS v. STATE of Mississippi

2017-CT-01009-COA

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Filed: April 9, 2019 Closed: June 20, 2019

Motion Desc: Petition for Writ of Certiorari.

Certiorari - Denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 12 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

<DOC>

119th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 12

   Notifying the President of the United States of the election of a 
             Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 3, 2025

Mr. Thune submitted the following resolution; which was considered and 
                               agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   Notifying the President of the United States of the election of a 
             Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate.

    Resolved, That the President of the United States be notified of 
the election of the Honorable Jennifer A. Hemingway as Sergeant at Arms 
and Doorkeeper of the Senate.
                                 <all>
```
Rickey TARVER, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D18-2511

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed February 13, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
David RUIZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D18-193

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed March 20, 2019

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Jeffrey Paul DeSousa, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Gabrielle Raemy Charest-Turken, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before SALTER, LINDSEY, and HENDON,1 JJ.

1

Judge Hendon did not participate in oral argument.

SALTER, J.

The defendant, David Ruiz, appeals his judgment of conviction and sentences for battery on a law enforcement officer, resisting an officer with violence, and simple battery. We reverse the convictions under *Mosely v. State*, 842 So.2d 279, 280-81 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003). We hold that the trial court abused its discretion in curtailing defense counsel's questions of the jury venire about the sole defense theory.2

The theory of defense at trial was that the officers used excessive force during Ruiz's arrest. During voir dire, the defense attempted three times to ask the prospective jurors their views about police use of excessive force. Each question was met with an objection by the state. After a side bar on the state's objection to the third question, the trial court ordered defense counsel not to discuss excessive force. This line of questioning ceased.

The trial court's ruling denied the defendant his right to a fair trial and to an impartial jury by restricting questioning of the prospective jurors about the sole defense in the case. *Mosely*, 842 So.2d at 280-81. *Mosely* concluded that "where a juror's attitude about a particular legal doctrine ... is essential to a determination of whether challenges for cause or peremptory challenges are to be made, it is well settled that the scope of the voir dire *140properly includes questions about and references to that legal doctrine ...." *Id.* at 281 (quoting *Lavado v. State*, 469 So.2d 917, 919-20 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) (Pearson, J., dissenting) (dissent adopted in *Lavado v. State*, 492 So.2d 1322, 1323 (Fla. 1986) ).

It is improper to curtail questioning on the theory of defense, even where counsel is permitted to inquire generally. Counsel must be permitted to question the prospective jurors about their willingness and ability to accept the defense's theory. *Harrison v. State*, 172 So.3d 1018, 1022 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015). If defense counsel knew nothing else about the prospective jurors, "the single thing that defense counsel needed to know was whether the prospective jurors could fairly and impartially consider the defense of [excessive use of force]." *Lavado v. State*, 492 So.2d 1322, 1323 (Fla. 1986).

Reversed and remanded.

2

Additionally, we note the state's concession that the trial court erred in concluding that it lacked discretion to withhold adjudication. The trial court had such discretion, *State v. Hewitt*, 702 So.2d 633, 636 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997), and we reverse and remand the sentences for that reason.
Approved by OMB 

OMB Control No. 3060-0113 

See Instructions for public burden estimate 

Form 2100, Schedule 396 – BROADCAST EQUAL EMPLOYMENT 

OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM REPORT 

1 

 Form 2100, Schedule 396 

February 2019 

 
Approved by OMB 

OMB Control No. 3060-0113 

See Instructions for public burden estimate 

Form 2100, Schedule 396 – BROADCAST EQUAL EMPLOYMENT 

OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM REPORT 

2 

 Form 2100, Schedule 396 

February 2019 
Approved by OMB 

OMB Control No. 3060-0113 

See Instructions for public burden estimate 

Form 2100, Schedule 396 – BROADCAST EQUAL EMPLOYMENT 

OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM REPORT 

3 

 Form 2100, Schedule 396 

February 2019 
Approved by OMB 

OMB Control No. 3060-0113 

See Instructions for public burden estimate 

Form 2100, Schedule 396 – BROADCAST EQUAL EMPLOYMENT 

OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM REPORT 

4 

 Form 2100, Schedule 396 

February 2019 
Approved by OMB 

OMB Control No. 3060-0113 

See Instructions for public burden estimate 

Form 2100, Schedule 396 – BROADCAST EQUAL EMPLOYMENT 

OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM REPORT 

5 

 Form 2100, Schedule 396 

February 2019 

 
Approved by OMB 

OMB Control No. 3060-0113 

See Instructions for public burden estimate 

Form 2100, Schedule 396 – BROADCAST EQUAL EMPLOYMENT 

OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM REPORT 

6 

 Form 2100, Schedule 396 

February 2019 

 
Approved by OMB 

OMB Control No. 3060-0113 

See Instructions for public burden estimate 

Form 2100, Schedule 396 – BROADCAST EQUAL EMPLOYMENT 

OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM REPORT 

7 

 Form 2100, Schedule 396 

February 2019 
Approved by OMB 

OMB Control No. 3060-0113 

See Instructions for public burden estimate 

Form 2100, Schedule 396 – BROADCAST EQUAL EMPLOYMENT 

OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM REPORT 

8 

 Form 2100, Schedule 396 

February 2019
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 China Housing & Land Development,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending March 31, 2009 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the date 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.





Date:
      October 30, 2009
            By:
            /s/ Xiaohong FengXiaohong
      Feng(Chief
      Executive Officer)
EXHIBIT 13.1

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

COMPANHIA BRASILEIRA DE DISTRIBUIÇÃO (the “Company”) is filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, on the date hereof, its annual report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017 (the “Report”). Pursuant to Exchange Act Rules 13a – 14(b) or 15d – 14(b) and to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as enacted pursuant to the requirements of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Ronaldo Iabrudi, Chief Executive Officer, hereby certify that:

(i)    the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

Date: April 27, 2018

By:/s/ Ronaldo Iabrudi

Name: Ronaldo Iabrudi

Title:    Chief Executive Officer
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

691 CA 10-00436 PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, PERADOTTO, GORSKI, AND MARTOCHE, JJ.

WALDEMAR H. JURKOWSKI, BY EDWARD C. COSGROVE, GUARDIAN OF HIS PERSON AND PROPERTY, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

SHEEHAN MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT, ET AL., DEFENDANTS. (APPEAL NO. 3.)

EDWARD C. COSGROVE, BUFFALO (PHILIP H. MAGNER, JR., OF THE FLORIDA BAR, ADMITTED PRO HAC VICE, OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT.

ROACH, BROWN, MCCARTHY & GRUBER, P.C., BUFFALO (JOSEPH V. MCCARTHY OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Joseph D. Mintz, J.), entered January 21, 2010 in a medical malpractice action. The judgment, inter alia, dismissed the second amended complaint against defendant Sheehan Memorial Hospital.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Same Memorandum as in Jurkowski v Sheehan Mem. Hosp. ([appeal No. 1] ___ AD3d ___ [June 17, 2011]).

Entered: June 17, 2011 Patricia L. Morgan Clerk of the Court
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-31372 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff - Appellee

v. CLIFTON RODNEY COTTEN

Defendant - Appellant

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana

USDC No. 99-CR-85-ALL-C

-------------------- June 6, 2000 Before KING, Chief Judge, and WIENER and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * In this direct criminal appeal, Clifton Rodney Cotten argues that the district court did not afford him the right to allocution before sentencing him to 24 months of imprisonment upon his guilty plea to wire fraud. Rule 32 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure mandates that a defendant be given the opportunity “to make a statement and [] present any information in mitigation of sentence.” Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(c)(3)(C); United States v. Myers , 150 F.3d 459, 462 (5th Cir. 1998). To complyNo. 99-31372 -2- with Rule 32, “the court, the prosecutor, and the defendant must at the very least interact in a manner that shows clearly and convincingly that the defendant knew he had a right to speak on any subject of his choosing prior to the imposition of sentence.” Myers , 150 F.3d at 462. It is not enough that the sentencing court addresses a defendant on a particular issue, affords counsel the right to speak, or hears the defendant’s specific objections to the PSR. Id . at 461-62 & n.3. We review a determination whether the defendant was allowed his right to allocution de novo . Id . at 461. A review of the sentencing transcript reveals that the district court did not afford Cotten his right to allocution. Accordingly, Cotten’s sentence is VACATED and the case is REMANDED for resentencing so that Cotten may exercise his right to allocution. Since the issues raised by the sentence may arise again, we address them. Cotten also argues that the district court’s decision to depart upward at sentencing was an ex post facto application of the law. He also argues that there was not a sufficient factual basis to support the court’s finding that he used mass-marketing to recruit his victims. Although he challenged the departure on other grounds at sentencing, Cotten failed to object to the upward departure on the grounds he nowurges on appeal; therefore, his arguments are limited to plainerror review. See United States v. Alford , 142 F.3d 825, 830 (5th Cir. 1998). Cotton has failed to demonstrate plain error in the district court’s upward departure.No. 99-31372 -3- VACATED and REMANDED for resentencing.
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 16 (Monday, January 27, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Page 8226]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-01723]

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

OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board Membership; 
Withdrawal

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

ACTION: Notice; withdrawal.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with Presidential Action, Restoring 
Accountability for Career Senior Executives (January 20, 2025), the 
Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission is withdrawing its 
notice published in the Federal Register on January 21, 2025, 
concerning the appointment of members to the agency's Performance 
Review Board (PRB).

DATES: As of January 27, 2025, the Federal Register notice published at 
90 FR 7197 on January 21, 2025, is withdrawn.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michelle Huffman, Human Resources 
Specialist, U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission, 1120 
20th Street NW--Ninth Floor, Washington, DC 20036-3457, (202) 606-5393.

Cynthia L. Attwood,
Chairman.
[FR Doc. 2025-01723 Filed 1-24-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7600-01-P
```
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 China Housing & Land Development, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending June 30, 2012 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of the undersigned, in the
capacities and on the date 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------







|Date: August14, 2012 | By: | /s/ Xiaohong Feng            
|-------------------- | --- | -----------------------------
|                     |     | Xiaohong Feng                
|                     |     | Chief Executive Officer      
|                     |     | (Principal Executive Officer)
Norvall SCOTT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-1537

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed February 22, 2019

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

CASANUEVA, BLACK, and BADALAMENTI, JJ., Concur.