alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 32


      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 Sabine Royalty Trust (the "Trust") on
Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, not in its individual capacity but solely as the trustee of the
Trust, certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to its 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 operations of the
Trust.



                                   BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., TRUSTEE FOR
                                   SABINE ROYALTY TRUST

                                   By: /s/ Ron E. Hooper
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Ron E. Hooper,
                                       Senior Vice President, Royalty Management

Date: August 14, 2003


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Sabine Royalty Trust and will be retained by Sabine Royalty Trust
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 90 (Wednesday, May 10, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 24849]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11435]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP95-267-000]


Transwestern Pipeline Company; Notice of Section 4 Filing

May 4, 1995.
    Take notice that on May 2, 1995, Transwestern Pipeline Company 
(Transwestern), tendered for filing with the Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission (Commission) in the above-referenced proceeding a Section 4 
filing.
    Transwestern states that it has previously made three abandonment 
filings (in Docket Nos. CP94-211, CP95-153 and CP95-70) for which 
Transwestern is submitting the Section 4 filing to notify the 
Commission of the proposed termination of gathering services prior to 
the effective date of such terminations. Transwestern states it is 
filing concurrently herewith a Stipulation and Agreement in Docket No. 
RP95-267 resolving, among other things, outstanding regulatory issues 
in the proceedings referenced in the Stipulation including Docket Nos. 
CP94-211, CP95-153 and CP95-70.
    Transwestern also states that as a result of restructuring under 
Order No. 636, Transwestern has determined that the facilities listed 
in the abandonment filings are no longer necessary to Transwestern's 
primary function of providing transportation services, and, as an 
interstate pipeline subject to the Commission's full regulatory 
authority, Transwestern cannot compete effectively with the unregulated 
entities providing similar gathering services with similar facilities. 
These facilities, states Transwestern, could be operated more 
efficiently by a non-regulated entity whose primary business is to 
provide production and gathering services. Therefore, Transwestern 
states that it proposes to terminate services that are performed on 
those facilities.
    Transwestern states that copies of the filing were served on its 
gas utility customers, interested state commissions, and all parties to 
this proceeding.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 825 North Capitol Street, NE., Washington, DC, 
20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules 
of Practice and Procedure. All such motions or protests should be filed 
on or before May 11, 1995. Protests will be considered by the 
Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will 
not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person 
wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of 
this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for 
public inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-11435 Filed 5-9-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
e 4 - AT:7 7- 1

/ 4 4 ,.)1. 1\11.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 22-0215
STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiffand Appellee,
v. MATTHEW JASON WELCH,

Defendant and Appellant. 

### OCT 0 4 2022 Bowen Greenwood Clt ar, of Supreme Court

1VInntana ORDER

Appellant Matthew Jason Welch has appealed from the Judgment ofthe Thirteenth Judicial District Court, Yellowstone County, in its Cause No. DC-20-1434. The parties, by and through their respective counsel, now stipulate and jointly move for an order dismissing this appeal and remanding this matter to the District Court. The parties assert that remand is warranted for two reasons. First, the sentence the District Court imposed on Counts III, V, VI, and X exceed the maximum possible penalty. Second. the court included certain financial and probation conditions in the written judgment that were not imposed during the oral pronouncement ofsentence. The parties assert that Welch pled guilty to six counts ofDeceptive Practices under § 45-6-317, MCA, and four counts ofTheft by Deception under §45-6-301(2),MCA. The District Court sentenced him to ten years in Montana State Prison with five years suspended on each count with the sentences to run consecutively to one another and to all other sentences. However, the parties further assert that the statutory maximum possible penalty on Counts III, V, VI, and X is three years, not ten, because of the value of the property at issue. The parties further assert that in its written judgment, the court imposed financial and probation conditions 13(e), 13(h), 19, 23, 24, and 25, which were not part ofits oral pronouncement. 10/04/2022

Case Number: DA 22-0215Thus, the parties have stipulated and jointly moved that this Court remand this

matter tothe District Court with instructionstoresentence Welchon Counts III, V,VI, and X within the statutory parameters and to strike conditions 13(e), 13(h), 19, 23, 24, and 25 from the writtenjudgment in this matter. Based on the parties' stipulation, and good cause appearing, IT ISHEREBY ORDERED thatthiscaseisREMANDEDtotheThirteenthJudicial District Court, Yellowstone County, with instructions for the District Court to resentence Defendant Matthew Jason Welch on Counts III, V, VI, and X within the statutory parameters forthose offenses. IT IS FURTHERORDEREDthatthe District Court amend itsJudgmenttoconform with its oral pronouncement, as set forth above. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this appeal is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that REMITTITUR shall issue IMMEDIATELY UPON REMAND. The Clerk is directed to provide copies ofthis Order to all counsel ofrecord and to presidingjudge Honorable Donald L. Harris. Dated this 4th day ofOctober, 2022.

ChiefJustice

LA ani/ or

Justices 2
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 87 (Friday, May 5, 1995)]
[Sunshine Act Meetings]
[Page 22438]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11183]



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


LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Provision for the Delivery of Legal Services Committee Meeting
Time and Date: The Legal Services Corporation Board of Directors 
Provision for the Delivery of Legal Services Committee will meet on May 
12, 1995. The meeting will commence at 1:00 p.m.

Place: Legal Services Corporation, 750 1st Street, NE., 11th Floor, 
Board Room, Washington, DC 20002, (202) 332-8800.

STATUS OF MEETING: Open.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

OPEN SEASON:

    1. Approval of Agenda.
    2. Approval of Minutes of March 17, 1995 Meeting.
    3. Report on the Veterans Grant Initiative.
    4. Consider and Act on Proposal to Transfer Local Program Audit 
Review Function to the Inspector General.
    5. Consider and Act on Other Business.

CONTACT PERSON FOR INFORMATION: Patricia Batie (202) 336-8800.
    Upon request, meeting notices will be made available in alternate 
formats to accommodate visual and hearing impairments.
    Individuals who have a disability and need an accommodation to 
attend the meeting may notify Patricia Batie at (202) 336-8800.

    Date issued: May 2, 1995.
Patricia D. Batie,
Corporate Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-11183 Filed 5-3-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7050-01-M
One Wrong Step Can Make Food Deadly
== Bs aie : 4 5 ‘ ‘es w
i % : oI > ay f

Protect People Everywhere.
Never Store Raw Meat,
Poultry, or Seafood

Over Ready-to-Eat Foods.
Dominique BENTLEY, petitioner, v. ILLINOIS.

No. 12-8654.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, denied.
#### David M. SCATES, Petitioner—Appellant, v. George HINKLE, Respondent—Appellee.

No. 03-7766.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: March 31, 2004.

Decided: April 27, 2004.

David M. Scates, Appellant pro se.

Donald Eldridge Jeffrey, III, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WIDENER, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

*118PER CURIAM:

David M. Scates seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2254 proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. *See Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Scates has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.

*DISMISSED*
John KNOX, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-9615.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-7061

PATRICK WILSON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

JOHN LAMBERT; FLORENCE COUNTY DETENTION

CENTER,

Defendants - Appellees.

No. 97-7312

PATRICK WILSON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

JAMES C. GREGG, Sheriff of Florence County,

"solely in his individual capacity,"

Defendant - Appellee.
2

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Florence. David C. Norton, District Judge.

(CA-96-662-4-18BE, CA-97-611-4-18BE)

Submitted: January 6, 1998 Decided: January 22, 1998

Before WILLIAMS and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Patrick Wilson, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Thomas King, WILCOX,

MCLEOD, BUYCK & WILLIAMS, P.A., Florence, South Carolina, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
* Although the district court found that Wilson failed to

timely object to the magistrate judge’s report in the action

against Lambert, we do not rely on waiver as a ground for our

affirmance.

3

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's orders denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed

the records and the district court's opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Wilson v. Lambert, No. CA-96-662-4-18BE (D.S.C.

July 15, 1997); Wilson v. Gregg, No. CA-97-611-4-18BE (D.S.C. Aug.

29, 1997).* 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
Thomas D. SMITH, petitioner, v. John HOWERTON, Warden.

No. 12-9502.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit 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 Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the period ended February 28, 2009 of Sparking Events, Inc, a Nevada corporation (the “Company”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Annual Report”), I, Hui-Yu Che, Chief Financial Officer of the Company certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





1. The Annual Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





2. The information contained in this Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.








Dated: May 29, 2009
/s/ Hui-Yu CheHui-Yu CheChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)
James W. JAMES, petitioner, v. BAYWALK HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, et al.

No. 12-9633.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 10, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, First Appellate District, denied.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 87 (Friday, May 5, 1995)]
[Sunshine Act Meetings]
[Page 22437]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11207]



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


COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

time and date: 10:00 a.m., Wednesday, May 24, 1995.

place: 2033 K St., NW., Washington, DC 8th Floor Hearing Room.

status: Closed.

matters to be considered: Enforcement Matters.

contact person for more information: Jean A. Webb, 202-254-6314.
Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 95-11207 Filed 5-3-95; 10:58 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
Sherod L. HUNT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D19-661

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed July 2, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Herbert Alonzo ROBINSON, petitioner, v. Jill WILSON, et al.

No. 12-9461.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 3, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit 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





Each of
the undersigned hereby certifies, in his capacity as an officer of Fushi
Copperweld, Inc. (the "Company"), for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the
best of his knowledge:





(1) The
Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31,
2009 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:
May 11, 2009





/s/
      Li FuLi
      FuChief
      Executive Officer/s/
      Wenbing Chris WangWenbing
      Chris WangChief
      Financial
Officer





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Fushi Copperweld, Inc. and will be retained by Fushi Copperweld, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM INSTITUTE, et al., petitioners, v. UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE.

No. 12-722.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 93 (Monday, May 15, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 25896]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11874]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP95-283-000]


Southern Natural Gas Company; Notice of Proposed Changes To FERC 
Gas Tariff

May 9, 1995.
    Take notice that on May 4, 1995, Southern Natural Gas Company 
(Southern) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Seventh 
Revised Volume No. 1, the following revised tariff sheets, to be 
effective as of the dates shown below:

June 3, 1995
    Second Revised Sheet Nos. 98-99
    First Revised Sheet No. 177
    First Revised Sheet No. 180
    Second Revised Sheet No. 219
May 4, 1995
    First Revised Sheet No. 169
    First Revised Sheet No. 173
    First Revised Sheet No. 178
    Second Revised Sheet No. 275

    Southern states that the purpose of this filing is to (1) eliminate 
the requirement to submit a prepayment with a request for firm 
transportation service, (2) eliminate the provision that allows 
Releasing Shippers to require prepayments from the Acquiring Shippers, 
and (3) comply with the provisions of Commission Order No. 577 which 
revise its Regulations governing non-posted, capacity release 
transactions. Southern has requested an effective date of June 3, 1995, 
for the first two revisions and an effective date of May 4, 1995, the 
effective date of Order No. 577, for the third revision.
    Southern states that copies of the filing will be served upon its 
shippers and interested state commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 825 North Capitol Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 
20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules 
of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such 
motions and protests should be filed on or before May 16, 1995. 
Protests will not be considered by the Commission in determining the 
parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene.
    Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are 
available for public inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-11874 Filed 5-12-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Exhibit 31.2





CERTIFICATION





I, Don Sproat, certify that:





1. I have reviewed this amended annual report on Form 10-K /A-2 of iMedicor, Inc. for the year ended June 30, 2014;





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 issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;





4. As The issuer's certifying officer I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the issuer and have:





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





b. designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such control over financial reporting to assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;





c. 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 (the “Evaluation Date”); and





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





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 issuer'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 issuer's internal control over financial reporting.





6. As the registrant’s certifying officer I have indicated in this year-end report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.








/s/ Don Sproat


Don Sproat


Chief Financial Officer


Date: May 6, 2016