alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Vascular Solutions, Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, James Hennen, Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify to my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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) 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.

| |                         
| | ------------------------
| | /s/ James
 Hennen       
| | James Hennen            
| | Chief
 Financial Officer
| | July 22,
 2009          

---
#### CONRAD v. CONRAD.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

November 15, 1907.)

Action by Reine Conrad against George J. Conrad.

No opinion. Motion denied, with $10 costs. Settle order on notice.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-5205

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

JUAN CARLOS SORTO,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees,

District Judge. (5:05-cr-00030-1)

Submitted: August 23, 2007 Decided: August 28, 2007

Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and WILKINS and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lisa S. Costner, LISA S. COSTNER, P.A., Winston-Salem, North

Carolina, for Appellant. Amy Elizabeth Ray, OFFICE OF THE UNITED

STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Juan Carlos Sorto seeks to appeal his convictions and

123-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea to conspiracy

to possess with intent to distribute at least fifty grams of

methamphetamine and carrying a firearm during and in relation to a

drug trafficking crime. Sorto’s counsel has filed a brief pursuant

to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that there

are no meritorious grounds for appeal. Although notified of his

right to do so, Sorto has not filed a pro se supplemental brief. 

After conducting a de novo review of the record as

required by Anders, we agree that there are no meritorious grounds

for appeal. We find that the district court conducted a thorough

colloquy pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 and properly ascertained

that Sorto’s plea was knowing and voluntary. We also find that the

court sentenced Sorto within a properly calculated Guidelines

range, after granting the Government’s motion for a five-level

downward departure based on substantial assistance. To the extent

that counsel notes that Sorto voiced some concerns about trial

counsel prior to entering his guilty plea, we decline to address

any potential ineffective assistance of counsel claim as no

ineffective representation conclusively appears from the record.

See United States v. Baldovinos, 434 F.3d 233, 239 (4th Cir.),

cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1203 (2006).
- 3 -

Accordingly, we affirm Sorto’s convictions and sentence.

This court requires that counsel inform her client, in writing, of

his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for

further review. If the client requests that a petition be filed,

but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then

counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from

representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof

was served on the client. 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
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

            CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                         OF SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

In connection with this annual report on Form 10-K of Cortelco Systems Puerto
Rico, Inc. ("Registrant") I, Sergio Moren, Chief Executive Officer of
Registrant, certify, 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) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.       The information contained in this report fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
         Registrant.

Date: October 29, 2003                                 /s/ Sergio Moren
                                                       ------------------
                                                         Sergio Moren
                                                         Chief Executive Officer

<PAGE>

            CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                         OF SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

In connection with this annual report on Form 10-K of Cortelco Systems Puerto
Rico, Inc. ("Registrant") I, Francisco Sanchez, Chief Financial Officer of
Registrant, certify, 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) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.       The information contained in this report fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
         Registrant.

Date:  October 29, 2003                                /s/ Francisco Sanchez
                                                       -------------------------
                                                         Francisco Sanchez
                                                         Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                          58,470
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             450
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                12,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    237,176
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          75,155
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            75,048
<LOANS>                                      1,096,272
<ALLOWANCE>                                      9,617
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,488,474
<DEPOSITS>                                   1,283,743
<SHORT-TERM>                                    41,588
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             11,631
<LONG-TERM>                                     17,928
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        25,828
<OTHER-SE>                                     107,756
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               1,488,474
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 65,791
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               14,427
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   943
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                81,161
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              31,757
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              33,706
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           47,455
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    1,426
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 406
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 39,341
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 14,847
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      14,847
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     9,858
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.79
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.78
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.79
<LOANS-NON>                                     12,870
<LOANS-PAST>                                       128
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   317
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                10,033
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    2,471
<RECOVERIES>                                       470
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                9,617
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             9,617
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
|   | 1. | The Company's Form 10-Q/A Quarterly Report (Amendment No. 1) for the period ended April 30, 2010 (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. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|               | /s/ Denis A. Krusos                         |
|--------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|               | Denis A. Krusos                                                                                                                                                     |
|               | Chairman of the Board and                                                                                                                                           |
| September 14, 2010 |              Chief Executive Officer                                                               |
Order entered August 21 , 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

No. 05
- 13
- 00987
- CV IN RE STAFF CARE, IN C., Relator Original Proceeding from the 44th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 11
- 03615 

### O RDER In accordance with the Court’s opinion issued this date, the petition for writ of mandamus is conditionally GRANTED . The Court ORDERS the trial judge, the Honorable Carlos R. Cortez, Judge of the 44th Judicial District Court, to RENDER an order: 1 ) resolving all of the parties’ motions to compel that were pending as of July 18, 2013; 2) ruling on relator’s appeal of the Associate Judge’s Order granting Defendants’ Motion to Strike, and 3) setting a date for trial not less than thirty days from the date of the last of the order s resolving these motions. Should the trial judge fail to comply with this order, the writ will issue. The Court ORDERS the trial judge to file with this Court, within thirty (30) days of the date of this
order , a certified copy of his order issued in compliance with this order.
We ORDER that relator recover its costs of this original proceeding from real parties in
interest.
/s/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE
#### WILLIAM RIZIO, PLAINTIFF-PETITIONER, v. GLOBE TRUCKING CO., DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

See same case below: 58 *N. J. Super.*440.

*Messrs. Rosen & Kanov*for the petitioner.

*Messrs. Shaw, Pindar, McElroy, Connell & Foley*and *Mr. Theodore W. Geiser*for the respondent.

March 14, 1960.

Denied.
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Plant Genetic Resources Unit (PGRU): Geneva, NY
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Diversity Collections
                        Apple
                                    Brassica
                                    Buckwheat
                                    Celery
                                    Grape
                                    Hemp
                                    Onion
                                    Radish
                                    Squash
                                    Tart Cherry
                                    Tomato
                                    Other Seed CropsSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us






Crop Collection Pagesheadline bar No pages to list.


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
#### Henry C. Shoemaker, Respondent, *v.*New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Appellant.

(Argued April 21, 1890;

decided May 6, 1890.)

Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered upon an order made Kovemher 13,1888, which affirmed a judgment m favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict, and affirmed an order denying a motion for a new trial.

*G. D. Prescott*for appellant.

*T. Ourtm*for respondent.

Agree to affirm; no opinion.

All concur.

Judgment affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
COMPAQ COMPUTER CORPORATION'S CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENT OF INCOME FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<CAPTION>
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                           7,107
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,743
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      1,256
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                11,907
<PP&E>                                           2,028
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  14,580
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,106
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                         2,153
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,321
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    14,580
<SALES>                                          5,687
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 5,687
<CGS>                                            4,664
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,664
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   245<F1>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  40
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     23
<INCOME-TAX>                                         7
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 16
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        16
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.01
<FN>
<F1> Includes research and development costs.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
#### ZIMMERMAN v. RAU.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

July 11, 1913.)

Action by Emil Zimmerman against Emanuel Rau.

No opinion. Application denied, with $10 costs. Order signed. See, also, 142 N. Y. Supp. 467.
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 125 (Friday, July 2, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 35290]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-14185]


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

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION


FDIC Advisory Committee on Community Banking; Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).

ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, notice 
is hereby given of a meeting of the FDIC Advisory Committee on 
Community Banking. The Advisory Committee will provide advice and 
recommendations on a broad range of policy issues that have particular 
impact on small community banks throughout the United States and the 
local communities they serve.

DATES: Thursday, July 22, 2021, from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for further information 
concerning the meeting may be directed to Debra A. Decker, Committee 
Management Officer of the FDIC at (202) 898-8748.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Agenda: The agenda will include a discussion of current issues 
affecting community banking. The agenda is subject to change. Any 
changes to the agenda will be announced at the beginning of the 
meeting.
    Type of Meeting: The meeting is open to the public. Out of an 
abundance of caution related to current and potential coronavirus 
developments, the public's means to observe this meeting of the FDIC 
Advisory Committee on Community Banking will be via a Webcast live on 
the internet. In addition, the meeting will be recorded and 
subsequently made available on-demand approximately two weeks after the 
event. To view the live event, visit http://fdic.windrosemedia.com. To 
view the recording, visit http://fdic.windrosemedia.com/index.php?category=Community+Banking+Advisory+Committee. If you require 
a reasonable accommodation to participate, please contact 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#5b1f32283a393237322f220b29343c293a361b3d3f3238753c342d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a1e5c8d2c0c3c8cdc8d5d8f1d3cec6d3c0cce1c7c5c8c28fc6ced7">[email protected]</span></a> or call 703-562-2096 to make the necessary 
arrangements. For optimal viewing, a high-speed internet connection is 
recommended.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

    Dated at Washington, DC, on June 29, 2021.
Debra A. Decker,
Deputy Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-14185 Filed 7-1-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6714-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 23, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 05-40849

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RAMON ORNELAS-RODRIGUEZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:05-CR-109-ALL

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

Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Ramon Ornelas-Rodriguez appeals his guilty-plea sentence for

being unlawfully found in the United States following

deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b). We need

not decide the applicability of the waiver provisions in OrnelasRodriguez’s plea agreement because his constitutional challenge

is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S.

224, 235 (1998). Although Ornelas-Rodriguez contends that

Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly decided and that a majority of
No. 05-40849

-2-

the Supreme Court would overrule Almendarez-Torres in light of

Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), we have repeatedly

rejected such arguments on the basis that Almendarez-Torres

remains binding. See United States v. Garza-Lopez, 410 F.3d 268,

276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 298 (2005). 

Ornelas-Rodriguez properly concedes that his argument is

foreclosed in light of Almendarez-Torres and circuit precedent,

but he raises it here to preserve it for further review. 

AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit 13.1**

 

**Certification**

 

**Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

**(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)**

 

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections(a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of NTT DoCoMo, Inc., a Japanese corporation (the “Company”), hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that: 

 

The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended March 31, 2007 (the“Report”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company. 

 

Date: June 25, 2007