alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 110 (Thursday, June 7, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 30741]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-14359]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute on Aging; Amended Notice of Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the National 
Institute on Aging Special Emphasis Panel, June 7, 2001, 2:30 p.m. to 
June 7, 2001, 4 p.m., 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD, 20892 which 
was published in the Federal Register on May 24, 2001. 66 FR 28756.
    The meeting scheduled for June 7, 2001 will now be held on June 20, 
2001. The meeting is closed to the public.

    Dated: May 31, 2001.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 01-14359 Filed 6-6-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
EXHIBIT 32


<PAGE>


      In connection with the Quarterly Report of Digital Development Partners,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2010 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), Jack Jie Qin,
the Principal Executive and Financial Officer of the Company, certifies,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of 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 the Company.


November 15, 2010                     By:  /s/ Jack Jie Qin
                                           --------------------------------
                                           Jack Jie Qin, Principal Executive and
                                             Financial Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Robert A. Lafferty, Appellant.

[875 NYS2d 395]—

Appeal from a judgment of the Cattaraugus County Court (Larry M. Himelein, J.), rendered August 8, 2005. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of driving while intoxicated, a class D felony, and aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously modified as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice and on the law by vacating the sentence and as modified the judgment is affirmed, and the matter is remitted to Cattaraugus County Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of felony driving while intoxicated ([DWI] Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192 [3]; § 1193 [1] [c] [former (ii)]) and aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle in the second degree (§511 [2] [a] [ii]). As part of the plea agreement, County Court stated that it would impose an indeterminate term of imprisonment of no more than 2 to 6 years. The court, however, failed to advise defendant that the sentence on the DWI count could include a fine. In addition to imposing a term of imprisonment of 2 to 6 years on the DWI count at the time of sentencing, the court ordered defendant to pay a fine of $3,000 on that count, as well as a fine of $1,000 on the aggravated unlicensed operation count.

As the People correctly concede, the court erred in imposing a fine on the DWI count without affording defendant an op*1319portunity to withdraw his plea inasmuch as the fine was not mentioned at the time of the plea *(see People v Barber,*31 AD3d 1145, 1146 [2006]; *People v Fulton,*238 AD2d 439 [1997]). Although the issue is not preserved for our review *(see*CPL 470.05 [2]), we nevertheless exercise our power to review it as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice *(see*CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). Because defendant was denied the benefit of his plea bargain, we modify the judgment by vacating the sentence, and we remit the matter to County Court to impose the sentence promised on the DWI count or to afford defendant the opportunity to withdraw his plea *(see People v Shabazz,*203 AD2d 947 [1994]; *see also Santobello v New York,*404 US 257, 262-263 [1971]). In the event that defendant does not withdraw his plea and the court imposes the sentence promised on the DWI count, we note that defendant must be resentenced on the aggravated unlicensed operation count in accordance with Vehicle and Traffic Law § 511 (2) (b). Present—Scudder, P.J., Hurlbutt, Peradotto and Gorski, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 108 (Tuesday, June 5, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 30176]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-14115]


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

COMMISSION OF FINE ARTS


Notice of Meeting

    The next meeting of the Commission of Fine Arts is scheduled for 
June 21, 2001 at 10:00 a.m., in the Commission's offices at the 
National Building Museum, Suite 312, Judiciary Square, 441 F Street, 
NW, Washington, DC, 20001-2728. Items of discussion affecting the 
appearance of Washington, DC, may include buildings, parks and 
memorials.
    Draft agendas are available to the public one week prior to the 
meeting. Inquiries regarding the agenda and requests to submit written 
or oral statements should be addressed to Charles H. Atherton, 
Secretary, Commission of Fine Arts, at the above address or call 202-
504-2200. Individuals requiring sign language interpretation for the 
hearing impaired should contact the Secretary at least 10 days before 
the meeting date.

    Dated: in Washington, DC, May 30, 2001.
Charles H. Atherton,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-14115 Filed 6-4-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6330-01-M
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED DE CEMBER 18, 2014

NO. 03

- 13

- 00584

- CV

Kyle Lynn Ashley, Appellant

v.

Citimortgage, Inc., Appellee

APPEAL FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, GOODWIN, AND FIELD

AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE PURYEAR

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the tr i a l court on August 15, 2013. Having

reviewed the record and the pa rties’ arguments, the C ourt holds that there was no reversible error

in the judgment . Therefore, the C ourt affirms the trial court’s judgment

. The appellant shall pay

all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and the court below.
No. 07-21-00286-CR

In re Eli D. Edwards, Relator Original Proceeding December 7, 2021 Opinion by Chief Justice Quinn § § § § J U D G M E N T Pursuant to the opinion of the Court dated December 7, 2021, it is ordered, adjudged, and decreed that relator's petition for writ of mandamus is hereby denied.

o O o
EXHIBIT 31.1

                                CERTIFICATIONS

I, William Tay, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of China Quest
Acquisition Corp.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

4. The small business issuer's other certifying officers 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)) for the small business issuer
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 small business issuer,
including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within
those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report
is being prepared;

   (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer'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 small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small
business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business
issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit
committee of the small business 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 controls over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the small business 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 small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting.


Date: April 14, 2008

CHINA QUEST ACQUISITION CORP.


/s/ William Tay
-------------------------------
William Tay, President and CEO
(Principal Executive and Financial Officer)
EXHIBIT 32.1

      CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND 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, Raul Getino, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge, Descanso
Agency Inc.'s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March
31, 2008 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 Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial
condition and results of operations of Descanso Agency Inc.


Date: April 28, 2008                  By: /s/ Raul Getino
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                      Name:  Raul Getino
                                      Title: Chief Executive & Financial Officer

This certification accompanies the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed for
purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the
liability of that section. This certification shall not be deemed to be
incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or the
Exchange Act, except to the extent that Descanso Agency, Inc. specifically
incorporates it by reference.
EXHIBIT 32.1





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 NO SHOW, INC. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended April 30, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Raniero Corsini, Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.














/s/ RANIERO CORSINIRaniero CorsiniChief Executive and Chief Financial OfficerDecember 12th, 2011
Exhibit 32.1




CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER




UNDER 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 0F 2002




I, Michael Marckx, the President and Chief Executive Officer of SPY Inc. (the “Company”), certify for the purposes of Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code that, to my knowledge,




(i) the annual report of the Company on Form 10-K /A for the year ended December 31, 2012 (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the 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: November 5, 2013By:
/s/ Michael MarckxMichael MarckxPresident and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)






I, James McGinty , Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of SPY Inc. (the “Company”), certify for the purposes of Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code that, to my knowledge,




(i) the annual report of the Company on Form 10-K /A for the year ended December 31, 2012 (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the 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: November 5 , 2013By:
/s/ James McGintyJames McGintyChief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary(Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)
#### In the Matter of the Estate of Kevin W. Stanley, Deceased. Diane R. Stanley, Appellant; Lawrence J. Mattar, Esq., et al., Respondents. In the Matter of the Estate of Kathleen A. Stanley, Deceased. Richard T. Stanley, Appellant; Lawrence J. Mattar, Esq., et al., Respondents.

Submitted November 28, 2011;

decided February 16, 2012

On the Court’s own motion, appeal by Diane R. Stanley dismissed, without costs, upon the ground that no substantial constitutional question is directly involved. On the Court’s own motion, appeal by Richard T. Stanley dismissed, without costs, upon the ground that appellant is not a party aggrieved. Motion for leave to appeal, insofar as made by Diane R. Stanley, denied; motion for leave to appeal, insofar as made by Richard T. Stanley, dismissed upon the ground that said appellant is not a party aggrieved.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Armando SIMENTAL-CARRILLO, also known as Manuel Garcia, also known as Manuel Avilez, also known as Armando Braulio Simental, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-50016

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Oct. 26, 2010.

Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Judy Fulmer Madewell, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Henry Joseph Bem-porad, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before SMITH, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Armando Simental-Carrillo (Simental) appeals the sentence imposed following his conviction of unlawful reentry pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Simental contends that the district court erred by imposing a 16-level crime of violence enhancement based on his prior Texas conviction of indecency by exposure with a child under 17 years of age, a violation of Texas Penal Code *25§ 21.11(a)(2). He argues that the Texas conviction is not within the enumerated offense of sexual abuse of a minor because an offense under § 21.11(a) can be committed against a victim who is 16 years of age. The Government moves for summary affir-mance or, in the alternative, for an extension of time to file a brief.

As Simental concedes, his argument is foreclosed by circuit precedent. *See United States v. Ayala,*542 F.3d 494, 495 (5th Cir.2008); *United States v. Zavala-Sustaita,*214 F.3d 601, 604 (5th Cir.2000). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED and the Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED. The alternative request for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be *25published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
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 HUGHES Telematics, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jeffrey A. Leddy,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:



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



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



By:

/s/ JEFFREY A. LEDDYName:

Jeffrey A. LeddyTitle:

Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)Date:

November 13, 2009
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-18-00079- CV
In re Harlan Levien, Stephen L evien, K enneth Ives, and Parvin Johnson , Jr.

ORI GINAL P ROCEEDI NG F ROM B ASTROP CO UNTY

O R D E R P ER CURIAM

Relators Har lan L evien, Stephen L evien, Kenne th I ves, and Parvin J ohnson, J r., have filed a petition for writ of manda mus seeking revie w of the district c ourt’s January 23, 2018 order compelling production of a n email communication and f iled a motion for emer g ency relief asking this Court to sta

y the order pending resolution of their petition f or writ of ma

ndamus. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.1-.3, .10. We g rant the motion for emer g ency relief and stay t h e d i s trict court’s order pending further order of this Court. See id. R. 52.10. The rea l pa rties in inter est, Kenne th L evien, Ba rry L evien, and Phili p L evien, are reque sted to file a response to the petition for writ of mandamus on or bef ore Ma rch 8, 2018. I t is ordere d Fe bruar

y 7, 2018.

Be fore J ustices Pury ear , Pemberton, and B ourland
QT5, INC.

                                   EXHIBIT 32

                            CERTIFICATION OF OFFICERS
                                  OF QT 5, INC.
                           PURSUANT TO 18 USC SS. 1350

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsection (a) and
(b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) each of the
undersigned officers of QT5, Inc. (the "Company") does hereby certify, to such
officer's knowledge, that:

(a) The Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2004 of
the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(b) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(b) Information contained in the Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

A signed original copy of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to QT5, Inc. and will be retained by QT5, Inc. and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

Dated: October 4, 2004


/s/ Edward W. Withrow III
--------------------------------------------------------------
Edward W. Withrow III
Chief Executive Officer


/s/ Edward W. Withrow III
--------------------------------------------------------------
Edward W. Withrow III
President


/s/ Edward W. Withrow III
--------------------------------------------------------------
Edward W. Withrow III
Acting Chief Financial Officer
#### J. Asuncion Urbina CORREA, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 05-72869.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 26, 2008.*

Filed Sept. 8, 2008.

*590J. Asuncion Urbina Correa, Ontario, CA, pro se.

CAC-Distriet Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Richard M. Evans, Esq., Patricia A. Smith, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: SCHROEDER, KLEINFELD, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

J. Asuncion Urbina Correa, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order summarily affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision preter-mitting his application for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the IJ’s continuous physical presence determination. *Ibarra-Flores v. Gonzales,*439 F.3d 614, 618 (9th Cir.2006). We review de novo claims of constitutional violations. *Ram v. INS,*243 F.3d 510, 516 (9th Cir.2001). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Urbina Correa did not meet the continuous physical presence requirement where he testified that he departed the United States for eight months in 1992. *See*8 U.S.C. § 1229b(d)(2) (departure for any period in excess of 90 days or for any periods in the aggregate exceeding 180 days breaks continuous physical presence).

Urbina Correa’s equal protection challenge to the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (“NACARA”) is foreclosed by *Jimenez-Angeles v. Ashcroft,*291 F.3d 594, 603 (9th Cir.2002) (“Congress’s decision to afford more favorable treatment to certain aliens ‘stems from a rational diplomatic decision to encourage such aliens to remain in the United States.’ ”) (citation omitted). Urbina Correa’s due process challenge based on NACARA also fails. *See Hernandez-Mezquita v. Ashcroft,*293 F.3d 1161, 1165 (9th Cir.2002) (rejecting due process challenge because petitioner failed to demonstrate he was deprived of a qualifying liberty interest).

*591Urbina Correa’s contention that the streamlined BIA decision violates his constitutional rights is foreclosed by *Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft,*350 F.3d 845, 848 (9th Cir.2003).

Urbina Correa’s remaining contentions are not supported by the record, because the IJ did not make any findings regarding credibility or hardship.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.