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 Covenant Group of China Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Kenneth Wong, President of the Company, hereby certifies, 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.









Dated: November 15, 2010
By:  /s/ Kenneth WongKenneth WongPresident







This certification accompanies each Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.




A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
No. 163.

#### United States *v.*Vanbiervliet.

Argued December 9, 1931.

Decided December 14, 1931.

*Mr, Whitney North Seymour,*with whom *Solicitor General Thacher, Assistant Attorney General Dodds,*and *Mr. Frank M. Parrish*were on the brief, for the United States.

*Mr. Martin J. Kilsdonk*submitted for Vanbiervliet.

The facts certified were as follows: The alien entered the United States at Detroit on July 14,1924, without any immigration visa, thus entering in violation of § 13 of the Immigration Act of 1924 (Title 8, § 213, U. S. C.). He was arrested for deportation. January 3, 1930; and the warrant of deportation, based upon the finding “that he-was not, at the time of his entry into the United States, in possession of an unexpired immigration visa,” was issued February 17, 1930. Upon his petition for habeas corpus the District Court at Detroit discharged him from cus- ' tody because the period of limitation provided by § 19 of the Immigration Act of 1917 (Title 8, § 155, U. S. C.) had expired. From that order of discharge the Government appealed. Question certified: “ On January 3, 1930, did § 19 of the Immigration Act of 1917 (§. 155, Title 8, U. S. C.) by its time limitations bar the deportation proceedings? ”

*Per Curiam:*

Question answered “ No.” *Philippides v. Day,*283 U. S. 48.
FIRST COURT OF APPEA LS

301 Fannin Street

Houston, Texas 77002

- 2066

October 31, 2012

RE: Case No. 01

- 11

- 00439

- CV

Style: In the Matter of C.L.S.

Today the First Court of Appeals issued a dissenting opinion(s) in the

above

- refere nced cause.

A copy of the dissenting opinion(s) can be obtained through Case Search on

our Court’s webpage at:

http://www.1stcoa.courts.state.tx.us/.

T. C. Case # 56309 M. Karinne McCullough, Clerk of the Court

JIMMY PHILLIPS JR.

P.O. DRAWER 29

ANGLETON, TX 77516

- 0029

FIRST COURT OF APPEA LS

301 Fannin Street

Houston, Texas 77002

- 2066

October 31, 2012

RE: Case No. 01

- 11

- 00439

- CV

Style: In the Matter of C.L.S.

Today the First Court of Appeals issued a dissenting opinion(s) in the

above

- refere nced cause.

A copy of the dissenting opinion(s) can be obtained through Case Search on

our Court’s webpage at:

http://www.1stcoa.courts.state.tx.us/.

T. C. Case # 56309 M. Karinne McCullough, Clerk of the Court

MARY PETER CUDD

229 E. CEDAR

ANGLETON, TX 77 515
#### In the Matter of Michael A. Yood, for Reinstatement to the Practice of Law in the State of New York.

[874 NYS2d 830]—

Order entered terminating suspension and reinstating petitioner to the practice of law. Present — Hurlbutt, J.P., Smith, Centra and Peradotto, JJ. (Filed Mar. 5, 2009.)
CIRCUIT COURT OF ALBEMARLE COUNTY

#### Crystal H. Spangler v. Wintergreen Partners, Inc.

January 3, 1991

Case No. 4074-L

By JUDGE PAUL M. PEATROSS, JR.

This matter comes before the Court on the Motion to Transfer Venue filed by defendant, Wintergreen Partners, Inc., pursuant to § 8.01-265 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended.

A brief history of this case involves the fact that this matter was originally commenced in the Circuit Court for the City of Richmond in September of 1989. After a challenge to venue by defendant, including a hearing and submission of legal authority, the Circuit Court for the City of Richmond transferred this case to the Circuit Court for Albemarle County, Virginia. Albemarle County was not suggested by either side as an appropriate venue. The defendant in its original motion suggested Nelson County as the only appropriate jurisdiction to which venue should be transferred. A review of the evidence taken in the form of the transcript of hearing on November 7, 1989, revealed that defendant used a food supplier in Albemarle County, Virginia. Evidently, as a result of that activity, the Circuit Court for the City of Richmond transferred venue to this court.

This motion was filed pursuant to § 8.01-265 of the Code of Virginia and the language in that statute specifically gives "the Court wherein an action is commenced" the power to transfer venue to a more convenient *47forum. Since the Circuit Court for Albemarle County was not the court in which this action was commenced, this Court is without power to transfer venue to another court. Therefore, the Motion to Transfer Venue to Nelson County is 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

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of HUGHES Telematics, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended September 30, 2010 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 8, 2010
| DOCUMENT NUMBER: | 33 |
|------------------|----|

|  | Memorandum, Division ofTrading and Markets to Commission, Attachment L, Risk |
|--|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  | management Policy andProcedures |
|--|----------------------------------|

| DATE: | 06/14/01 | PAGES: | 4 | PDF SIZE: | 61 KB | PDF LINK: |
|-------|----------|--------|---|-----------|-------|-----------|

| **---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------** |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| DOCUMENT NUMBER: | 34 |
|------------------|----|

|  | Memorandum, Division ofTrading and Markets to Commission, Attachment M, June |
|--|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  | 8, 2001 Letter from BTEX toCommission |
|--|----------------------------------------|

| DATE: | 06/14/01 | PAGES: | 3 | PDF SIZE: | 35 KB | PDF LINK: |
|-------|----------|--------|---|-----------|-------|-----------|

| **---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------** |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

FirstPreviousNextLast

�
GWFS Equities, Inc.
                             8515 East Orchard Road
                        Greenwood Village, Colorado 80111


April 11, 2006

VIA EDGAR AND HAND DELIVERY

Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington D.C.  20549-0506

   Re:    Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance Company
          Post-Effective Amendment No. 6 to Registration Statement on Form S-3
          File No. 333-95839

Commissioners:

         The principal distributor hereby requests, pursuant to Rule 461 under
the Securities Act of 1933, that the Commission declare the enclosed
Registration Statement effective on May 1, 2006, or as soon thereafter as
practicable.

         The principal distributor represents that this request is consistent
with the public interest and the protection of investors.

                                         Very truly yours,


                                         GWFS EQUITIES, INC.


                                         By:  /s/ Charles P. Nelson

                                         Name:  Charles P. Nelson

                                         Title:  President
CERTIFICATIONS  I, Patricia Cooke,
certify that:  1. I
have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Asia Atlantic Resources;  2. Based
on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading
with respect to the period covered by this report;  3. Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and
for, the periods presented in this report;  4. The
registrant's other certifying officer(s) 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 registrant and have:  (a) Designed
such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated
the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed
in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and  5. The
registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):  (a) All
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and  (b) Any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial
reporting.    Date: March 18,
2010   _/s/
Patricia Cooke_________________ Patricia
Cooke Chief
Executive Officer, President and Director
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Audrenn STARR, also known as Adrian Gutierrez, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 11-50462

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

March 19, 2012.

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

M. Carolyn Fuentes, Henry Joseph Bemporad, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before WIENER, STEWART, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

United States Customs and Border Protection officers at the El Paso port of entry discovered drugs concealed on the person of Defendant-Appellant Audrenn Starr. The district court denied Starr’s motion to suppress the drugs. Following a bench trial on stipulated facts, Starr was convicted of importation of methylenediox-ymethamphetamine (MDMA) (Count One) and possession of MDMA with intent to distribute (Count Two). He contends on appeal that the district court should have granted the motion to suppress because the search, which involved lifting the hem of his untucked T-shirt approximately one inch, exceeded the acceptable limits of a routine border search.

We conclude that the district court did not err in concluding that the search of Starr’s person, which took place in a private room and was conducted by a person of the same sex, did not exceed the scope of a routine border search. *See United States v. Kelly,*302 F.3d 291, 294 (5th Cir.2002); *United States v. Sandler,*644 F.2d 1163, 1167 (5th Cir.1981) (en banc).

AFFIRMED.

*

 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.
No. 52.

#### Skipper *v.*Schumacher, Sheriff.

October 14, 1935.

*Mr. W. D. Bell*for petitioner.

*Mr. Cary D. Landis*for respondent.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Florida denied.
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed February 21, 2018.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D17-2436

Lower Tribunal No. 75-11762B

________________

William Charles Richardson,

Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida,

Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Stephen T.

Millan, Judge.

William Charles Richardson, in proper person.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before SALTER, EMAS and FERNANDEZ, JJ.

PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. The Appellant, William Charles Richardson, is directed to show

cause, within thirty days of the date of this opinion, why he should not be

prohibited from filing further pro se appeals, petitions, motions, or other pleadings

in this Court relating to lower tribunal case F75-11762. See State v. Spencer, 751

So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1999), and the trial court’s orders of October 13, 2017, June 24,

2016, September 24, 2015, and April 12, 2013, as well as this Court’s opinions and

orders in Case Nos. 3D17-2051, 3D16-2162, 3D16-1825, 3D15-1936, 3D15-530,

and 3D13-2045. 

2
CIRCUIT COURT OF FAIRFAX COUNTY

#### Mary Lynn Elliston v. Stohlman Automotive Group, Inc., et al.

Case No. (Law) 84914

August 1, 1989

By JUDGE RICHARD J. JAMBORSKY

This matter is before the Court on the demurrer to a three count Amended Motion for Judgment.

Count I: *Breach of Contract*

The demurrer is overruled. Looking at the pleading in the light most favorable to plaintiff and drawing all reasonable inferences in favor of the pleading, one could conclude that this was a contract supported by a written memorandum (Company Handbook, p. 15, Termination of Employment, and p. 16, Work Rules and Conduct).

Count II: *Retaliation Discharge*

The demurrer is overruled. It is true that this cause of action is not recognized in protection of private rights. But the allegation in Count II sufficiently affects the public interest so as to bring this action within *Bowman*v. *State Bank of Keysville,*229 Va. 534 (1985), and *Miller v. SEVAMP, Inc.,*234 Va. 462, 467 (1987).

*545Count III: *Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress*

The demurrer is overruled. If the defendants’ conduct was as alleged, it is sufficiently outrageous to bring it within the scope of *Womack*v. *Eldridge,*215 Va. 338 (1974).

November 26, 1990

By JUDGE THOMAS A. FORTKORT

This case is before the Court on defendant’s motion to dismiss Count III of plaintiff’s amended motion for judgment. For the following reasons, defendant’s motion is sustained.

As a matter of law, the Virginia Workers’ Compensation Act is the exclusive remedy for a plaintiff alleging intentional infliction of emotional distress arising out of and in the course of employment. *Haddon*v. *Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.,*239 Va. 397 (1990). Jurisdiction of this Court over the claims in Count III of plaintiff’s amended motion for judgment cannot be obtained by consent of the parties, waiver or estoppel. The defendant has raised a defense of this Court’s lack of jurisdiction to determine these claims. Jurisdictional issues can be raised at any time, even if the plaintiff is barred by the statute of limitation in seeking a remedy under the Virginia Workers’ Compensation Act.

Jurisdiction to determine claims in Count III of plaintiff’s amended motion for judgment is vested solely in the Industrial Commission of Virginia and not in this Court.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 112 (Monday, June 11, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 31226]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-14559]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. RT01-85-000, RT01-83-000, RT01-82-000, and RT01-92-000]


California Independent System Operator Corporation, Pacific Gas 
and Electric Company, San Diego Gas & Electric Company, Southern 
California Edison Company; Notice of Filing

June 4, 2001.
    Take notice that on June 1, 2001, the California Independent System 
Operator Corporation (ISO), Southern California Edison Company (SoCal 
Edison), and San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E), jointly, and 
Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), individually, tendered filings 
in compliance with the Commission's April 26, 2001 Order in Docket Nos. 
EL00-95-012, et al. San Diego Gas & Electric Company, et al., 95 FERC 
para. 61,115 (2001), reh'g pending. The April 26 Order required the 
ISO, SoCal Edison, SDG&E, and PG&E to file a proposal for a regional 
transmission organization (RTO).
    The ISO, SoCal Edison, SDG&E, and PG&E state that the filings have 
been served on all parties on the official service list maintained by 
the Secretary for above-captioned dockets.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest such filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 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 June 19, 2001. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission to determine the appropriate action to be 
taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceedings. 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. This filing may also be viewed on 
the Internet at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-
2222 for assistance).
    Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically 
via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and 
the instructions on the Commission's web site at http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm.

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-14559 Filed 6-8-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
IV 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1159 

Supporting efforts to address the crisis faced by Haitian orphans following 

the earthquake of January 12, 2010. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 10, 2010 

Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York submitted the following resolution; which was 

referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

RESOLUTION 

Supporting efforts to address the crisis faced by Haitian 

orphans following the earthquake of January 12, 2010. 

Whereas the tragic earthquake that struck Haiti on January 

12, 2010, has had devastating effects, leaving Haiti vulnerable and unstable; 

Whereas the death toll in Haiti nears 250,000, leaving thousands of Haitians with broken families and thousands of 

children parentless; 

Whereas nearly 1,000 Haitian orphans were in the process of 

being adopted into United States homes, and a total of 

nearly 20,000 orphans were in Haiti prior to this tragedy; 

Whereas the earthquake has created hundreds or thousands 

of newly orphaned children; 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 1159 IH 

Whereas many of these orphans have family in the United 

States; 

Whereas thousands of Haitian children, now orphans, face an 

uncertain future for adoption and await placement or reunion with their families either in Haiti or the United 

States; and 

Whereas the United States Department of State and Department of Homeland Security have provided excellent leadership in relief efforts for the Haitian people, and have 

worked tirelessly on behalf of orphaned children in Haiti: 

Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) remembers all of those lost and affected by 

3 this tragedy; 

4 (2) commends the efforts of the United States 

5 Department of State and Department of Homeland 

6 Security on behalf of orphans; and 

7 (3) urges the Federal Government to continue 

8 to work to improve the lives of Haitian orphans and 

9 to expeditiously develop a safe, legal process to re10 unite Haitian orphans with family members in the 

11 United States when possible. 

Æ 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS