alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT
32.2








SECTION
1350 CERTIFICATION








In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Teen Education Group,  Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter  ending September
30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"),  I, Robert L.  Wilson,  President
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, to 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.








Date:
March 30, 2010











By: /s/
ROBERT L. WILSON


___________________________


Robert L.
Wilson


Principal
Financial Officer
##### 



Exhibit 13.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of China Yuchai International Limited (the
Company) hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge that: (i) the accompanying Annual Report on Form 20-F of the Company for the
year ended December 31, 2003 (the Report) fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company. Dated: June 29, 2004 By:
    
    /s/ Wrixon Frank Gasteen
Wrixon Frank Gasteen
Chief Executive Officer
 The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, and is not being filed for the purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be
incorporated by reference to any filing of the Company, whether made before or
after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such
filing.




---



##### 



Exhibit 13.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of China Yuchai International Limited (the
Company) hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge that: (i) the accompanying Annual Report on Form 20-F of the Company for the
year ended December 31, 2003 (the Report) fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company. Dated: June 29, 2004 By:
    
    /s/ Philip Ting Sii Tien
Philip Ting Sii Tien
Chief Financial Officer and Director
 The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, and is not being filed for the purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be
incorporated by reference to any filing of the Company, whether made before or
after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such
filing.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 113 (Tuesday, June 12, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 31629]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-14758]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RT01-75-003]


Entergy Services, Inc., on behalf of the Entergy Operating 
Companies: Entergy Arkansas, Inc., Entergy Gulf States, Inc., Entergy 
Louisiana, Inc., Entergy Mississippi, Inc., and Entergy New Orleans, 
Inc.; Notice of Filing

June 6, 2001.
    Take notice that on May 25, 2001, Entergy Services, Inc., on behalf 
of the five Entergy Operating Companies: Entergy Arkansas, Inc., 
Entergy Gulf States, Inc., Entergy Louisiana, Inc., Entergy 
Mississippi, Inc., and Entergy New Orleans, Inc., (together Entergy), 
submitted a compliance filing in response to the Commission's March 28, 
2001 order in the above-captioned proceedings.
    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 18, 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. 01-14758 Filed 6-11-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
# FCM Data November 2015

SELECTED FCM FINANCIAL DATA AS OF November 30,&KFF0000 &K0000002015FROM REPORTS FILED BY December 30,&KFF0000 &K0000002015	&P of &N
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-1769

JENNIFER MARIE JONES,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

COMSYS IT PARTNERS, INCORPORATED; MICHAEL MUSCATELL, Vice 

President, Strategic Accounts; KARLA MEADOR, Managing 

Director; TERRY BELL, Vice President, Human Resources; 

MICHAEL BARKER, Chief Operating Officer; KEITH MARKHAM, Sr. 

Regional Vice President,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Max O. Cogburn, Jr., 

District Judge. (3:10-cv-00072-MOC-DSC)

Submitted: April 23, 2012 Decided: May 8, 2012

Before MOTZ, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jennifer Marie Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Kimberly Quade Cacheris, 

MCGUIREWOODS, LLP, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Jennifer Marie Jones seeks to appeal the district 

court’s May 16, 2011 order dismissing the individual defendants 

and denying Jones’s motion to dismiss the counterclaims filed by

COMSYS IT Partners, Inc. (“COMSYS”). Jones also seeks to appeal 

the district court’s order refusing to grant her relief from the 

May 16 order. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over 

final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), and certain interlocutory 

and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P. 

54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-

46 (1949). The orders Jones seeks to appeal are neither final 

orders nor appealable interlocutory or collateral orders. 

Accordingly, we deny Jones’s motion to compel enforcement of the 

settlement agreement and dismiss the appeal for lack of 

jurisdiction. 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
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Ricardo JEFFERSON, Appellant.

No. 10-2163.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: Oct. 22, 2010.

Filed: Oct. 27, 2010.

Matthew C. Quinn, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Fort Smith, AR, for Appellee.

Ricardo Jefferson, Texarkana, TX, pro se.

William Arden McLean, El Dorado, AR, for Appellant.

Before WOLLMAN, MELLOY, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Ricardo Jefferson appeals the 188-month prison sentence the district court1 imposed after he pleaded guilty to distributing more than 5 grams of a mixture or substance containing cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(l)(B)(iii). His counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief under *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. *1361396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), stating that Jefferson believes his sentence is too severe.

We conclude that the district court committed no procedural error and imposed a substantively reasonable sentence. *See Gall v. United States,*552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007) (in reviewing sentence, appellate court first ensures that district court committed no significant procedural error, and then considers substantive reasonableness of sentence under abuse-of-discretion standard; if sentence is within applicable Guidelines range, appellate court may apply presumption of reasonableness); *United States v. Haack,*403 F.3d 997, 1004 (8th Cir.2005) (describing abuse of discretion).

Having reviewed the record under *Penson v. Ohio,*488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfrivo-lous issues. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm.

1

. The Honorable Harry F. Barnes, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas.
```

[Federal Register: April 22, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 77)]
[Notices]
[Page 19749]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr22ap99-35]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

TIME AND DATE: 2:00 p.m., Monday, May 17, 1999.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., N.W., Washington, D.C., 9th Floor Conference
Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:
    Adjudicatory Matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Jean A. Webb, 202-418-5100.
Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 99-10264 Filed 4-20-99; 2:38 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
```

----

**======== RETURN    TO INDEX ========**

----
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 22
- 0529 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. JASSIE LAYDELL WESTERMAN,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including September 29 , 2023 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 23 2023

08/23/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0529
Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP 1

RTO and ISO Commenter Remarks

Paul J. Pantano, Jr. -- February 25, 2016

• The benefits of public interest exemptions for the 

RTOs and ISOs, the CFTC and the public;

• The history of the Commission’s public interest 

exemptions; and

• The adverse consequences of allowing private 

claims based solely upon RTO and ISO transactions.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

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

Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Strategic Storage Trust, Inc., (the Company), in connection with the Companys Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011 (the Report) hereby certifies, to his knowledge, that:



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



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



|                    |  |     |  |                                                                              
|------------------- |  | --- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: May 13, 2011 |  | By: |  | /s/ H. Michael Schwartz                                                      
|                    |  |     |  | H. Michael Schwartz President, CEO and Director (Principal Executive
Officer)
| DOCUMENT NUMBER: | 3 | **:** |
|------------------|---|-------|

|  | D.J. Huseman, FutureCom,          to E.W. Colbert, CFTC, re: FOIA Confidential |
|--|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  | Treatment Request |
|--|-------------------|

| DATE: |  | 5/5/99 | PAGES: |  | 1 | PDF SIZE: |  | 30 KB | PDF LINK: |
|-------|--|--------|--------|--|---|-----------|--|-------|-----------|

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

| DOCUMENT NUMBER: | 4 |
|------------------|---|

|  | D.J. Huseman, FutureCom,          to E.W. Colbert, CFTC, re: FOIA Confidential |
|--|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  | Treatment Request |
|--|-------------------|

| DATE: |  | 5/20/99 | PAGES: |  | 1 | PDF SIZE: |  | 33 KB | PDF LINK: |
|-------|--|---------|--------|--|---|-----------|--|-------|-----------|

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

First
Previous
Next
Last
#### Didar AHAMED; Monika Ahamed; and Dishamoni Ahamed, Petitioners, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 06-73435.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted July 22, 2008.*

Filed Sept. 3, 2008.

Ahmed M. Abdallah, Hollywood, CA, for Petitioners.

Rebecca Anne Niburg, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, District Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

Before: B. FLETCHER, THOMAS, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Didar Ahamed and his wife and daughter, all natives of Bangladesh and members of the Ahmadiya community, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying them motion to reopen deportation proceedings. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for an abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, *Iturribarria v. INS,*321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), and we grant the petition for review and remand.

*532Petitioners argued in their motion to reopen that conditions in Bangladesh have changed since the time of their merits hearing, and attached a recent State Department Country Report and several Amnesty International reports to support their argument. The State Department Country Report submitted at the time of petitioners’ merits hearing made no mention of any anti-Ahmadiya activity. In contrast, the new evidence presented with the motion to reopen is replete with accounts of threats, intimidation and hate speech against Ahmadiyas, and it indicates an escalating threat to Ahmadiyas in Bangladesh. In particular, the Amnesty International Reports indicate that Ahma-diyas in Bangladesh “may be at risk of violent attack” by orthodox Islamist groups, and describe the “impunity for violence” against Ahmadiya members as “endemic” in Bangladesh. Accordingly, we conclude that BIA abused its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to reopen where they provided sufficient evidence that circumstances have changed in Bangladesh regarding the Ahmadiya community such that petitioners now have a “reasonable likelihood” of demonstrating a well-founded fear of persecution. *See Malty v. Ashcroft,*381 F.3d 942, 947-48 (9th Cir.2004).

Accordingly, we grant the petition and remand to the BIA with instructions to reopen. *See id.*at 948.

PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.

**

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

Inspector Generals FY 2007 Asse
40 C
CFT

M A N A G E M E N T ’ S D I S C U S S I O N A N D A N A LY S I S
# FCM Data June 2011

SELECTED FCM FINANCIAL DATA AS OF June 30,&KFF0000 &K0000002011FROM REPORTS FILED BY August 01,&KFF0000 &K0000002011	&P of &N
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 110 (Thursday, June 7, 2001)]
[Presidential Documents]
[Page 30633]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-14520]




                        Presidential Documents 



Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 110 / Thursday, June 7, 2001 / 
Presidential Documents

[[Page 30633]]


                Presidential Determination No. 2001-17 of June 1, 2001

                
Determination Under Subsection 402(d)(1) of the 
                Trade Act of 1974, as Amended--Continuation of Waiver 
                Authority for Vietnam

                Memorandum for the Secretary of State

                Pursuant to the authority vested in me under the Trade 
                Act of 1974, as amended, Public Law 93-618, 88 Stat. 
                1978 (hereinafter the ``Act''), I determine, pursuant 
                to section 402(d)(1) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. 2432(d)(1), 
                that the further extension of the waiver authority 
                granted by section 402 of the Act will substantially 
                promote the objectives of section 402 of the Act. I 
                further determine that continuation of the waiver 
                applicable to Vietnam will substantially promote the 
                objectives of section 402 of the Act.

                You are authorized and directed to publish this 
                determination in the Federal Register.

                    (Presidential Sig.)B

                THE WHITE HOUSE,

                    Washington, June 1, 2001.

[FR Doc. 01-14520
Filed 6-6-01; 8:45 am]
Billing code 4710-10-M
**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**

|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                        |                         |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------|
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                        |                         |
|   | By:                                                                                                                                                                                               | /s/              Israel Levy |
|   | Name:   Israel              Levy                                                                                                                                                        |
|   | Title:                 President,                Chief Executive Officer, Treasurer                and Director(Principal                Executive, Financial & Accounting                Officer) |

----
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-14-00020-CR

James LEGATE,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of 

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 1998CR6480

Honorable Melisa Skinner, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Delivered and Filed: February 12, 2014

DISMISSED

On August 11, 1999, James Legate was sentenced to ninety-nine years imprisonment. On 

January 7, 2014, he filed a notice of appeal. In his notice of appeal, Legate states that on September 

15, 2013, he filed a Motion for the Release of Clerk’s Record. He complains that the trial court 

has failed to rule on his motion. A complaint about the failure of a trial court to rule on a motion 

cannot be brought on direct appeal, but should instead be brought in a mandamus proceeding. See

In re Chavez, 62 S.W.3d 225, 228 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2001, orig. proceeding); In re Ramirez, 

994 S.W.2d 682, 683 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1998, orig. proceeding). We therefore ordered 
04-14-00020-CR

appellant to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Appellant 

has filed a response to our order that stating he is “voluntarily dismissing [his] notice of appeal.”

See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2. We dismiss this appeal.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish

- 2 -
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-40795

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

FREDERICK JOSEPH KING, a/k/a Freddie King,

Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. G-95-CR-6-1

- - - - - - - - - -

April 10, 1997

Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Frederick King has moved for leave to supplement the record

with a copy of the transcript of his detention hearing and with

copies of the transcripts of sentencing hearings in other

criminal cases. The motion is GRANTED as to the detention

hearing transcript and is otherwise DENIED.

The Government appeals the district court’s decision to

apply the “safety-valve” provision of 18 U.S.C. § 3663(f) in

sentencing King. The Government argues that King was not
No. 96-40795

- 2 -

entitled to relief because he had failed to disclose the last

name of his drug supplier, or state that he did not know the

name. The district court found that King disclosed what he knew. 

This finding was not clearly erroneous. See United States v.

Edwards, 65 F.3d 430, 433 (5th Cir. 1995). The judgment is 

AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED IN PART, DENIED IN PART.