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 Annual Report of IA Global, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-K/A for the year ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Derek Schneideman,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to
the best of my knowledge, that:

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

         (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company for the dates and periods covered by the Report.

         This certificate is being made for the exclusive purpose of compliance
by the Chief Executive and Financial and Accounting Officer of the Company with
the requirements of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and may not
be disclosed, distributed or used by any person or for any reason other than as
specifically required by law.

                                        /s/ Derek Schneideman
                                        Derek Schneideman
                                        Chief Executive Officer
                                        December 23, 2008
# C_2010195EN.01001602.xml

| 17.7.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 195/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.7.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 195/16

---

Order of the President of the Court of 21 April 2010 — BCS SpA v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Deere & Company

(Case C-553/09 P) (1)

1

2010/C 195/25

Language of the case: English

Language of the case: English

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 51, 27.2.2010.

1

---
Luis A. NIEVES, et al., petitioners, v. Russell P. BARTLETT.

No. 17-1174.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 28, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granted.
REPUBLIC OF SUDAN, petitioner, v. Rick HARRISON, et al.

No. 16-1094.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 25, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit granted.
George Desales MORSE, petitioner, v. Adam Paul LAXALT, Attorney General of Nevada, et al.

No. 17-5301.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-30113

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JOSE LUIS REGALADO, also known as Tito,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 6:09-CR-124-2

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DENNIS, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Jose Luis Regalado has moved for

leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California,

386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011).

Regalado has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the

relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s

assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. 

Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is

excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 

See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

November 14, 2013

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

* 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.

 Case: 13-30113 Document: 00512441734 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/14/2013
Release: #4045-97 (97 Civ. 638)    For Release: August 28, 1997**CFTC FILES TWO-COUNT ANTI-FRAUD ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST RONALD    BARBACK, A TENNESSEE-BASED COMMODITY TRADING ADVISOR**

**Court-Issued*****Ex Parte** Order Prohibits    the Defendant From*

**Destroying or Altering Books and Records**

WASHINGTON -- The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) announced    today that on August 27, 1997, the Honorable Leon Jordan, U.S. District    Court Judge for the Eastern District of Tennessee, entered an *ex    parte* asset freeze order against **Ronald Barback** of Knoxville,    Tennessee, prohibiting Barback from destroying, altering, or disposing of    books and records. Barback has never been registered with the CFTC in any    capacity.

The court's action stems from a two-count CFTC civil injunctive    complaint filed on August 27, 1997, charging Barback with defrauding at    least seven customers of at least $165,000 in violation of the anti-fraud    provisions of the *Commodity Exchange Act (CEA)*.

The CFTC complaint specifically alleges that Barback misrepresented to    prospective customers his performance record and the risks associated with    trading commodity futures contracts, and that he guaranteed certain    prospective customers that they would profit from futures trading. In    addition, Barback is charged with the unauthorized trading of at least one    customer's account.

**Hearing Scheduled for September 10th**

In its continuing litigation against the defendant, the CFTC is seeking    preliminary and permanent injunctions in addition to other remedial relief,    including restitution to customers, a trading prohibition, and civil    penalties in an amount of not more than the higher of $110,000 ($100,000    for violations occurring before November 28, 1996) or triple the monetary    gain to the defendant, whichever is greater, for each violation of the CEA    or CFTC regulations.

A hearing on the preliminary injunction is scheduled on September 10,    1997.
(Yleuj // 2JHS

MAY 18 2fls

"* P.O. BosiLL1 f ~—<k£&K

R.L '. UuiseNo!iz.-15-dddw-o/

Ale hctL affyp*J uj*s £UAr!//4 lesr /* At M<*i s/yfc 4jl4/aj*uU*s zw^ .

IfcVtV^AtfJ <Lt h> nppc/fa^ Mot feprzs^<L<iby ^O&rAJ^/U/ftppdicujJA'U Pro 5£, &a/Jdi>,At*& App^/I^ut -ft/'f-k? Tb/uturJ OkCopy Dp 'Noh'c^oPfipp^"

fippt/UAI-t- five App^//c^ //i>//^V/ ///I/ /,a^ tbifilbnw flppeJ/e, tls*Ja. AJot.'ce,

{Lour-4- btAppeal.

Ltrrihudc of'Service

jrfypurf h^u jjtMJ /rf<u led-pc 1YIP- 9u>Lu~$ /Yleyerj aP-PP<l C/es/& cAP,'c*-i** feduhu*.
# L_2008047EN.01000101.xml

| 21.2.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 47/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.2.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 47/1

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 96/2007

of 27 July 2007

amending Protocol 31 to the EEA Agreement, on cooperation in specific fields outside the four freedoms

THE EEA JOINT COMMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, as amended by the Protocol adjusting the Agreement on the European Economic Area, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’, and in particular Articles 86 and 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Protocol 31 to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 89/2005 of 10 June 2005 (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Protocol 31 to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 89/2005 of 10 June 2005 (1).

| (2) | It is appropriate to extend the cooperation of the Contracting Parties to the Agreement to include Council Decision 2007/162/EC, Euratom of 5 March 2007 establishing a Civil Protection Financial Instrument (2). |
| --- | --- |

(2)

It is appropriate to extend the cooperation of the Contracting Parties to the Agreement to include Council Decision 2007/162/EC, Euratom of 5 March 2007 establishing a Civil Protection Financial Instrument (2).

| (3) | Protocol 31 to the Agreement should therefore be amended in order to allow for this extended cooperation to take place from 1 January 2007, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Protocol 31 to the Agreement should therefore be amended in order to allow for this extended cooperation to take place from 1 January 2007,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The following subparagraph shall be added in Article 10(8) of Protocol 31 to the Agreement:

| ‘(c) | Community acts which shall take effect from 1 January 2007:






  — | 32007 D 0162: Council Decision 2007/162/EC, Euratom of 5 March 2007 establishing a Civil Protection Financial Instrument (OJ L 71, 10.3.2007, p. 9).’ |
| --- | --- | --- |

‘(c)

Community acts which shall take effect from 1 January 2007:

—

32007 D 0162: Council Decision 2007/162/EC, Euratom of 5 March 2007 establishing a Civil Protection Financial Instrument (OJ L 71, 10.3.2007, p. 9).’

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the day following the last notification to the EEA Joint Committee under Article 103(1) of the Agreement (*1).

It shall apply from 1 January 2007.

Article 3

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 27 July 2007.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Stefán Haukur JÓHANNESSON

---

(1)  
  OJ L 268, 13.10.2005, p. 25.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 71, 10.3.2007, p. 9.

2

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
BOSTON FINANCIAL QUALIFIED HOUSING TAX CREDITS L.P. V


(A Limited Partnership





EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE


SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In connection with the Quarterly Report of Boston Financial Qualified Housing Tax Credits L.P. V (the “Partnership”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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 Partnership.











/s/Kenneth J. Cutillo


Kenneth J. Cutillo


Principal Executive Officer and


Principal Financial Officer


Arch Street VIII, Inc., as


Managing General Partner of


Boston Financial Qualified


Housing Tax Credits L.P. V





Date: February 14, 2011








A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Partnership and will be retained by the Partnership and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Larry RICE, petitioner, v. INTERFOOD, INC., et al.

No. 17-1504.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 18, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
1 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 00-21004

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RICHARD WAYNE LEE,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-00-CR-149-1

- - - - - - - - - -

September 24, 2001

Before DUHÉ, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:1

Richard Wayne Lee appeals his conviction following a jury

trial for being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of

18 U.S.C. § 922(g). Lee argues that the district court abused its

discretion when it (1) denied his request for a missing witness

instruction, (2) prevented him from cross-examining a witness about

an indictment and deferred adjudication from a state-court

proceeding, and (3) admitted photographic, gang-related evidence at

trial.
2

Lee has not demonstrated that it was within the Government’s

power to produce the missing witness. See United States v. Black,

497 F.2d 1039, 1042 n.3 (5th Cir. 1974); United States v. Davis,

487 F.2d 112, 126 (5th Cir. 1973); Ford v. United States, 210 F.2d

313, 316-17 (5th Cir. 1954). Nor has he demonstrated that the

missing witness’ testimony would have been favorable. See id.

Thus, the district court did not abuse its discretion when it

denied his request for a missing witness instruction. See United

States v. Pettigrew, 77 F.3d 1500, 1510 (5th Cir. 1996).

Lee has failed to provide any authority for his assertion that

Government witness Karen Bezet was prohibited from possessing a

firearm while she was under a state court indictment. Accordingly,

he has failed to demonstrate that she would have been motivated to

falsify her testimony based on the state court indictment and

deferred adjudication. Moreover, Bezet’s testimony regarding Lee’s

ownership of the firearms was corroborated by other witnesses. See

United States v. Gray, 105 F.3d 956, 965 (5th Cir. 1997). The

district court did not abuse its discretion when it limited Lee’s

cross-examination of Bezet. United States v. Freeman, 164 F.3d

243, 249 (5th Cir. 1999).

Lee’s assertion that the district court admitted impermissible

gang-related evidence is without merit. The parties and witnesses

were under instructions from the court not to make reference to

gangs or gang-related activities. No such testimony or argument

was presented to the jury. Lee makes only the speculative

assertion that the “SS” tattoo on his leg (which was displayed in
3

one of the photographs) is “widely recognized” as denoting

membership in a white supremacist prison gang. The district court

did not abuse its discretion when it admitted photographs of Lee’s

tattoos. See United States v. Parsee, 178 F.3d 374, 379 (5th Cir.

1999).

Lee’s conviction is AFFIRMED.
Jamil Stefon CARTER, petitioner, v. MICHIGAN.

No. 17-5357.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Michigan denied.
Phillip Edward BAKER, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-6476.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 5, 2018.

Petition for rehearing denied.
HOAI THANH, petitioner, v. HIEN T. NGO.

No. 17-1273.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 14, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 73 (Friday, April 15, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22613-22614]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-08111]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 11684]


Secretary of State's Determination Under the Foreign Assistance 
Act of 1961 To Provide Assistance to Ukraine

ACTION: Determination.

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

SUMMARY: The State Department is publishing a determination signed 
September 2, 2021 by the Secretary of State regarding the provision of 
military assistance to Ukraine.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Below is the ``Determination Under Section 
506(a)(1) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to Provide Assistance 
to Ukraine.''

[[Page 22614]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15AP22.037


Stanley L. Brown,
Acting Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, 
Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2022-08111 Filed 4-14-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-25-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET AND THE STATEMENTS OF REVENUE AND EXPENSES AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH REPORT ON FORM 10-K.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                       9,576,970
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,604,699
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  10,484,961
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,604,699
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               127,356
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,855
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              (30,078)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (116,596)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
##### 



Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Standard Management Corporation;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 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; andc)
    
    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 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 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 controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely
to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; andb)
    
    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.
  /s/ Ronald D. HunterRonald D. HunterChairman, Chief Executive Officer and President
Diego NUNEZ, petitioner, v. Julie L. JONES, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al.

No. 17-8406.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 11, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Joe Humberto RENTERIA-MARTINEZ, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-9608.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 25, 2018.

On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* and petition for writ of certiorari granted. Judgment vacated, and case remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit for further consideration in light of *Rosales-Mireles v. United States,* 585 U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 1897, --- L.Ed.2d ---- (2018).
SNR WIRELESS LICENSECo, LLC, et al., petitioners, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, et al.

No. 17-1058.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 25, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied.
Exhibit 99.1



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 Hooker Furniture Corporation (the Company) Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ending November
30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Paul B. Toms, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, 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, as amended; and
| | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 
| | 

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



|     
|-----
|Date:
|
Ty Kealoha EOFF, aka Ty Kegloha Eoff, petitioner, v. TEXAS.

No. 16-9706.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Texas, Second District denied.