alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION1



Pursuant to the
requirement set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. § 1350), Reynolds C. Bish, the Chief
Executive Officer of Captiva Software Corporation (the Company), hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:



1.    The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1
(the Periodic Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and



2.    The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the Company at the
end of the period covered by the Periodic Report and results of operations of the Company for the period covered by the Periodic Report.



Date:    May 9, 2005



|                                        
|----------------------------------------
|                                        
|/s/ REYNOLDS C. BISH                    
|Reynolds C. Bish Chief Executive Officer

---

1This Certification accompanies the Periodic Report, is not deemed filed with the SEC and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company
under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Periodic Report), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
Willie Ed SMITH, petitioner, v. MISSISSIPPI.

No. 18-7969.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 18, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Mississippi denied.
MONOCACY BANCSHARES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY          EXHIBIT 11.0


                      Information used in the computation
                         of net income per common share

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                     Nine Months Ended          Three Months Ended
                                                                      September 30,                September 30,

                                                                1996             1995           1996            1995
                                                                ----             ----           ----            ----
<S> <C>
Net income                                                  $1,278,643       $1,891,597       $308,444        $648,982
                                                            ==========      ===========       ========        ========
Weighted average common shares outstanding                   1,459,958        1,318,973      1,462,734       1,321,166
                                                             =========        =========      =========       =========

Net income per common share                                      $.88           $1.43           $.21            $.49
                                                                 ====           =====           ====            ====
</TABLE>

                                       12
Christian Dior WOMACK, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-8262.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
Scott Anthony CROW, petitioner, v. Lorie DAVIS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

No. 18-7491.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 25, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Demetrio CISNEROS, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-7296.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 19, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 83 (Friday, April 29, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 25509]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-09269]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4520-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2022-0001]


Wisconsin; Amendment No. 10 to Notice of a Major Disaster 
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the State of Wisconsin (FEMA-4520-DR), dated April 4, 2020, and 
related determinations.

DATES: This change occurred on March 28, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and 
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency 
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the 
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Thomas C. 
Sivak, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer 
for this disaster.
    This action terminates the appointment of Moises Dugan as Federal 
Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, 
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis 
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster 
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance 
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and 
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, 
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing 
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially 
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other 
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially 
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2022-09269 Filed 4-28-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
# C_2015190EN.01002501.xml

| 8.6.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 190/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.6.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 190/25

---

Action brought on 30 March 2015 — Estonia v Commission

(Case T-157/15)

(2015/C 190/29)

Language of the case: Estonian

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Estonia (represented by: Kristi Kraavi-Käerdi, acting as Agent)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

| — | annul Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/103 of 16 January 2015 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (C(2015) 53 final) (1) in so far as it concerns the Republic of Estonia in the amount of EUR 6 91  746,53; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/103 of 16 January 2015 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (C(2015) 53 final) (1) in so far as it concerns the Republic of Estonia in the amount of EUR 6 91  746,53;

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant contests the Commission Implementing Decision of 16 January 2015 (C(2015) 53 final) in so far as it concerns the Republic of Estonia in the amount of EUR 6 91  746,53 for the years 2009 to 2011.

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law.

By the first plea, the applicant submits that the contested decision should be annulled because the Commission wrongly ascertained and assessed the circumstances which were the basis of the decision and applied EU law incorrectly, leading to the false conclusion that Estonia had endangered EU funds.

According to the second plea, the Commission infringed the principle of proportionality and incorrectly applied Article 52(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 (2), in that the contested decision imposed a flat-rate financial correction of 2 % on Estonia.

According to the third plea, the Commission breached the principle of good administration, as it did not carefully assess and take into account all the evidence put forward by the applicant.

According to the fourth plea, the Commission breached the principle of legal certainty, as it took the view that the GAEC landscape elements standard should also have been applied and its application continually monitored in 2009.

---

(1)  
  OJ 2015 L 16, p. 33.

(2)  Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on the financing, management and monitoring of the common agricultural policy and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 352/78, (EC) No 165/94, (EC) No 2799/98, (EC) No 814/2000, (EC) No 1290/2005 and (EC) No 485/2008 (OJ 2013 L 347, p. 549).

---
Ashley Mere HOWARD, petitioner, v. TEXAS.

No. 17-9302.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

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

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1308

To extend the supplemental security income benefits program to Guam and

the United States Virgin Islands.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 25, 1999

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN (for herself and Mr. UNDERWOOD) introduced the

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To extend the supplemental security income benefits program

to Guam and the United States Virgin Islands.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY

4 INCOME BENEFITS PROGRAM TO GUAM AND

5 THE UNITED STATES VIRGIN ISLANDS.

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1101(a)(1) of the Social

7 Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1301(a)(1)) is amended by strik8 ing ‘‘, the Virgin Islands, and Guam’’ each place such

9 term appears.

10 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—
2

•HR 1308 IH

1 (1) Section 303(b) of the Social Security

2 Amendments of 1972 (86 Stat. 1484) is amended by

3 striking ‘‘, Guam, and the Virgin Islands’’.

4 (2) Sections 3(a)(2), 1003(a)(2), 1403(a)(2),

5 and 1603(a)(2) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 303(a)(2),

6 1203(a)(2), 1353(a)(2), and 1383 note) are each

7 amended by striking ‘‘, the Virgin Islands, and

8 Guam’’.

9 (3) Section 1614(e) of such Act (42 U.S.C.

10 1382c(e)) is amended by striking ‘‘and the District

11 of Columbia’’ and inserting ‘‘, the District of Colum12 bia, the Virgin Islands, and Guam’’.

13 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

14 this section shall take effect on the 1st day of the 3rd

15 calendar month that begins after the date of the enact16 ment of this Act.

Æ
```

```

----

Updated November 28, 2011
Ilich VARGAS, aka Ilich Ernesto Vargas Romero, petitioner, v. John McMAHON.

No. 18-6261.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 1, 2019.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Austin RAY, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-7148.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 19, 2019.

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

Justice GORSUCH took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
In Re Ronnie Lee FAGAN, petitioner.

No. 18-8123.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2019.

Petition for writ of mandamus denied.
I

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1481

To designate the United States courthouse under construction at 333 Las

Vegas Boulevard South in Las Vegas, Nevada, as the ‘‘Lloyd D. George

United States Courthouse’’.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 20, 1999

Ms. BERKLEY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

A BILL

To designate the United States courthouse under construction at 333 Las Vegas Boulevard South in Las Vegas,

Nevada, as the ‘‘Lloyd D. George United States Courthouse’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF LLOYD D. GEORGE UNITED

4 STATES COURTHOUSE.

5 The United States courthouse under construction at

6 333 Las Vegas Boulevard South in Las Vegas, Nevada,

7 shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Lloyd D. George

8 United States Courthouse’’.
2

•HR 1481 IH

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

2 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the United

4 States courthouse referred to in section 1 shall be deemed

5 to be a reference to the ‘‘Lloyd D. George United States

6 Courthouse’’.

Æ
Antwain Lamour WILLIAMS, petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA.

No. 17-9118.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District denied.
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION2



Pursuant to Section 906
of the Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted), Rick E. Russo, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:



1.        The Companys Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2003, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.2 (the Periodic Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended; and



2.        The
information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the Company at the end of the period covered by the Periodic Report and results of operations of the Company for the period covered by
the Periodic Report.



Date:  November 12, 2003



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/    RICK E.
RUSSO                 
|Rick E. Russo Chief Financial Officer



---

2This Certification accompanies the Report in accordance with § 906 of the
Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act of 2002 and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether
made before or after the date of this Form 10-Q), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
# United States Court of Appeals **for the Fifth Circuit**

____________ No. 22-40777 Summary Calendar

____________ United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee ,

versus Domingo Hernandez-Perez, Defendant—Appellant

.

______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:22-CR-1162-1

______________________________ Before Jones , Stewart, and Duncan, Circuit Judges

. Per Curiam: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Domingo Hernandez-Perez 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). Hernandez-Perez has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED May 30, 2023 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 22-40777 Document: 00516768126 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/30/2023No. 22-40777

2 record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issu e for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED , counsel is excused from further responsibilitie s herein, and the appeal is DISMISSED

. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2. Case: 22-40777 Document: 00516768126 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/30/2023
Scott PETERS, petitioner, v. Nancy A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security.

No. 18-7376.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 25, 2019.

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

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Brandon Everett Palmer, Appellant

No. 06-23-00174-CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

Appeal from the 202nd District Court of 

Bowie County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 

22F1714-202). Panel consists of Chief 

Justice Stevens and Justices van Cleef and 

Rambin. Memorandum Opinion delivered 

by Justice Rambin. 

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find there was partial error in the 

judgment of the court below. Therefore, we modify the trial court’s judgment by replacing 

“N/A” with “YES” in regard to the allegations contained in the first and second enhancement 

paragraphs and by replacing “N/A” with “TRUE” as to the jury’s finding in regard to the second 

enhancement paragraph. As modified, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

We note that the appellant, Brandon Everett Palmer, has adequately indicated his inability 

to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED AUGUST 23, 2024

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

SCOTT E. STEVENS

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
Exhibit 10.10



SECOND AMENDMENT TO WARRANT CERTIFICATES



Reference is hereby made to Warrant Certificate nos. 1 through 9 inclusive (collectively, the Warrants and
individually a Warrant) dated February 5, 1999, and the first Amendment to the Warrant, dated June 9, 2000, of Ascendant Solutions, Inc., a Delaware corporation, (formerly known as ASD Systems, Inc., a Texas corporation) (the
Company). Each of the Warrants was issued in the name of CKM Software Partners, Skip Victor and/or Russell Belinsky. Capitalized terms defined in the Warrants shall have the same meaning herein unless otherwise specifically provided
herein.



Pursuant to Section 7(a) of the Warrants, each Warrant
is hereby amended to provide the following additional rights:



| | 1. |  | Per Section 1 of the Warrants state that they will expire on February 5, 2004. This Amendment will extend the life of the Warrants and the new expiration date will be February 5,
2006 for each Warrant.
| | -- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. |  | Sections 10, 11 and 12 of the Warrants are hereby incorporated herein by this reference.
| | -- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 3. |  | Except as specifically provided above, all other provisions of the Warrant Certificates shall remain in full force and effect.
| | -- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Second Amendment to Warrant
Certificates as of the 21st day of July, 2003.



ASCENDANT SOLUTIONS, INC., a Delaware corporation (formerly known as ASD Systems, Inc., a Texas corporation)By:

/S/    DAVID E.
BOWEDavid E. Bowe, President & CEOREGISTERED OWNER:  CKM SOFTWARE PARTNERS (With respect to Warrants No. 1, 4 & 7)By:

/S/    JONATHAN
BLOCHJonathan Bloch, General Partner
```

```

----

Updated January 14, 2011
Travis HAWKINS, petitioner, v. Mark S. INCH, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections.

No. 18-1021.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 4, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
##### 



Exhibit 31.2
 Certification
Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
      (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)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or
caused such internal control over financial reporting to be
designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable
assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting
and the preparation of financial statements for external
purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles;(c)
    
    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(d)
    
    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
  (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.
  By:
    
    /s/ Lee E. BeckelmanName:
    
    Lee E. BeckelmanTitle:
    
    Vice President and Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)