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




STATEMENT OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER OF


INTERNATIONAL TEXTILE GROUP, INC.


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 on Form 10-K of International Textile Group, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Gail A. Kuczkowski, Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 31, 2011/s/ Gail A. KuczkowskiGail A. KuczkowskiVice President and Chief Accounting Officer

Principal Financial Officer




The foregoing statement is being furnished to accompany International Textile Group, Inc.’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 (the “Report”) solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document and shall not be deemed incorporated by reference into any other filing of International Textile Group, Inc. that incorporates the Report by reference. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to International Textile Group, Inc. and will be retained by International Textile Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 106 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 106

Authorizing the use of Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center 
 for a ceremony to award Congressional Gold Medals in honor of the men 
  and women who perished as a result of the terrorist attacks on the 
                  United States on September 11, 2001.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 11, 2014

 Mr. Shuster submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
           referred to the Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Authorizing the use of Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center 
 for a ceremony to award Congressional Gold Medals in honor of the men 
  and women who perished as a result of the terrorist attacks on the 
                  United States on September 11, 2001.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),

SECTION 1. USE OF EMANCIPATION HALL FOR GOLD MEDAL CEREMONY IN HONOR OF 
              FALLEN HEROES OF 9/11.

    Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center is authorized to be 
used on September 10, 2014, for a ceremony to award Congressional Gold 
Medals in honor of the men and women who perished as a result of the 
terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001. Physical 
preparations for the conduct of the ceremony shall be carried out in 
accordance with such conditions as may be prescribed by the Architect 
of the Capitol.
                                 <all>
```
Benjamin Jacob STRATTON, petitioner, v. VIRGINIA, dba Catheryn K. Clemens, et al.

No. 17-1551.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

*89Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED May 2, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-50949 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus WILFREDO LIZAMA-DIAZ, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:04-CR-979-ALL

-------------------- Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Wilfredo Lizama-Diaz pleaded guilty to illegal reentry after deportation and was sentenced to 46 months of imprisonment, three years of supervised release, and a $100 special assessment. Lizama-Diaz moves for appointment of new counsel based on his current court-appointed attorney’s decision not to file a reply brief in this case. The motion is DENIED. Lizama-Diaz argues that his sentence is unreasonable and is greater than necessary to meet the sentencing goals under 18No. 05-50949 -2- U.S.C. § 3553(a) because the court did not consider his rehabilitation. He does not challenge the district court’s calculation of his guidelines sentencing range. A sentence, such as Lizama-Diaz’s, “within a properly calculated Guideline range is presumptively reasonable.” United States v. Alonzo , 435 F.3d 551, 554 (5th Cir. 2006). In the district court’s written Statement of Reasons it noted that it considered, in part, “the history and characteristics of the defendant,” which would have encompassed any rehabilitation on Lizama-Diaz’s part. Lizama-Diaz has failed to demonstrate that his properly calculated guidelines sentence was unreasonable.
See id. ; United States v. Mares , 402 F.3d 511, 519 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 43 (2005). Lizama-Diaz also argues that the “felony” and “aggravated felony” provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and (b)(2) are unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000). His constitutional challenge is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998). Although Lizama-Diaz contends that Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule Almendarez-Torres in light of Apprendi , we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that AlmendarezTorres remains binding. See United States v. Garza-Lopez , 410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 298 (2005). Lizama-Diaz properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed inNo. 05-50949 -3- light of Almendarez-Torres and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review. AFFIRMED; MOTION DENIED.
Ronnie RICKS, Jr., Petitioner, v. TEXAS

No. 18-1579

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

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

October 20, 1997

Cecil Crowson, Jr.

Appellate C ourt Clerk

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

 AT JACKSON

 OCTOBER 1997 SESSION

RAY DARRIS THOMPSON,

) C.C.A. No. 02C01-9608-CC-00249 

 Appellant, )

) Lake County

V. )

) Honorable Joe G. Riley, Jr., Judge

)

FRED J. RANEY, WARDEN, )

) (Habeas Corpus-Rape)

Appellee. )

FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:

Mark A. Mesler John Knox Walkup

Ballin, Ballin & Fishman, P.C. Attorney General & Reporter 

200 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 1250

Memphis, TN 38103 Elizabeth T. Ryan 

Assistant Attorney General

450 James Robertson Parkway

Nashville, TN 37243-0493

C. Phillip Bivens

District Attorney General

P.O. Drawer E

Dyersburg, TN 38024

OPINION FILED: ___________________

AFFIRMED

PAUL G. SUMMERS,

Judge

O P I N I O N
-2-

In May 1975 the appellant, Ray Darris Thompson, was convicted by a jury

of rape. He received a seventy-five year sentence. In June of 1996 he filed a

petition for writ of habeas corpus. The trial court dismissed the petition finding

that the conviction was not void and that the appellant’s sentence had not

expired. He appeals this dismissal. Upon review, we affirm the judgment of the

trial court. 

The appellant contends that his conviction is void because the trial judge

failed to exercise his duty as thirteenth juror. He claims that after the jury found

him guilty of rape the trial judge approved the verdict after stating that he

disagreed with the jury’s decision. 

We first note that habeas corpus relief is limited to cases where the

judgement is void or the petitioner’s sentence has expired. Passarella v. State,

891 S.W.2d 619, 626 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1994). Even if we assume the

appellant’s allegations true, his conviction would not be void. If a trial judge fails

to exercise his role as thirteenth juror, the appellant’s conviction would be

voidable and he would be entitled to a new trial. Therefore, the appellant fails to

allege a cognizable claim for habeas corpus relief. 

Furthermore, the appellant has failed to provide this Court with a transcript

of the proceedings in which the trial judge expressed dissatisfaction with the

jury’s verdict. Without a transcript it is impossible for this Court to determine the

merits of the appellant’s claim. Tenn. Ct. Crim. App. Rule 10. 

 

Accordingly, we find no error of law mandating reversal. The judgment of

the trial court is affirmed. 
-3-

__________________________

PAUL G. SUMMERS, Judge

CONCUR:

__________________________

JOHN H. PEAY, Judge

__________________________

DAVID G. HAYES, Judge
Marby HOGEN, et al., Petitioners, v. Steven C. HOGEN, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Arline H. Hogen, Deceased, et al.

No. 18-1440

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of North Dakota denied.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

TYLER DIVISION 

THE DAILY WIRE, LLC, et al., 

 Plaintiffs, 

v. 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF 

STATE, et al., 

 Defendants. 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

Case No. 6:23-cv-609-JDK 

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE 

MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION 

Before the Court is Plaintiffs FDRLST Media, LLC, the State of Texas, and 

The Daily Wire, LLC’s motion for a preliminary injunction. Docket No. 11. The Court 

previously granted Plaintiffs’ motion for expedited preliminary-injunction discovery 

and granted the parties leave to supplement their existing briefing on the 

preliminary-injunction motion following that discovery. Docket No. 54. 

Upon further review, the Court DENIES the pending motion for a preliminary 

injunction (Docket No. 11) WITHOUT PREJUDICE and will allow Plaintiff to refile 

an amended motion after the close of the expedited discovery. The Court will issue 

an initial schedule that includes deadlines and page limits for briefing the amended 

motion. 

So ordered and signed on this 

Jun 12, 2024

Case 6:23-cv-00609-JDK Document 61 Filed 06/13/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 2008
Jose Luis TAPIA-FIERRO, Petitioner, v. William P. BARR, Attorney General, et al.

No. 19-6438.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 23, 2020

Petition for rehearing denied.
## **Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PERSUANT TO****18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,****AS ADOPTED PERSUANT TO****SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connectionwith the Quarterly Report of Steinway Musical Instruments, Inc.  (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterended June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the “Report”), I, Dennis M. Hanson, Senior Executive VicePresident and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that:

 

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

 

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

 

 
|   | /s/ Dennis  M. Hanson                |   |
|--------|--------------------------------------|--------|
|   |                                 |
|   | Senior  Executive Vice President and |
|   | Chief  Financial Officer             |
|   | (Principal  Financial Officer)       |

 

August 5, 2004

 

 

 

A signedoriginal of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided toSteinway Musical Instruments, Inc. and will be retained by Steinway MusicalInstruments, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission orits staff upon request.

 

1

----
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-14-0006317 14-APR-2014 08:29 AM
```
 
 
VIX FUTURES - CBOE FUTURES EXCHANGE                                  Code-1170E1
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 11/26/13          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
($1000 X INDEX)                                      OPEN INTEREST:      413,869
COMMITMENTS
 112,030  172,054  112,135  166,304  104,910  390,469  389,099   23,400   24,770

CHANGES FROM 11/19/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:    -25,772)
 -11,381   -6,212    9,374  -23,964  -26,303  -25,971  -23,141      199   -2,631

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    27.1     41.6     27.1     40.2     25.3     94.3     94.0      5.7      6.0

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      186)
      49       75       74       38       39      135      156
```

----

Updated December 2, 2013
Rashaun Scott CARTER, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-7575.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 9, 2020.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
PNM 3.31.2012 EX.10.5






Exhibit 10.5
FIRST AMENDMENT
TO THE
PNM RESOURCES, INC.
AFTER-TAX RETIREMENT PLAN
Effective as of January 1, 2009, PNM Resources, Inc. (the “Company”) adopted the PNM Resources, Inc. After-Tax Retirement Plan (the “Plan”).  By this instrument, the Company now desires to amend the Plan to eliminate the special credits that are provided due to a Change in Control.
1.    This First Amendment shall be effective as of January 1, 2012.
2.    This First Amendment amends only the provisions of the Plan as set forth herein, and those provisions not expressly amended hereby shall be considered in full force and effect.  Notwithstanding the foregoing, this First Amendment shall supersede the provisions of the Plan to the extent those provisions are inconsistent with the provisions and intent of this First Amendment.
3.    Section 3.3(d) (Supplemental Contributions - Termination During the Plan Year) of the Plan is hereby amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows: 
(d)    Termination During the Plan Year.  An Eligible Officer must be employed on December 1 of the relevant Plan Year in order to have any right to receive the Supplemental Contribution called for by this Section 3.3 (Supplemental Contributions) for that Plan Year.  (In most instances, the Eligible Officer also must be employed on the date on which the Supplemental Contribution will vest, as provided in paragraph (e)).  Notwithstanding the foregoing, an Eligible Officer shall receive a pro-rata Supplemental Contribution if the Eligible Officer incurs a Separation from Service before December 1 of any Plan Year under any of the following circumstances:  (1) after reaching Normal Retirement Date; (2) under circumstances that entitle the Eligible Officer to receive benefits under the Officer Retention Plan; (3) due to Disability or (4) due to the death of the Eligible Officer.  The pro-rata Supplemental Contribution shall be calculated based on the time elapsed between December 1 of the prior Plan Year and the date of the Eligible Officer's Separation from Service as compared to 365 days and shall be credited to the 











Eligible Officer's Account within thirty (30) days of the Eligible Officer's Separation from Service.  For example, if an Eligible Officer terminates employment on June 1, 2012 due to retirement, the Eligible Officer will receive 50% of the Supplemental Contributions for the 2012 Plan Year and that amount will be credited to the Eligible Officer's Account by July 1, 2012.
4.    Section 3.5 (Special Change In Control Provisions) of the Plan is hereby amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows:
3.5    Reserved.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, PNM Resources has caused this First Amendment to be executed as of this _28th_ day of _March________, 2012.
PNM RESOURCES, INC.
By:    /s/ Patrick Apodaca                                                 
      Its:    Sr. V.P., General Counsel & Secretary        





2
Matthew TASSONE, Petitioner, v. Zephynia TASSONE.

No. 19-6852

Supreme Court of the United States.

Feb. 24, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Ohio, Franklin County denied.
Michael Anthony THIBODEAUX, Petitioner, v. Drew EVANS, Superintendent, Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension.

No. 19-6432

Supreme Court of the United States.

Feb. 24, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Minnesota denied.
Exhibit L

Case 2:24-cv-00021-JRG Document 54-13 Filed 07/18/24 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 3164
Case 2:24-cv-00021-JRG Document 54-13 Filed 07/18/24 Page 2 of 14 PageID #: 3165
Case 2:24-cv-00021-JRG Document 54-13 Filed 07/18/24 Page 3 of 14 PageID #: 3166
Case 2:24-cv-00021-JRG Document 54-13 Filed 07/18/24 Page 4 of 14 PageID #: 3167
Case 2:24-cv-00021-JRG Document 54-13 Filed 07/18/24 Page 5 of 14 PageID #: 3168
Case 2:24-cv-00021-JRG Document 54-13 Filed 07/18/24 Page 6 of 14 PageID #: 3169
Case 2:24-cv-00021-JRG Document 54-13 Filed 07/18/24 Page 7 of 14 PageID #: 3170
Case 2:24-cv-00021-JRG Document 54-13 Filed 07/18/24 Page 8 of 14 PageID #: 3171
Case 2:24-cv-00021-JRG Document 54-13 Filed 07/18/24 Page 9 of 14 PageID #: 3172
Case 2:24-cv-00021-JRG Document 54-13 Filed 07/18/24 Page 10 of 14 PageID #: 3173
Case 2:24-cv-00021-JRG Document 54-13 Filed 07/18/24 Page 11 of 14 PageID #: 3174
Case 2:24-cv-00021-JRG Document 54-13 Filed 07/18/24 Page 12 of 14 PageID #: 3175
Case 2:24-cv-00021-JRG Document 54-13 Filed 07/18/24 Page 13 of 14 PageID #: 3176
Case 2:24-cv-00021-JRG Document 54-13 Filed 07/18/24 Page 14 of 14 PageID #: 3177
EXHIBIT 31.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Linda Kwan certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Glas-Aire Industries
Group, Ltd.

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 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 function):

     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 controls
     over financial reporting.

Date: November 14, 2003

/s/ Linda Kwan
--------------
Linda Kwan, Chief Financial Officer
Billy J. BOOKER, Petitioner, v. Lorie DAVIS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

No. 19-7300.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 23, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Sherrick A SIMS, Petitioner, v. KANSAS.

No. 18-9347

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 07, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Kansas denied.
EXHIBIT 32.2



Certification

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

(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title
18, United States Code)



Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of Reptron Electronics, Inc., Inc., a Florida corporation (the Company), does hereby certify that:



To my knowledge, the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2003 (the Form 10-K) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|               |  |  |  |     |  |                                              
|-------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------
|               |  |  | 
|March 30, 2004 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/    PAUL J. PLANTE                        
|               |  |  |  |     |  |                                              
|Date           |  |  |  |     |  | Paul J. Plante Acting Chief Financial Officer



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.