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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7419

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

CHARLES LEE TORIAN,

 Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of Virginia, at Danville. Norman K. Moon, Senior

District Judge. (4:01-cr-70057-NKM-1)

Submitted: January 14, 2016 Decided: January 20, 2016

Before AGEE, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Charles Lee Torian, Appellant Pro Se. Donald Ray Wolthuis, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Charles Lee Torian appeals the district court’s order 

denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for a sentence 

reduction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible 

error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the 

district court. United States v. Torian, No. 4:01-cr-70057-NKM1 (W.D. Va. Aug. 24, 2015). We dispense with oral argument 

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented 

in the materials before this court and argument would not aid 

the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO****18 U.S.C. SECTION1350,****AS ADOPTED PURSUANTTO****SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with theAnnual Report of BIO-key International, Inc. (the “Company”) onForm 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2005, as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Francis J. Cusick, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of The Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that:

 

(1)                     The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934; and

 

(2)                     The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultof operations of the Company.

 

 
| BIO-KEY  INTERNATIONAL, INC. |                    |              |
|-----------------------------------|-------------------------|-------------------|
| By:                               | /s/                     | FRANCIS J. CUSICK |   |
|                              | Francis J. Cusick       |
|                              | Chief Financial Officer |
| Date: March 30, 2006         |                    |              |
|                                   |                         |                   |  |  |  |

 

----
#### In the Matter of Carl Gee, Petitioner, v Glenn S. Goord, as Commissioner of Correctional Services, Respondent.

[800 NYS2d 775]

*637Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

When petitioner bent over during a strip frisk, a blue balloon fell from his anus which he proceeded to put in his mouth and swallow. He was placed in temporary isolation on a drug watch for two days during which time he defecated twice, but no drugs were found. Petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with smuggling, possessing contraband, violating frisk and search procedures and refusing a direct order. Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, he was found guilty of all charges except refusing a direct order. The determination was affirmed on administrative appeal, resulting in this CPLR article 78 proceeding.

We confirm. The misbehavior report, together with the testimony of its author, provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt *(see Matter of Borcsok v Selsky,*296 AD2d 678, 678 [2002], *lv denied*98 NY2d 616 [2002]; *Matter of Rosati v Senkowski,*221 AD2d 675, 676 [1995]). Although no drugs were recovered as a result of the drug watch, the blue balloon constituted contraband inasmuch as it was an article not authorized by the superintendent or his designee *(see*7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [14] [xiv]). Inasmuch as petitioner secreted this item on his person following a visit, he smuggled it from one part of the facility to another *(see*7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [15] [i]). His subsequent attempt to dispose of the item by swallowing it violated frisk and search procedures *(see*7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [16]), notwithstanding the absence of a direct order prohibiting him from doing so. Petitioner’s denial of the incident and claim that the correction officer mistook blue dots on his underwear for the balloon presented a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve *(see Matter of Spulka v Goord,*12 AD3d 1004, 1005 [2004]).

Mercure, J.P., Crew III, Carpinello, Mugglin and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.
RENFRO v. RICHARDSON SPORTS, et al.

No. 537P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 29, 2006.

Shannon P. Metcalf, Hatcher B. Kincheloe, Charlotte, for Richardson Sports, Inc.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 5th day of April 2006 by Plaintiff to Remand:

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference this the 29th day of June 2006."

Justice TIMMONS-GOODSON recused.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





The undersigned, Velda King, President and Chief Executive Officer, and Gerald R. Tuskey, Chief Financial Officer, of Pacific Alliance Ventures Ltd., 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 quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Pacific Alliance Ventures Ltd. for the period ended March 31, 2005 (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 Pacific Alliance Ventures Ltd.









Dated May 12, 2005

/s/Velda King



Velda King,

President and Chief Executive Officer





/s/Gerald R. Tuskey



Gerald R. Tuskey,

Chief Financial Officer and

Principal Accounting Officer
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 Annual Report of
Internet Infinity, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended March
31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the
date hereof (the “Report”), I, George Morris, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, 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)           Information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:  July
13, 2009




/s/ George
      MorrisGeorge
      MorrisChief Financial
      Officer







A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Internet Infinity, Inc. and will be retained by Internet Infinity, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
#### In the Matter of Frank A. Monzon, Appellant, v Lori Zaikowski, Respondent.

[800 NYS2d 433]

In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Snellenburg, S.M.), entered November 10, 2003, which, after a hearing, denied the petition for a change of custody and granted the mother’s oral application to amend the parties’ judgment of divorce to award the mother sole custody of the parties’ child.

Ordered that on the court’s own motion, so much of the notice of appeal as purports to appeal as of right from that portion of the order as granted the mother’s oral application to amend the judgment of divorce is deemed to be an application for leave to appeal from that portion of the order, and leave to appeal is granted *(see*CELR 5701 [c]); and it is further,

Ordered that the order is modified by deleting the provision thereof granting the oral application to amend the judgment of divorce and substituting therefor a provision denying the oral application; as so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

A change in custody should be made only if the totality of the circumstances warrants a change in the best interests of the child *(see Eschbach v Eschbach,*56 NY2d 167, 171 [1982]; *Matter of Krebsbach v Gallagher,*181 AD2d 363, 364 [1992]; *see also Friederwitzer v Friederwitzer,*55 NY2d 89 [1982]). Along with *376the factors considered in any custody determination, the court must also consider the stability and continuity afforded by maintaining the present arrangement *(see Eschbach v Eschbach, supra*at 171; *Friederwitzer v Friederwitzer, supra*at 94; *Matter of Krebsbach v Gallagher, supra).*Stability can be maintained where, as here, priority is given to the parent who was first awarded custody by voluntary agreement *(see Matter of Coyne v Coyne,*150 AD2d 573, 575 [1989]). Here, the evidence adduced at trial supports the conclusion that the best interests of the child will be advanced by leaving residential and physical custody with the mother.

The mother made an oral application during the hearing to amend the judgment of divorce entered in the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, on January 13, 1995, on the ground that the judgment did not conform the findings of fact and conclusions of law. The Family Court did not have jurisdiction to correct the judgment *(see*Family Ct Act § 652 [b] [ii]). Any motion to correct the judgment on the ground that it did not conform to its corresponding Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law would have to be made in the Supreme Court *(see*CPLR 2221).

The parties’ remaining contentions are without merit. Schmidt, J.P., Mastro, Rivera and Skelos, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 21.1

Sabre Holdings Corporation  Subsidiaries

(All subsidiaries are wholly owned unless otherwise noted in parenthesis. Each subsidiary's subsidiaries outlined further below.)

Sabre
Holdings Corporation SUBSIDIARY



Sabre Inc.
SUBSIDIARIES



GetThere Inc.
SUBSIDIARIES



AllMeetings Inc.
SUBSIDIARY



GetThere
L.P. SUBSIDIARY



1

---

Greyhound
Acquisition Corp SUBSIDIARY



Sabre
Decision Technologies International, Inc. SUBSIDIARIES



Airline
Technology Services Mauritius Ltd. SUBSIDIARY



Sabre
Holdings GmbH SUBSIDIARIES



Sabre
International, Inc. SUBSIDIARIES



Sabre
China Sea Technologies Ltd. SUBSIDIARY



Sabre
Deutschland Marketing GmbH SUBSIDIARY



Sabre
Marketing Nederland B. V. SUBSIDIARY



2

---

Sabre
International Holdings, Inc. SUBSIDIARIES



Sabre
Australia Technologies I Pty Limited SUBSIDIARIES



Sabre
Investments, Inc. SUBSIDIARIES



SabreMark
G.P., Inc. SUBSIDIARY



SabreMark
L.P., Inc. SUBSIDIARY



Sabre
Soluciones de Viaje S. de R.L. de C.V. SUBSIDIARIES



Sabre
Technology Enterprises, Ltd. SUBSIDIARIES



Sabre
Technology Enterprises II, Ltd. SUBSIDIARY



Sabre
Technology Holland B.V. SUBSIDIARIES



Sabre
Sociedad Tecnologica S.A. de C.V. SUBSIDIARY



Sabre
Travel International Limited SUBSIDIARY



Travel
Technologies Holdings GmbH SUBSIDIARIES



3

---

DCS
GmbH & Co. KG SUBSIDIARIES



Travelocity
Holdings, Inc. SUBSIDIARY



Travelocity.com Inc.
SUBSIDIARIES



Travelocity.com
LP Sub Inc. SUBSIDIARY



Travelocity.com
LP SUBSIDIARIES



Travelocity
GmbH SUBSIDIARY



Travel
Overland Flugreisen GmbH SUBSIDIARY



Travelocity
Holdings GmbH SUBSIDIARIES



Skandinavisk
Reisefeber AS SUBSIDIARIES



*
All subsidiaries are wholly-owned unless otherwise noted in parenthesis

4

---

QuickLinks
| 1. | The Form 10-Q of the Corporation for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2010 (the "Form 10-Q"), fully complies with requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition, and results of operations of the Corporation. |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date: August 13, 2010 | /s/ Carol K. Nelson                                                                                                                                |
|-----------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                  | By:     Carol K. Nelson,President and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)                                |
|                  |                                                                                                                                               |
| Date: August 13, 2010 | /s/ Debra L. Johnson                                                                                                                               |
|                  | By:     Debra L. Johnson,Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) |

----
WATSON v. SNEAD.

No. COA05-813.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed February 21, 2006.

Certification Date March 13, 2006.

Appeal from Johnston (04CVS1660).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 32.1 CEO CERTIFICATIONS UNDER SECTION 906



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 Marketing
Worldwide, Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending  June 30, 2012 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Charles Pinkerton, Chief Executive Officer
of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to 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; and



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



| | /s/ Charles Pinkerton   | 
| | ----------------------- | 
| | Charles Pinkerton       | 
| | Chief Executive Officer | 
| | August 20, 2012         |
**THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS**

**Post Office Box 12248**

**Austin, Texas 78711**

**(512) 463-1312**

January 08, 2008

Mr. David Mullin

Mullin Hoard & Brown

P. O. Box 31656

Amarillo, TX 79120-1656

Ms. Karen S. Precella

Haynes & Boone, L.L.P.

201 Main Street, Suite 2200

Fort Worth, TX 76102-3126

RE:Case Number:  07-0593

Court of Appeals Number:  

Trial Court Number:  

Style:IN RE  CANO PETROLEUM, INC., W.O. ENERGY OF NEVADA, INC., W.O. OPERATING COMPANY, LTD., AND WO ENERGY, INC.

Dear Counsel:

The Multidistrict Litigation Panel delivered the enclosed opinion on January 2, 2008 in the above-referenced case.  

Sincerely,

Blake A. Hawthorne, Clerk

by Claudia Jenks, Chief Deputy Clerk

Enclosure

**Case No. 07-0593Page 1**
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-41403

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

HORACIO MANJARREZ-SANCHEZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:12-CR-443-1

Before JONES, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Horacio ManjarrezSanchez 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). Manjarrez-Sanchez 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

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

June 18, 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: 12-41403 Document: 00512278507 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/18/2013
No. 12-41403

is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the

APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

2

 Case: 12-41403 Document: 00512278507 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/18/2013
```

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

                  CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER (1)

Pursuant  to  18  U.S.C.  Section  1350,  as  created  by  Section  906  of  the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of  2002,  the  following  certification  is  being  made to
accompany  Catskill  Litigation  Trust's Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the
period ended September 30, 2006;

In connection  with the Quarterly  Report of Catskill  Litigation  Trust on Form
10-QSB for the period ended  September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Paul A. deBary, Acting
Chief Financial Officer of the Catskill Litigation Trust,  certify,  pursuant to
18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, 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
            Section  15(d),  as applicable,  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 Catskill Litigation Trust.

                                            /s/ Paul A. deBary
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Name:  Paul A. deBary
                                            Title: Acting Chief Financial Officer
                                            Date:  November 10, 2006

      (1)   A signed original of this written statement  required by Section 906
            has been provided to Catskill  Litigation Trust and will be retained
            by Catskill  Litigation  Trust and furnished to the  Securities  and
            Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

            The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18
            U.S.C.  Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or
            as a separate disclosure document.
```
EXHIBIT 10.1


 


April 6, 2005


 


Mr. George Jue


[*]


[*]


 


Dear George:


 


On behalf of Protein Design Labs, Inc., I am pleased to extend you an
offer for the position of Vice President, Finance & Corporate Controller,
reporting to Glen Sato, Sr. Vice President & CFO.  Your appointment as an officer of PDL is
subject to approval by PDL’s Board of Directors.


 


The monthly salary for this position is $17,916.67
($215,000.00/annually).  We offer our
employees an attractive benefits package, including a comprehensive medical
policy and dental plan, as well as life insurance coverage. You are also
eligible to participate in PDL’s 2005 performance bonus program, which is paid
in the first quarter of 2006.


 


You will also receive options to purchase
105,000 shares of Protein Design Labs Common Stock under a PDL stock option
plan.  This offer is subject to the
approval of the Board of Directors and your execution of our standard Stock
Option Agreement.  The options will vest
over four years, with one-fourth of the options vesting after one year of
employment and the remainder vesting in equal monthly increments over the
remaining three years.


 


PDL is prepared to offer you a hiring bonus
of $15,000.00.  The bonus amount shall be
payable and included with your first paycheck from PDL.  If you voluntarily resign your position or
your employment is terminated for cause prior to your one-year anniversary with
PDL, the entire $15,000.00 will be immediately due and payable to PDL.


 


For purposes of federal immigration law, you will be required to
provide PDL documentary evidence of your identity and eligibility for
employment in the United States.  Such
documentation must be provided to us within three (3) business days of your
date of hire.


 


As a Protein Design Labs employee, you are free to resign at any time,
just as Protein Design Labs is free to terminate your employment at any time,
with or without cause.  There will be no
express or implied agreements to the contrary.


 


To indicate your acceptance of our offer,
please sign and date one copy of this letter in the space provided below and
return it to [*], in the enclosed envelope by the date indicated below.  This letter, along with an agreement relating
to proprietary rights between you and PDL, sets forth the terms of your
employment with PDL and supersedes any prior representations or agreements,
whether written or oral.  This letter may
not be modified or amended except by a written agreement, signed by PDL and by
you.


 


We are very excited at the prospect of your joining Protein Design Labs
as a key contributor. This offer will remain open until April 8, 2005, at which
time it will expire if not previously accepted.


 


	
  Sincerely,

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   /s/ Laurie Torres

  	
   

  	
  /s/ George Jue

  	
   

  
	
  Laurie Torres

  	
  George Jue

  
	
  Vice President, Human Resources

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  April 8, 2005

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Date
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Consumer Product Safety Commission

# TIME AND DATE:

Wednesday, July 20, 2022; 10:00 a.m.

# PLACE:

The meeting will be held remotely.

      ( print page 42716)    

# STATUS:

Commission Meeting—Closed to the Public.

# MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED:

*Briefing Matter:*                         Commission staff will brief the Commission on a compliance matter.                    

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Alberta E. Mills, Office of the Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, 301-504-7479 (Office) or 240-863-8938 (Cell).

Dated: July 13, 2022.

Alberta E. Mills,

Commission Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2022-15327 Filed 7-14-22; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE 6355-01-P