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

|   | (1) | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or                15(d), as applicable, 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. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |   |                                        |   |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |   | /s/ Charles              A. Casalinova |   |
|   |   | Charles              A. Casalinova          |   |
|   |   | Chief              Financial Officer        |   |
|   |   | November              7, 2007               |   |

*The      foregoing certification shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18      of the Exchange Act or otherwise subject to the liability of that section.      Such      certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing      under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the      registrant specifically incorporates it by reference.*
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

July 30, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
133906 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 133906 COA: 267518 Branch CC: 04-118174-FH 04-118176-FH JOSEPH GLEN FRAZIER, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 24, 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

l0723 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

July 30, 2007

Clerk
Exhibit 32.2



AMPLIPHI
BIOSCIENCES CORPORATION



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL
OFFICER

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 AmpliPhi Biosciences Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2013 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Kelley A. Wendt, Chief Financial Officer
of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the
United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:



| | (1) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods indicated.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



A signed original of
this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version 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.



This Certification has
not been, and shall not be deemed, “filed” with the Securities and Exchange Commission.



Date: April 15, 2014



| | /s/ Kelley A. Wendt    
| | -----------------------
| | Kelley A. Wendt        
| | Chief Financial Officer
**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 amended Quarterly Report of Triangle Petroleum Corporation
      (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ending October 31, 2006, as
      filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
      "Report"), I, Mark Gustafson, Principal 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.





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      Triangle Petroleum Corporation and will be retained by Triangle Petroleum
      Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
      staff
      upon request.





/s/
                MARK GUSTAFSONMark
                GustafsonPresident
                (Principal Executive Officer)March
                6, 2008
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 Quarterly Report of Innocap, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended April 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Paul Tidwell, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, 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 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.  Date: June 27, 2011  /s/ Paul Tidwell Paul Tidwell Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
STATE of North Carolina v. Robert Darrell CARTER, Defendant.

No. COA16-946

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: July 18, 2017

VACATED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.
**Exhibit 32.3**

 

**Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

I, Douglas P. Teitelbaum, as a Manager andPrincipal Executive Officer of BH/RE, L.L.C., a Nevada limited liability company (the “Company”),certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to myknowledge:

 

(A) the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period endedSeptember 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission(the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

 

(B) the information in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

 

 

Dated: November 14, 2005

 

 
|   | /S/  Douglas P. Teitelbaum             |
|--------|----------------------------------------|
|   | Douglas  P. Teitelbaum                 |
|   | Manager  (Principal Executive Officer) |

 

----
STATE v. Jeral Thomas ORE, Jr.

352P16-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 16, 2017

Kimberly P. Hoppin, Attorney at Law, for Ore, Jeral Thomas (Jr.).

M. Elizabeth Guzman, Assistant Attorney General, Roger A. Echols, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 26th of September 2016 by State of NC for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Dissolved by order of the Court in conference, this the 16th of March 2017."
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4359 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to make memorial headstones and 

markers available for purchase on behalf of members of reserve components who performed inactive duty training or active duty for training 

but did not serve on active duty. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 1, 2014 

Mr. SEAN PATRICK MALONEY of New York introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to make memorial 

headstones and markers available for purchase on behalf 

of members of reserve components who performed inactive duty training or active duty for training but did 

not serve on active duty. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Honor Guardsmen and 

5 Reservists Act’’. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 4359 IH

1 SEC. 2. AVAILABILITY FOR PURCHASE OF DEPARTMENT OF 

2 VETERANS AFFAIRS MEMORIAL HEADSTONES 

3 AND MARKERS FOR MEMBERS OF RESERVE 

4 COMPONENTS WHO PERFORMED CERTAIN 

5 TRAINING. 

6 Section 2306 of title 38, United States Code, is 

7 amended by adding at the end the following new sub8 section: 

9 ‘‘(i)(1) The Secretary shall make available for pur10 chase a memorial headstone or marker for the marked or 

11 unmarked grave of an individual described in paragraph 

12 (2) or for the purpose of commemorating such an indi13 vidual whose remains are unavailable. 

14 ‘‘(2) An individual described in this paragraph is an 

15 individual who— 

16 ‘‘(A) as a member of a reserve component per17 formed inactive duty training or active duty for 

18 training, but did not serve on active duty; and 

19 ‘‘(B) is not otherwise ineligible for a memorial 

20 headstone or marker on account of the nature of the 

21 individual’s separation from the Armed Forces or 

22 other cause.’’. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
OCWEN LOAN SERVICING v. Margaret Ann REAVES

No. 75P17-2

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 14, 2017

Ms. Margaret Reaves, for Reaves, Margaret Ann.

Mr. G. Benjamin Milam, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, for Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 24th of July 2017 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, Wake County, the following order was entered and is hereby *728certified to the Superior Court of that County:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 14th of August 2017."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 3rd of August 2017 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, Wake County, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court of that County:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 14th of August 2017."

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 11th of August 2017 by Defendant for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 14th of August 2017."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 11th of August 2017 for Writ of Supersedeas of the judgment of the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 14th of August 2017."
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JUNE 27, 2013

NO. 03-13-00023-CR

Erica Allen Cook, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 207TH DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE JONES, JUSTICES GOODWIN AND FIELD

DISMISSED ON APPELLANT’S MOTION -- OPINION BY JUSTICE FIELD

THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the written motion of the appellant to dismiss the appeal 

and the same being considered, because it is the opinion of this Court that the same should be 

granted: it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by the Court that the appellant is

allowed to withdraw his notice of appeal and that the appeal is dismissed; that the appellant pay 

all costs relating to this appeal; and that this decision be certified below for observance.
* 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 January 19, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-40050 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus FARID ARTURO CANIZALEZ-RIVERA, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:04-CR-1332-1

-------------------- Before SMITH, GARZA and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Farid Arturo Canizalez-Rivera appeals the conviction and sentence imposed following his guilty plea to unlawful presence in the United States after having been deported, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Canizalez-Rivera contends that his sentence is illegal under United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005), because it was imposed pursuant to a mandatoryapplication of the federal sentencing guidelines. CanizalezRivera, thus, alleges a “Fanfan” error. See United States v.No. 05-40050 -2- Walters , 418 F.3d 461, 463 (5th Cir. 2005). In the district court, Canizalez-Rivera objected to his sentence under Blakely v. Washington , 542 U.S. 296 (2004), and the Government concedes that the preserved Fanfan error is subject to review for harmless

error. The Government has not carried its burden of showing beyond a reasonable doubt that the district court’s error did not affect Canizalez-Rivera’s sentence. See Walters , 418 F.3d at 464; United States v. Pineiro , 410 F.3d 282, 284-86 (5th Cir. 2005). We therefore VACATE the sentence and REMAND for resentencing in accordance with Booker

. Canizalez-Rivera also contends that the “felony” and “aggravated felony” provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are unconstitutional. Canizalez-Rivera’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998). Although Canizalez-Rivera contends that Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule Almendarez-Torres in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000), we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that Almendarez-Torres remains binding. See United States v. Garza-Lopez , 410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 126 S. Ct. 298 (2005). CanizalezRivera properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of Almendarez-Torres and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review. Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is AFFIRMED. AFFIRMED IN PART; VACATED AND REMANDED IN PART.
Exhibit 31.1  Section 302 Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer   I, B. Alva Schoomer, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Innocap, Inc.  2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report;  4. I am 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 to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly 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.  5. I have disclosed, based on my 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 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.     /s/ B Alva Schoomer B. Alva Schoomer Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer  February 13, 2007
EXHIBIT 32.1

Section 906 Certification

The following statement is provided by the undersigned to accompany
the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended July 1, 2006 pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) and shall not be deemed filed pursuant to any provision of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 or any other securities law.

Each of the undersigned certifies that the foregoing Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a), or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m) and that the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of Sensus Metering Systems (Bermuda 2) Ltd. and Sensus Metering Systems Inc.



|                      |  |                                                                           |  |                 |  |          |  |                                                                          
|--------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | --------------- |  | -------- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ DANIEL W. HARNESS |  |                                                                           |  | /s/ PETER MAINZ
|Name:                 |  | Daniel W. Harness                                                         |  |                 |  | Name:    |  | Peter Mainz                                                              
|Title:                |  | Chief Executive Officer and President                                     |  |                 |  | Title:   |  | Chief Financial Officer                                                  
|Company:              |  | Sensus Metering Systems (Bermuda 2) Ltd.
and Sensus Metering Systems Inc. |  |                 |  | Company: |  | Sensus Metering Systems (Bermuda 2) Ltd.
and Sensus Metering Systems Inc.
|Date:                 |  | July 28, 2006                                                             |  |                 |  | Date:    |  | July 28, 2006
TULLY v. CITY OF WILMINGTON

348A16-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

November 18, 2016

Ms. Katie Weaver Hartzog, Ms. Jaye E. Bingham-Hinch, Attorneys at Law, For City of Wilmington.

Mr. S. Luke Largess, Cheyenne Chambers, Attorneys at Law, For Tully, Kevin J.

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 16th of November 2016 by Plaintiff:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 18th of November 2016."

Plaintiff shall have up to and including the 16th day of January 2017 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-7356

HOWARD EUGENE SAFRIT, Petitioner - Appellant, versus TODD PINION, Superintendent, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Chief District Judge. (CA-03-585-3-MU) Submitted: April 26, 2006 Decided: May 15, 2006 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Howard Eugene Safrit, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Howard Eugene Safrit seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2254 proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. SeeMiller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Safrit has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

DIANE FLORIAN,

Petitioner

v.

CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION (DEPT.

OF MILITARY & VETERANS AFFAIRS),

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 138 WM 2018

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 12th day of October , 2018, the Petition for Leave to File Petition

for Allowance of Appeal Nunc Pro Tunc is DENIED.
#### Donald E. McGINNIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 5D03-189.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Aug. 26, 2003.

Donald E. McGinnis, Sanderson, pro se.

Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Patrick W. Krechowski, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. *See State v. McBride,*848 So.2d 287 (Fla.2003).

PETERSON, GRIFFIN and TORPY, JJ., concur.