alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D2022-1745

_____________________________

JACARIE RUCKER,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County.

Francis Allman, Jr., Judge.

December 18, 2023

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

BILBREY, NORDBY, and TANENBAUM, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Jessica J. Yeary, Public Defender; Megan Long and Jasmine 

Dixon, Assistant Public Defenders, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
#### In re Appeal of Decision of DISCIPLINARY BOARD NO. 02-PDB-071.

No. 2002-OB-3194.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Aug. 29, 2003.

In re Guice, Neller Jean Brass;—Plaintiff; Applying for Appeal of Decision of Disciplinary Board Office of the Disciplinary Board, No. 02-PDB-071.

Leave to appeal denied.
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 Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Mack-Cali
Realty, L.P. (the "Operating Partnership") for the year ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Mitchell E.
Hersh, as President and Chief Executive Officer of Mack-Cali Realty Corporation, its general partner, and Barry Lefkowitz, as Chief Financial Officer of Mack-Cali Realty
Corporation, its general partner, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:



Date: March 6, 2009

By:

/s/ MITCHELL E. HERSHMitchell E. Hersh President and Chief Executive Officer
of Mack-Cali Realty Corporation,
the general partner of Mack-Cali Realty, L.P.Date: March 6, 2009

By:

/s/ BARRY LEFKOWITZBarry Lefkowitz Executive Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer of Mack-Cali Realty Corporation,
the general partner of Mack-Cali Realty, L.P.


This
certification accompanies each Report pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
be deemed filed by the Operating Partnership for purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

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

---



QuickLinks
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to 18 U. S. C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of THOMAS PROPERTIES GROUP, INC. (the Company) hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:



| | (i) | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (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
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the
periods expressed in the Report.
| | ---- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       |  |  |  |  |  |                        
|---------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | -----------------------
|Dated: August 11, 2008 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ James A. Thomas    
|                       |  |  |  |  |  | James A. Thomas        
|                       |  |  |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C § 1350 and shall
not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended or incorporated by reference in any registration statement of the Company filed under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

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.
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14**  **- 2217** 

IJAZ WILLIAM , Petitioner ,

v. LORETTA E. LYNCH , Attorney General , Respondent

.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

.

Submitted : May 15, 2015 Decided: June 2, 2015

Before NIEMEYER and DUNCAN , Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petition dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Jonathan M. Fee, Michael E. Ward, ALSTON & BIRD LLP, Washington, D.C. , for Petitioner. Benjamin C. Mizer , Acting Assistant Attorney General , Song Park, Senior Litigation Counsel, Lindsay M. Murphy , Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opi nions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Ijaz William, a native and citizen of Pakistan, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals denying his motion to reopen after he affirmatively withdrew his appeal and his opposition to the Attorney General’s appeal. We dismiss the petition for review

. Under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C) (2012) , we lack jurisdiction, except as provided in 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D) (2012) , to review the final order of removal of an alien

conv icted of certain enumerated crimes, including an aggravated felony . We retain jurisdiction “only to review factual determinations that trigger the jurisdiction

- stripping provision, such as whether [ William ] [i]s an alien and whether [ ]he has been convict ed of an aggravated felony.” Ramtulla v. Ashcro ft , 301 F.3d 202, 203 (4th Cir. 2002). Once the Court confirms these two factual determinations, then, under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C), (D), it can only consider “constitution al claims or questions of law raised upon a petition for review. ” 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D); see Mbea v. Gonzales , 482 F.3d 276, 278 n.1 (4th Cir. 2007). Because William concedes that he is an alien who was removed because he was convicted of an aggravated felony, our review is limite d to constitutional claims and questions of law. William challenges that part of the Board’s order denying3 reopening in order to revisit the Board’s order sustaining the Attorney General’s appeal from the immigration judge’s order granting deferral of rem oval under the CAT

. The Board denied reopening to revisit the Board’s prior order because William affirmatively withdrew his appeal and his opposition to the Attorney General’s appeal, not because he had been removed. (Administrative Record 3 ). Because the Board’s decision in this regard was a discretionary one, we do not have jurisdiction

. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C) ; see also , Larngar v. Holder , 562 F.3d 71, 75 (1st Cir. 2009) ( court lacked jurisdiction, except for constitutional claims and questions of law, over denial of alien’s motion to reopen , who was removable for having been convicted of an aggravated felony). Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for review. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately prese nted in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DISMISSED
#### Estate of James Beatty, Deceased. Appeal of S. S. Taylor, Guardian.

*Wills—Probate—Jurisdiction—Jurisdiction of register of wills—Orphans' court.*

The register’s powers cease with the probate of a will, and he has no jurisdiction to entertain a petition for the revocation of the probate, or to set the will aside.

Argued Oct. 17, 1899.

Appeal, No. 124, Oct. T., 1899, by S. S. Taylor, guardian et al., from decree of O. C. Beaver Co., June T., 1899, No. 39, setting aside an order of the register opening the probate of a will.

Before Sterjrett, C. J., Green, McCollum:, Mitchell, Dean and Fell, JJ.

Affirmed.

*305Appeal from register of wills.

Wilson, P. J., filed the following opinion:

The will in this case was probated September 6, 1894. The petition of L. L. Wilson and Nettie P. Wilson, by their guardian, S. S. Taylor, was filed on June 22, 1897, with the register of wills for the revocation of the probate of said will. “ With the probate of the will the register’s power ceased. Under the constitution all questions thereafter touching the probate or validity of the will are to be determined by the orphans’ court on appeal from the register’s decision where the proper issue may be framed.” See Mathew v. Biddell, 8 Pa. Superior Ct. 112. The register in this case upon petition filed, asking for revocation of probate, took testimony and set the will aside. Under the law as interpreted by the Superior Court he had no jurisdiction in the premises. The only course open to the petitioner was by appeal to the orphans’ court from the action of the register in probating the will.

Now, January 9, 1899, the proceedings before the register are set aside and the order of the register in opening the probate of said will, in placing the costs on Antoinette Cowen and others, is also set aside.

*Error assigned*was the decree of the court.

*A. P. Marshall,*with him *L. E. Grim,*for appellants.

*George Wilson, Richard S. Molt, John M. Buchanan*and *William A. McOonnel,*for appellees, were not heard.

October 17, 1899:

Pee Cueiam,

Decree affirmed at bar.
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 192 (Wednesday, October 5, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 58206]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-19955]



[[Page 58206]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army; Corps of Engineers


Estuary Habitat Restoration Council; Open Meeting

AGENCY: Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.

ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with Section 105(h) of the Estuary Restoration 
Act of 2000, (Title I, Pub. L. 106-457), announcement is made of the 
forthcoming meeting of the Estuary Habitat Restoration Council. The 
meeting is open to the public.

DATES: The meeting will be held October 24, 2005, from 10 a.m. to 12 
p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be in room 3M60/70 in the GAO building 
located at 441 G Street, NW., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Ellen Cummings, Headquarters, U.S. 
Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC 20314-1000, (202) 761-4750; or 
Ms. Cynthia Garman-Squier, Office of the Assistant Secretary of the 
Army (Civil Works), Washington, DC, (703) 695-6791.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Estuary Habitat Restoration Council 
consists of representatives of five agencies. These are the National 
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Environmental Protection 
Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of Agriculture, and 
Army. The duties of the Council include soliciting, reviewing, and 
evaluating project proposals, and submitting to the Secretary of the 
Army a prioritized list of projects recommended for construction.
    Agenda topics will include review and ranking of project proposals 
to be recommended for potential funding under the Estuary Habitat 
Restoration Program, update on the National Estuary Restoration 
Inventory, reports on the dialogue session at the CZ05 meeting, an 
interagency developmental assignment and status of ongoing projects.
    Current security measures require that persons interested in 
attending the meeting must pre-register with us before 2 p.m., October 
20, 2005. We cannot guarantee access for requests received after that 
time. Please contact Ellen Cummings to pre-register. When leaving a 
voice mail message please provide the name of the individual attending, 
the company or agency represented, and a telephone number, in case 
there are any questions. The public should enter on the ``G'' Street 
side of the GAO building. All attendees are required to show photo 
identification and must be escorted to the meeting room by Corps 
personnel. Attendee's bags and other possessions are subject to being 
searched. All attendees arriving between one-half hour before and one-
half hour after 10 a.m. will be escorted to the meeting. Those who are 
not pre-registered and/or arriving later than the allotted time will be 
unable to attend the public meeting.

Brenda S. Bowen,
Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 05-19955 Filed 10-4-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710-92-M
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 1350**

 

I, Ashutosh Roy, the chief executive officer of eGain CommunicationsCorporation (the “Company”), certify for the purposes of section 1350 of chapter 63 of title 18 of the United States Code that, to my knowledge, 

 

(i) the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K for the period ending June 30, 2007 the (“Report”), fully complies with the requirementsof section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and 

 

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

 

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by 18 U.S.C. § 1350 has been provided to eGain Communications Corporation and will be retained by eGain Communications Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
##### 



Exhibit 31.2 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Robert M. Neumeister, Jr., certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Dex Media, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of
a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were
made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects
the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant
as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and (c) Disclosed in this report any changes in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most
recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting;
and 5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal controls over financial reporting, to the
registrants auditors and the audit committee of the 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. November 10, 2004 By:
    /s/ Robert M. Neumeister, Jr.Robert M. Neumeister, Jr.Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(principal financial 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 quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Ply Gem Holdings, Inc., a
Delaware corporation (the “Company”), for the quarter ended September 27, 2008,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), I certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my
knowledge:
  1.           the
Report fully complies, in all material respects, 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: 
      November 10, 2008
              /s/Shawn
      K.
      Poe
                Shawn
      K. Poe
                Vice
      President, Chief Executive Officer, Treasurer and Secretary
                Ply
      Gem Holdings, Inc.
================================================================================
Exhibit 32.2


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


In  connection  with the  Quarterly  Report  of  Achievers  Magazine  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period  ended  January 31, 2006 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  the
undersigned,  in the  capacities  and  on  the  dates  indicated  below,  hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his 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 14, 2006


/s/ Arto Tavukciyan
------------------------------------
Arto Tavukciyan
Principal Financial Officer
EX-10.3



 EXHIBIT 10.3 
 THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE 
 GENTHERM INCORPORATED 2011 EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN

 (F/K/A AMERIGON INCORPORATED 2011 EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN) 

1. Section 1(k) is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 

“(k) “Plan” shall mean this Gentherm Incorporated 2011 Equity Incentive Plan.” 

2. A new sentence is hereby added to the end of Section 5 of the Plan as follows: 

“Notwithstanding the foregoing, from and after May 16, 2013, no new Awards may be granted under the Plan.”
Reconciliation of Net Income to Net Cash From Operations
 Three Months
    
    
    Six MonthsEnded
    
    
    EndedJune 30, 2009
    
    
    June 30, 2009Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Summit Hotel Properties, LLC
    
    $
    140,749
    
    
    $
    (1,330,223
    )plus Depreciation and Amortization
    
    $
    5,809,486
    
    
    $
    11,476,226plus Unsuccessful Project Costs
    
    $
    815,209
    
    
    $
    815,209less Gain on Sale of Assets
    
    $
    (1,619,446
    )
    
    $
    (1,619,446
    )less State Income Tax Payments
    
    $
    (526,053
    )
    
    $
    (526,053
    )less Principal Payments on Company Debt
    
    $
    (1,723,108
    )
    
    $
    (3,307,485
    )less Priority Return Payments to Investors
    
    $
    (3,010,560
    )
    
    $
    (5,854,031
    )less Reserves Required by Lenders
    
    $
    (415,096
    )
    
    $
    (851,250
    )plus Capitalized Interest on Loans
    
    $
    621,426
    
    
    $
    1,079,222plus Repair Expense Funded by Loans/Reserves
    
    $
    867,336
    
    
    $
    1,707,303Net Cash from Operations
    
    $
    959,943
    
    
    $
    1,589,472
## In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07 - 14 - 0030 5 - CR RODOLFO LUNA, APPELL ANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE On Appeal from the 242nd District Court Swisher County, Texas Trial Court No. B - 4409 - 11 - 10, Honorable Edward Lee Self, Presiding January 12 , 2015 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ. Rodolfo Luna pled guilty to the offense of burglary of a building ( a state jail felony ) and was placed on deferred adjudication for four years. His community supervision was modified twice, but the State subsequently filed a motion to adjudicate his guilt. Appellant pled true to the allegations that he violated the terms and conditions of his community supervision, and the court revoked his probation. He was then adjudicated guilty and sentenced to two years confinement in a state jail facility and a ssessed a $3,000 fine.2

Appellant’s appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw, toge ther with an Anders 1 brief in which he certified that, after diligently searching the record, he has concluded that the appeal is without merit. Attached to his brief is a copy of a letter sent to appellant informing appellant of counsel’s belief that th ere was no reversible error and of his right to file a brief or response pro se . Counsel has further represented that he provided a copy of the appellate record to appellant. By letter, this court also notified appellant of his right to file a brief or r esponse and set December 31, 2014 , as the date to do so. No brief or response has been filed. In compliance with the principles enunciated in Anders , appellate counsel discussed potential issues for appeal including 1) appellant’s waiver of his rights at t he original plea hearing, 2) the sufficiency of the indictment and its invocation of the trial court’s jurisdiction, 3 ) the modificat ions of appellant’s probation, 4 ) the legality of the sentence, and 5 ) the sufficiency of the evidence to support the initi al plea and the subsequent adjudication of guilt . After doing so, he explained why there was no reversible error. We have also conducted our own review of the record to assess the accuracy of appellate counsel’s conclusions and to uncover any reversible error pursuant to In re Schulman , 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) and Stafford v. State , 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). Our own review failed to reveal arguable error. Accordingly, the motion to withdraw is granted, and the judgment is af firmed.
Brian Quinn Chief Justice Do not publish.

1 Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738, 744 - 45, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).