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

                                                                    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 Mondial Ventures, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Periodic
Report"), I, Marc Juliar, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.    the Periodic 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 Periodic Report fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      the Company.


     Dated: May 10, 2010


     /s/ "Marc Juiar"

     Marc Juliar
     Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SHALLOTTE PARTNERS, LLC, Plaintiff, v. BERKADIA COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE, LLC, and Samet Corporation, Defendants.

No. COA17-1288

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: December 4, 2018

AFFIRMED.
STATE of North Carolina v. Dontae Rashawn ANTHONY and Deangelo Dumarcus Johnson

No. COA18-403

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: December 18, 2018

VACATED. REMANDED.
Roy A. COOPER, III, in his official capacity as Governor of the State of North Carolina v. Philip E. BERGER, in his official capacity as President Pro Tempore of the North Carolina Senate; Timothy K. Moore, in his official capacity as Speaker of the North Carolina House of Representatives; North Carolina Bipartisan State Board of Elections and Ethics Enforcement; and James A. (Andy) Penry, in his official capacity as Chair of the North Carolina Bipartisan State Board of Elections and Ethics Enforcement

No. 267P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 29, 2018

John R. Wester, Adam K. Doerr, Charlotte, J. Dickson Phillips, III, Erik R. Zimmerman, Morgan P. Abbott, Chapel Hill, Attorneys at Law, for Cooper, Roy A.

D. Martin Warf, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Berger, Philip E., et al.

Matthew W. Sawchak, Solicitor General, for North Carolina Bipartisan Board of Elections and Ethics Enforcement, et al.

Andrew H. Erteschik, Caroline P. Mackie, Raleigh, John Michael Durnovich, Wendy R. Weiser, Daniel I. Weiner, Douglas E. Keith, Attorneys at Law, for Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law and Democracy North Carolina

Daniel F.E. Smith, Jim W. Phillips, Jr., Greensboro, Charles E. Coble, Raleigh, Attorneys at Law, for Hon. James G. Martin, et al.

Robert F. Orr, Attorney at Law, for NC Professors of Constitutional Law

***ORDER***

*594Upon consideration of the conditional petition filed on the 27th of August 2018 by Defendant (Berger, et al.) in this matter for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 29th of August 2018."
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

JLA/Research

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

AKHLAS NAIM GEORGE,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 06-71167

Agency No. A078-759-515

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted December 15, 2009** 

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

Akhlas Naim George, a native and citizen of Iraq, petitions for review of the

Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an immigration

FILED

DEC 23 2009

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
JLA/Research 2 06-71167

judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying her application for asylum, withholding of

removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have

jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence an IJ’s

adverse credibility finding. Don v. Gonzales, 476 F.3d 738, 741 (9th Cir. 2007). 

We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility determination

because the contradictory accounts of the mistreatment George suffered, coupled

with the differing accounts of her detentions and interrogations are material

discrepancies that go to the heart of her asylum claim. See Li v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d

959, 962 (9th Cir. 2004). In the absence of credible testimony, George’s asylum

and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153,

1156 (9th Cir. 2003). 

Because George’s CAT claim is based on the testimony the agency found

not credible, and she points to no evidence showing it is more likely than not she

will be tortured in Iraq, her CAT claim also fails. Id. at 1156-57. 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
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 Boss Minerals,  Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2005 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:  August 8, 2005


/s/ Alexei Jirniaguine
-----------------------------------------------
Alexei Jirniaguine, Principal Financial Officer
* 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 July 10, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-50505 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus RICARDO VEGA-NIETO, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 4:05-CR-240-3

-------------------- Before DeMOSS, STEWART and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *Ricardo Vega-Nieto was charged, along with three codefendants, with possessing with the intent to distribute 50 kilograms or more of marijuana and aiding and abetting. On the morning of his trial, Vega-Nieto attempted to enter a guilty plea. After substantially complying with F ED . R. CRIM . P. 11, the district court determined that Vega-Nieto’s plea was not entered voluntarily and that Vega-Nieto did not admit the elements of his offense. The district court thus refused to accept Vega-Nieto’s guilty plea, and Vega-Nieto was convicted by a jury and sentencedNo. 06-50505 -2- to 46 months of imprisonment, three years of supervised release, and a $100 special assessment. Vega-Nieto argues that the district court abused its discretion in refusing to accept his plea. “A court may reject a plea in the exercise of sound judicial discretion.” Santobello v. New York , 404 U.S. 257, 262 (1971). A district court’s “broad discretion” in deciding whether to reject a guilty plea “is limited only by the procedural requirements of Rule 11.” United States v. Wild , 92 F.3d 304, 308 (5th Cir. 1996). “A district court ‘abuses its discretion if it bases its decision on an error of law or a clearly erroneous assessment of the evidence.’” United States v. Smith , 417 F.3d 483, 486-87 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 126 S. Ct. 713 (2005). Vega-Nieto concedes that the district court substantially complied with Rule 11. Vega-Nieto has not addressed the district court’s reasons for rejecting his plea. He has therefore not shown that the district court’s findings were clearly erroneous or that the decision to reject his plea was an abuse of discretion. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
[716 NYS2d 922]

#### In the Matter of Richard M. Strauss, a Suspended Attorney, Respondent. Grievance Committee for the Second and Eleventh Judicial Districts, Petitioner.

Second Department,

December 4, 2000

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Robert H. Straus,*Brooklyn *(Robert J. Saltzman*of counsel), for petitioner.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

By decision and order of this Court dated March 8, 2000, the respondent was suspended from the practice of law pursuant to 22 NYCRR 691.4 (l) (1) (i) upon a finding that he was guilty *73of professional misconduct immediately threatening the public interest based upon his failure to cooperate with the Grievance Committee’s ongoing investigation, the Grievance Committee was authorized to institute and prosecute a disciplinary proceeding against the respondent, and the issues raised were referred to the Honorable Luigi R Maraño, as Special Referee, to hear and report.

This Court’s decision and order of March 8, 2000, was issued after personal service upon the respondent of an order to show cause and an annexed petition, dated December 27, 1999. The respondent failed to submit any papers in answer to the order to show cause. The decision and order dated March 8, 2000, directed the respondent to serve an answer upon the Grievance Committee and Special Referee Maraño and file same with the Court within 10 days. The respondent was personally served with the order on March 26, 2000. The respondent failed to submit an answer and is in default, and he has not filed an affidavit of compliance as required by 22 NYCRR 691.10.

Although served with the notice of motion to adjudicate him in default on May 21, 2000, the respondent has not submitted any papers in reply. Accordingly, the charges against him must be deemed admitted and the Grievance Committee’s motion granted.

The respondent is disbarred on default, and his name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law, effective immediately.

Mangano, P. J., O’Brien, Ritter, Santucci and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the petitioner’s motion to impose discipline upon the respondent based upon his failure to appear or answer is granted; and it is further,

Ordered that pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90, effective immediately, the respondent, Richard M. Strauss, is disbarred, and his name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law; and it is further,

Ordered that the respondent shall continue to comply with this Court’s rules governing the conduct of disbarred, suspended, and resigned attorneys *(see,*22 NYCRR 691.10); and it is further,

Ordered that pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90, effective immediately, Richard M. Strauss is commanded to continue to desist and refrain from (1) practicing law in any form, either as principal or as agent, clerk, or employee of another, (2) ap*74pearing as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, Judge, Justice, board, commission, or other public authority, (3) giving to another an opinion as to the law or its application or any advice in relation thereto, and (4) holding himself out in any way as an attorney and counselor-at-law.
EXHIBIT 32.01



CERTIFICATIONS



(Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350)



The undersigned hereby certifies that, to his knowledge (i) the foregoing Annual Report on Form 10-K filed by ECB Bancorp, Inc. (the
Issuer) for the year ended December 31, 2007, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the information contained in that Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer on the dates and for the period presented therein.



|                     |  |  |  |                                                  
|-------------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------------------
|Date: March 14, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/    ARTHUR H. KEENEY
III                      
|                     |  |  |  | Arthur H. Keeney, III                            
|                     |  |  |  | President and Chief Executive Officer            
|                     |  | 
|Date: March 14, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/    GARY M. ADAMS                             
|                     |  |  |  | Gary M. Adams                                    
|                     |  |  |  | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
#### C.C., Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, Appellee.

No. 1D02-5291.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Aug. 12, 2003.

William H. Fraser and Jenny Lancaster of Legal Ad Society of Palm Beach County, West Palm Beach; Cindy Huddleston, of Florida Legal Services, Inc., Tallahassee, for appellant.

William Large, General Counsel, and Michael A. Grief, Senior Attorney, Department of Health, Tallahassee, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks review of the Department of Health’s denial of his petition for declaratory statement. The Department concedes that it erred in denying the petition. We accept the Department’s concession of error and vacate the Department’s amended final order. In accordance with the settlement agreement filed with the Court on June 30, 2003, we grant appellant’s motion for setting new deadlines and remand this case to the Department for entry of a declaratory statement on appellant’s petition within ninety days of issuance of the mandate in this cause.

KAHN, VAN NORTWICK and BROWNING, JJ., concur.
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 March 31, 2006 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.
| | ---- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                    |  |  |  |                                        
|------------------- |  |  |  | ---------------------------------------
|                    |  | 
|Dated: May 10, 2006 |  |  |  | /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.
#### Scott EARLE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D02-4093.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

June 11, 2003.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 2, 2003.

Fred Haddad of Fred Haddad, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, and Scott Earle, Indian-town, for appellant.

Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Laura Fisher Zibura, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Scott Earle challenges an order that denied his rule 3.850 motion for postcon-viction relief. We reverse and remand for the trial court to conduct an evidentiary hearing to address Earle’s sentences in light of *State v. Klayman,*835 So.2d 248 (Fla.2002); *State v. Travis,*808 So.2d 194 (Fla.2002); *Hayes v. State,*750 So.2d 1 (Fla.1999); *see also DeFreis v. State,*814 So.2d 1166 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). We find no error with the trial court’s disposition of Earle’s other claims.

POLEN, C.J., SHAHOOD and MAY, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 10.2

 

For a period of 60 days beginning on the date of this instrument, the undersigned will not offer, sell, contract to sell, pledge, grant any option to purchase, make any short sale or otherwise dispose of any shares of Common Stock of Atwood Oceanics, Inc (the “Company”), or any options or warrants to purchase any shares of Common Stock of  the Company, or any securities convertible into, exchangeable for or that represent the right to receive shares of Common Stock of the Company, whether now owned or hereinafter acquired, owned directly by the undersigned or with respect to which the undersigned has beneficial ownership within the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (collectively the “Undersigned’s Shares”).

 

The foregoing restriction is expressly agreed to preclude the undersigned from engaging in any hedging or other transaction which is designed to or which reasonably could be expected to lead to or result in a sale or disposition of the Undersigned’s Shares even if such Shares would be disposed of by someone other than the undersigned.  Such prohibited hedging or other transactions would include without limitation any short sale or any purchase, sale or grant of any right (including without limitation any put or call option) with respect to any of the Undersigned’s Shares or with respect to any security that includes, relates to, or derives any significant part of its value from such Shares.

 

Date : May 23, 2013

 

Helmerich & Payne International Drilling Co.

 

	
By:
    	
/s/   Steven R. Mackey
    	
 
    
	
Name: Steven R. Mackey
    
	
Title: Executive Vice President
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
Helmerich &   Payne, Inc.
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
By:
    	
/s/   Steven R. Mackey
    	
 
    
	
Name: Steven R. Mackey
    
	
Title: Executive Vice President
In the MATTER OF: J.O.

No. COA17-1033

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: April 17, 2018

REVERSED. REMANDED.
Exhibit 99.1



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 accompanying Annual Report of Targeted Genetics Corporation on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, H. Stewart Parker, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted 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)    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|March 26, 2003 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/  H. Stewart Parker               
|-------------- |  |  |  |  |  | -------------------------------------
|Date           |  |  |  |  |  | H. Stewart Parker                    
|               |  |  |  |  |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 10.1


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


                  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), each of the undersigned officers of Tele Norte Leste Participacoes S.A.
(the "Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:

                  The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended 2002 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 20-F
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.



Dated:  June 13, 2003                 /s/ Ronaldo Iabrudi dos Santos Pereira
                                     -----------------------------------------
                                     Name:  Ronaldo Iabrudi dos Santos Pereira
                                     Title: co-chief executive officer

Dated:  June 13, 2003                /s/ Luis Eduardo Falco
                                     ---------------------------------------
                                     Name:   Luis Eduardo Falco
                                     Title:  co-chief executive officer

Dated:  June 13, 2003                /s/ Marcos Grodetzky
                                     -------------------------------------
                                     Name:   Marcos Grodetzky
                                     Title:  chief financial officer


                  The foregoing certification is being furnished solely 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) and is not being filed
as part of the Form 20-F.

                  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.