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 Collexis Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”)
on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, William D.
Kirkland, 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, to my knowledge:




1.
            The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
and




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




February 19,
2009




/s/ William D.
      KirklandWilliam
      D. KirklandChief
      Executive Officer
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14**  **- 7**  **506**

BREYON D. MIDDLEBROOKS , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v. DUANE TERRELL, Administrator Marion Correctional Institution , Respondent

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Asheville

. Frank D. Whitney , Chief District Judge. ( 1 :13

- cv - 00 223

- FDW )

Submitted : April 23, 2015 Decided: April 27, 2015

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and THACKER , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Milton Gordon Widenhouse, Jr. , RUDOLF, WIDENHOUSE & FIALKO, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, for Appellant. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Car olina , for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Breyon D. Middlebrooks seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1) (A) (2012) . 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) (201 2)
. When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 52 9 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition stat es a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Middlebrooks has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability an d dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal3 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-6100

CHRISTOPHER LASTER,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

B. G. COMPTON,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Glen E. Conrad, District Judge.

(CA-03-763-7)

Submitted: April 15, 2004 Decided: April 22, 2004

Before NIEMEYER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Christopher Laster, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Christopher Laster, a federal prisoner, appeals the

district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under

28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) and his subsequent motion for

reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the

district court. See Laster v. Compton, No. CA-03-763-7 (W.D. Va.

Nov. 18, 2003; Dec. 8, 2003). 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.

AFFIRMED
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-31028 

Summary Calendar

__________________

SIDNEY MARTS,

 Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

CHARLES C. FOTI JR., Sheriff;

UNIDENTIFIED PARTY,

 Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 95-CV-1535

- - - - - - - - - -

February 22, 1996

Before JOLLY, JONES and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Sidney Marts appeals the district court's 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(d) dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, in which he

alleges that prison officials of the Orleans Parish prison system

(OPP) denied him meaningful access to the courts by not providing

him with an adequate law library. Marts also contends, for the

first time on appeal, that the defendants do not provide adequate

writing materials to inmate litigants and do not provide inmates 
No. 95-31028

-2-

with copies of pleadings for inmate use. To the extent that

these allegations comprise new claims of denial of access to the

courts, this court need not consider them. See Varnado v.

Lynaugh, 920 F.2d 320, 321 (5th Cir. 1991). We have examined the

record and determine that the district court did not abuse its

discretion in dismissing the case as frivolous. Appellant did

not allege any facts that indicate that he was prejudiced by the

alleged lack of access to the courts. See Eason v. Thaler, ___

F.3d ___ (5th Cir. Jan. 17, 1996, No. 95-10316) 1996 WL 15541 at

*6.

AFFIRMED.
**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 Otelco Inc. (the "Company") on Form
      10-Q
      for the period ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
      Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael D. Weaver, 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
      to my
      knowledge:





1.
            The
                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15
                (d) of
                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
                and





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








/s/
      Michael D. Weaver





Michael
      D. Weaver


*Chief
      Executive Officer*


May
      10,
      2006
#### ERNESTINE IGERT, Appellant, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE CO., Respondent.

No. 7666

April 16, 1975

533 P.2d 1365

*John Marshall,*of Las Vegas, for Appellant.

*Rose, Norwood & Edwards, Ltd.,*and *Niels L. Pearson,*of Las Vegas, for Respondent.

OPINION

*Per Curiam:*

Ernestine Igert, while driving an automobile, collided with an automobile driven by an uninsured motorist and sustained bodily injuries for which she incurred medical and hospital expenses in the amount of $1,154.10. Subsequently, and with the approval of her counsel, she negotiated a settlement with her own insurance company, State Farm, for the sum of $3,000 and executed a release “in full settlement and final discharge of all claims under the policy because of bodily injuries known and unknown. . . .”

The district court deemed the release to preclude her present action to recover medical and hospital expenses. We agree, since her complaint does not allege fraud, duress, mistake or any other basis for avoiding the release. Sibson v. Farmers Insurance Group, 88 Nev. 417, 498 P.2d 1331 (1972); Las *241Vegas Ins. Adjusters v. Page, 88 Nev. 16, 492 P.2d 616 (1972).

Affirmed.
#### Samuel M. Watts, Appellant, *v.*Frank C. Herrick et al., Respondents.

*Watts*v. *Herrick,*172 App. Div. 915, affirmed.

(Argued October 22, 1918;

decided November 12, 1918.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division; of the Supreme Court in the third j udicial department,'1 entered January 13, 1916, affirming a judgment in favor' of defendants entered upon a verdict. This action was’ brought to recover damages alleged to have "arisen out' of a sale of ice by the defendants ■ to the plaintiff. The complaint set forth two separate counts or causes of action, the first on the theory of breach of express warranty *664by defendants as to quality, and the second on a deficiency of quantity of the ice as measured and as understood to be by both parties. The defense denied the making of the .warranty or breach thereof and plaintiff’s allegations as to the quality of the ice or deficiency in the same.

*Howard Chipp*for appellant!

*■John- T. Norton*for respondents.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: His cock,’ Ch. J., Collin, .Cuddeback, Hogan and McLaughlin, JJ. Not voting: Chase, J. Absent: Crane, J.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 4.37

                                PROMISSORY NOTE

AMOUNT: $112,000.00                                    DATE: OCTOBER 16, 1998

Two years after date of receipt, for value received, the undersigned (jointly
and severally if more than one) promise(s) to pay to the order of:

                              Daniel Wang
                              Tax I.D.


the sum of One Hundred Twelve Thousand dollars plus an interest equal to (12%
annually) payable at any place the holder may so designate. Interest to be paid
annually beginning October 16, 1999.

The undersigned and any endorser or guarantors herefore, jointly and severally,
hereby agree that upon default in payment of performance of this note, or the
death, or any act of insolvency or bankruptcy on the part of any of them,
however expressed or indicated, then this note shall, at the option of the
holder, become immediately due and payable without presentment, demand, protest
or further attorney and/or agent of the holder, and the undersigned, and any
endorser or guarantors, jointly and severally, agree to pay all collection
costs, expenses, agents' fees, and reasonable attorney's fees.

The undersigned further states if he should default on said loan, the lender
shall be authorized to place a lien on the following collateral:

               1. All properties of Color Image, Inc


Borrowers Signature:                                Address:

/s/ Sueling Wang                                    2960/2972 Pacific Drive
---------------------------------------------
Sueling Wang, President Color Image, Inc.           Norcross, GA 30071


/s/ Flora Chung
---------------------------------------------
Witness
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVEOFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report ofInternational Aluminum Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the periodending March 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission (the “Report”), I, Cornelius C. Vanderstar, the Chairman of theBoard and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.                           The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
| Date:  May 12, 2004 | CORNELIUS C. VANDERSTAR   |
|--------------------------|---------------------------|
|                     | Cornelius C.  Vanderstar  |
|                     | Chairman of the Board and |
|                     | Chief Executive 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 Quarterly Report of Timberline Resources Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Randal Hardy, 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 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 12, 2009

| | By:   /s/ Randal Hardy
_____________________________
Randal Hardy
Chief Executive Officer & Chief Financial Officer
Principal Executive and Financial Officer
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------







The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 18

- 537

_____________________________
V ERNON R OBINSON , Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County

. Steven B. Whittington , Judge

. December 19, 2018

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

. W OLF , M AKAR , and M.K. T HOMAS , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________

Vernon Robinson, pro se
, for Appellant.2 Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
EXHIBIT
      32.1





CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350)





In
      connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the nine
      months ended September 30, 2008 and filed with the Securities and Exchange
      Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Michael J. Pawelek, Chief
      Executive Officer of South Texas Oil Company (the “Company”), hereby 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.
      The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




Date:
      May 15, 2009


*/s/*Michael
                J. PawelekMichael
                J. PawelekChief
                Executive Officer
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

**18 U. S. C.SECTION 1350**

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Vistula Communications Services, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30,2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, Rupert Galliers-Pratt, Chief Executive Officer of theCompany, certify, to my best knowledge and belief, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350,adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1)              the Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

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

 

 
|   | /s/ RUPERT GALLIERS-PRATT |   |
|--------|---------------------------|--------|
|   | Rupert Galliers-Pratt     |   |
|   | Chief Executive Officer   |

 

 

Dated: November 21,2005

 

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906, orother document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting thesignature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of thiswritten statement required by Section 906, has been provided to VistulaCommunications Services, Inc. and will be retained by VistulaCommunications Services, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

 

----
#### NATHAN AMOS HUNT, JR. v. COUNTY OF RANDOLPH and WESLEY ELVIN WRIGHT

No. 7519SC587

(Filed 3 December 1975)

Appeal by plaintiff from *Crissman, Judge.*Order entered 21 April 1975. Heard in the Court of Appeals 21 October 1975.

*Ottway Burton and Millicent Gibson, for plaintiff appellant.*

*Miller, Beck, O’Briant and Glass, by Adam W. Beck, for defendant appellees.*

MORRIS, PARKER, and MARTIN, Judges.

Affirmed.
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

O.S., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE, 

MacDILL AIR FORCE BASE, FL

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket Nos. 21-0450 & 

18-1744

Issued: June 16, 2021

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL IN DOCKET NO. 21-0450 AND

DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION IN

DOCKET NO. 18-1744

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Alternate Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

On February 5, 2021 appellant sought an appeal from a purported March 21, 2019 decision 

of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The Clerk of the Appellate Boards

docketed the appeal as No. 21-0450.

The Board, having duly considered the matter, notes that its jurisdiction is limited to the 

review of final adverse OWCP decisions issued under the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act.1 

The case record as transmitted to the Board does not contain a final adverse decision of OWCP 

issued within 180 days from the date of docketing of the current appeal.2 The most recent final 

adverse decision issued by OWCP was dated May 18, 2018. By decision dated March 21, 2019 

the Board decision affirmed OWCP’s May 18, 2018 decision.

3

 As there is no final adverse 

 

1 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.; 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3(a) (2009).

2 20 C.F.R. § 501.3(e) provides in pertinent part: “Any notice of appeal must be filed within 180 days from the 

date of issuance of a decision of OWCP.”

3 Docket No. 18-1744 (issued March 21, 2019).
2

decision issued by OWCP over which the Board may properly exercise jurisdiction, the Board 

concludes that the appeal docketed as No. 21-0450 must be dismissed. 

To the extent that appellant’s February 5, 2021 appeal may be construed as a timely petition 

for reconsideration of the Board’s March 21, 2019 decision in Docket No. 18-1744, the Board 

notes that its decision became final upon the expiration of 30 days from the date of issuance.4 As 

appellant did not file his petition for reconsideration of the Board’s March 21, 2019 decision until 

February 5, 2021, this submission may not be deemed as a timely petition for reconsideration.5 

Thus, the petition for reconsideration of the March 21, 2019 Board decision must be dismissed as 

untimely filed. Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 21-0450 is dismissed. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the petition for reconsideration in Docket No. 

18-1744 is dismissed as untimely filed.

Issued: June 16, 2021

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

 

4 20 C.F.R. § 501.6(d).

5 See id. at § 501.7(a).
#### WILLIE JUNIOR, Appellant, v. WARDEN, NEVADA STATE PRISON, Respondent.

No. 7578

February 26, 1975

532 P.2d 1037

*Horace R. Goff,*State Public Defender, and *Michael R. Griffin,*Deputy Public Defender, Carson City, for Appellant.

*Robert List,*Attorney General, and *Robert A. Groves,*Chief Deputy Attorney General, Carson City, for Respondent.

*112OPINION

*Per Curiam:*

We hold that this court’s decision in Johnson v. Warden, 89 Nev. 476, 515 P.2d 63 (1973), applies to post-conviction applications for habeas corpus under NRS Chapter 34, as well as to petitions for post-conviction relief under NRS Chapter 177.

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s dismissal of appellant’s petition for writ of habeas corpus, which alleged no reasons for omitting to raise, on direct appeal, appellant’s current attack on proceedings certifying him for adult trial. See: Junior v. State, 89 Nev. 121, 507 P.2d 1037 (1973).
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 Global  Gold  Corporation  (the
"Company")  on Form  10-KSB  for the year  December  31,  2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Lester S. Caesar, CPA, the
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 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 28, 2005                     /s/ Lester S. Caesar
                                         Lester S. Caesar, CPA
                                         Chief Financial Officer