alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32.1

                                  CERTIFICATION
            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)

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), the
undersigned officers of Financial Telecom Limited (USA), Inc., a Nevada
corporation (the "Company"), does hereby certify with respect to the Quarterly
Report of the Company on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31 2005 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "10-QSB Report") that:

(1) the 10-QSB 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 10-QSB Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

                                            Financial Telecom Limited (US), Inc.


Date:  April 29, 2005                                         By: /s/ David Chen
                                                                  --------------
                                                                      David Chen
                                                         Chief Executive Officer

Date:  April 29, 2005                                       By: /s/ Stephen Tang
                                                                ----------------
                                                                    Stephen Tang
                                                          President and Chairman
THE STATE OF TEXAS

MANDATE

TO THE 336TH DISTRICT COURT OF FANNIN COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 14th 

day of April, A.D. 2016, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your Judgment was determined; 

and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

Tami Donald, Jerry Moore, and Summit 

Spring Water Company, Inc., 

Appellants

v.

Brian Rhone, BMR Distributing, Inc., 

Chris Rhone, and Rhone Water 

Company, Inc. d/b/a Frosty’s Water, 

Appellees

No. 06-15-00052-CV

Trial Court No. 38803

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find reversible error in the judgment of the 

court below. Therefore, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand the cause for further 

proceedings.

We further order that the appellees, Brian Rhone, BMR Distributing, Inc., Chris Rhone, 

and Rhone Water Company, Inc. d/b/a Frosty’s Water, pay all costs of this appeal.

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court in this 

behalf, and in all things to have it duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS, the Hon. Josh R. Morriss, III, Chief Justice of our said Court of Appeals, with 

the seal thereof annexed, at the City of Texarkana, this the 30th day of June, A.D. 2016.

DEBRA K. AUTREY, Clerk
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5303 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5303

To amend title 38, United States Code, to improve housing stipends for 
veterans receiving educational assistance under the Post-9/11 Veterans 
                    Educational Assistance Program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 13, 2010

    Mr. Bishop 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 improve housing stipends for 
veterans receiving educational assistance under the Post-9/11 Veterans 
                    Educational Assistance Program.

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

SECTION 1. CALCULATION OF HOUSING STIPEND UNDER POST-9/11 VETERANS 
              EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.

    (a) Residence of Veteran.--Clause (i) of section 3313(c)(1)(B) of 
title 38, United States Code, is amended by striking ``the ZIP code'' 
and all that follows through the period and inserting the following: 
``the ZIP code area in which the individual resides.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
take effect on January 1, 2011.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5099 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5099

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 15 South Main Street in Sharon, Massachusetts, as the ``Michael C. 
                        Rothberg Post Office''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 21, 2010

 Mr. Frank of Massachusetts (for himself, Mr. Markey of Massachusetts, 
 Mr. Neal of Massachusetts, Mr. Olver, Mr. Delahunt, Mr. McGovern, Mr. 
   Tierney, Mr. Capuano, Mr. Lynch, and Ms. Tsongas) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and 
                           Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 15 South Main Street in Sharon, Massachusetts, as the ``Michael C. 
                        Rothberg Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. MICHAEL C. ROTHBERG POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 15 South Main Street in Sharon, Massachusetts, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Michael C. Rothberg Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any references in a law, map, regulation, 
document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 
referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the 
``Michael C. Rothberg Post Office''.
                                 <all>
```
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-31,511-05

EX P ARTE P AULO TREVINO JR., Appl icant

ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. 14-CR- 1274-FIN THE 214T H DISTRICT COURT

F ROM NUECES COUNTY

Per curiam . O R D E R Pursuant to the provisi o n s o f Ar t icle 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedur e, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y o u ng , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of ag gravat ed robber y , and he was sentenc ed to forty-five year s in priso n . T h e Thirteenth Court of Appea ls aff irm ed his conviction in an unpublished opinion. Trevino v. State , No. 13-15-00010- CR (Tex. App.—Edinburgdel. Dec . 29, 2016). Applicant raises sever al claims in his habea s application, including claim s of ineffe ctive assistance of trial counse l. He has a lleg ed fa cts that, if true, might entitle him to re lief. Strickland

v. W ashington , 466 U.S. 668 (1984); Ex part e P a tterson , 993 S.W .2d 114, 115 (Tex. Crim. App.-2-

1999). There is no response from trial counsel in the rec ord provided to this Court, and there are no finding s from the trial c ourt. In these circ umstances, additional fac ts a re neede d. As we he ld in Ex p arte Rodriguez , 334 S.W .2d 294, 294 (Tex. Crim. App. 1960), the trial court is the ap p ro p ri at e forum for finding s of fa ct. The trial court shall order trial counsel to respond t o Ap p l i ca n t ’s claims of ineffe ctive assistance by explaining counsel’s repr esentation of Applicant, including ap p l icable strategy and tactica l decisions. To obtain the response, the trial court may use any means set out in T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 11.07, § 3(d). I f the trial court elec ts to hold a hearing, it shall deter mine whether Applicant is indige nt. I f Applicant is indige nt and wishes to be repr esente d by counsel, the trial court shall appoint an attorney to repr esent Applicant at the hearing. T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 26.04. The trial court shall make finding s of fac t and conclusions of law reg arding the claims raised in the habea s application. The trial court may also make any other finding s of fac t and conclusions of law it deems rele vant and appropriate to the dispositi on of Applicant’s claims for habea s corpus relief

. This application will be held in abeyance until the trial court has resolved the fac t issues. The issues shall be res o l v ed within 90 day s of this order

. A supplemental transcript containing all aff idavits and int err og atories or the transc ription of the court repor ter’s notes from any hearing or deposition, alongwith the trial court’ s supplemental finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of law, shall be forwa rded to this Court within 120 day s of the date of this order

. Any extensions of time shall be obtained fr om this C ourt. Filed: September

26, 2018 Do not publish
#### JANE W. WILLIAMS v. JOHN F. WILLIAMS

No. 7610DC71

(Filed 19 May 1976)

Appeal and Error § 6— interlocutory order not appealable

The trial court’s order that the parties and their child submit to a psychiatric examination prior to final determination on the question of child custody was interlocutory and not appealable.

Appeal by plaintiff from *Bullock, Judge.*Order entered 28 October 1975 in District Court, Wake County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 7 May 1976.

This is a civil action wherein plaintiff Jane W. Williams seeks an order for custody of Angela Denise Williams, born 4 March 1969, the only child of the marriage between plaintiff and the defendant, John F. Williams.

On 25 April 1975, when plaintiff filed her complaint for custody of the child, Judge Bason entered an order granting temporary custody to plaintiff and set a date for a hearing in the matter. On 18 July 1975, after a hearing, Judge Bullock entered an order continuing custody of the child with the plaintiff until after the parties and the child had submitted to psychiatric counseling. On 28 October 1975, the parties not having consulted any psychiatrist, Judge Bullock entered an order that plaintiff, defendant, and minor child submit themselves to Dr. Henry Lineberger or to someone recommended by him for counseling. On 18 November 1975, Judge Bullock entered another order directing plaintiff, defendant, and minor child to submit themselves to Dr. Betty Hydrick (recommended by Dr. Lineber-*510ger) at Suite 101, Doctor’s Building, St. Mary’s Street, Raleigh, North Carolina, at 1:00 p.m. on Friday, November 21, 1975. Plaintiff appealed.

*Dixon and Hunt by Daniel R. Dixon for plaintiff appellant.*

*No counsel for defendant appellee.*

HEDRICK, Judge.

G.S. 1-277 in pertinent part provides:

> *“Appeal from superior or district cou/rt*judge.— (a) An appeal may be taken from every judicial order or determination of a judge of a superior or district court, upon or involving a matter of law or legal inference, whether made in or out of session, which affects a substantial right claimed in any action or proceeding; or which in effect determines the action, and prevents a judgment from which an appeal might be taken; or discontinues the action, or grants or refuses a new trial.”

This section provides that no appeal lies to an appellate court from an interlocutory ruling or order of the trial court unless such ruling or order deprives the appellant of a substantial right. *Funderburk v. Justice,*25 N.C. App. 655, 214 S.E. 2d 310 (1975).

Judge Bullock’s order that the parties and the child submit to a psychiatric examination prior to final determination on the question of custody is interlocutory. The trial judge is empowered to order the plaintiff to submit to a psychiatric examination. G.S. 1A-1, Rule 35. Clearly, the order appealed from does not deprive plaintiff of a substantial right which she might lose if the order is not reviewed before a final determination of custody.

Appeal dismissed.

Chief Judge Brock and Judge Clark concur.
1995 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

12-19-1995

United States of America v. Neadle

Precedential or Non-Precedential:

Docket 94-7417

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1995

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 1995 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"United States of America v. Neadle" (1995). 1995 Decisions. Paper 314.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1995/314
 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

 FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT 

 

 No. 94-7417 

 

 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

 v. 

 LAWRENCE NEADLE, JR., 

 Appellant. 

 _______________ 

 On Appeal from the District Court of the Virgin Islands, 

 Division of St. Croix 

 (D.C. Criminal Action No. 92-cr-00113-2) 

 

 Argued April 17, 1995 

 Before: BECKER, NYGAARD and ROTH, 

 Circuit Judges 

 Opinion Filed: December 19, 1995 

 

 ______________________ 

 ORDER AMENDING OPINION 

 _______________________ 

 

 IT IS ORDERED that the slip opinion in the above case, filed on 

December 19, 1995, be amended as follows: 

1. Please delete the second paragraph in Part I.A of Judge Becker's 

concurring and dissenting opinion, including footnote 1. 

2. At the end of the third sentence in the first paragraph of Part 

I.A.1 of Judge Becker's concurring and dissenting opinion (which reads 

"See USSG ? 2F1.1(b)."), please add the following footnote: "Except where 

noted, my discussion is based on the 1988 Guidelines." 

 BY THE COURT: 

 

 /s/ Edward R. Becker 

 Circuit Judge 

DATED: March 25, l996 

?? 
(..continued)
H. R. 5146 

One Hundred Eleventh Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, 

the fifth day of January, two thousand and ten 

An Act 

To provide that Members of Congress shall not receive a cost of living adjustment 

in pay during fiscal year 2011. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. NO COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT IN PAY OF MEMBERS 

OF CONGRESS. 

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no adjustment 

shall be made under section 601(a) of the Legislative Reorganization 

Act of 1946 (2 U.S.C. 31) (relating to cost of living adjustments 

for Members of Congress) during fiscal year 2011. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 23 (Friday, February 4, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6039-6040]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-2161]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Accredited Standards Committee N-13 on 
Radiation Protection

    Notice is hereby given that, on September 27, 2004, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Accredited Standards 
Committee N-13 on Radiation Protection (``N-13'') has filed written 
notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal 
Trade Commission disclosing (1) the name and principal place of 
business of the standards development organization and (2) the nature 
and scope of its standards development activities. The notifications 
were filed for the purpose of invoking the Act's provisions limiting 
the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified 
circumstances.
    Pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act, the name and principal place 
of business of the standards development organization is: Accredited 
Standards Committee N-13 on Radiation Protection, McLean, VA. The 
nature and scope of N-13's standards development activities are: the 
development of national standards dealing with or pertaining to 
radiation protection and the protection of individuals or groups from 
occupational or environmental

[[Page 6040]]

exposure to radiation or radioactive materials.

Dorothy B. Fountain,
Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 05-2161 Filed 2-3-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 31.1

                           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 Annual Report of RTI International Metals, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Timothy G. Rupert, 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 result of operations of the
     Company.

March 8, 2004

/s/ TIMOTHY G. RUPERT
------------------------------------------------
Timothy G. Rupert
Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION



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)



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), the undersigned officer of Heidrick & Struggles International, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the Company), does hereby
certify that:



The Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2010 (the Form 10-K) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Form 10-K fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                      |  |  |  |                        
|--------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|Dated: March 16, 2011 |  |  |  | /s/    L. Kevin Kelly  
|                      |  |  |  | L. Kevin Kelly         
|                      |  |  |  | Chief 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 June 30, 2005, asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, Rupert Galliers-Pratt, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, tomy best knowledge and belief, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350, adoptedpursuant 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: August 15, 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.

 

----
#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. BILL HALL, PAUL RAY HALL and ROGER EVANS

No. 7319SC164

(Filed 31 January 1973)

On *Certiorari*to review judgments of *Johnston, Judge,*entered at the 8 May 1972 Session of Rowan Superior Court.

In separate warrants issued in Rowan District Court defendants were charged with assaulting a police officer while discharging a duty of his office. They were convicted in district court and from judgments imposed, they appealed to superior court.

In superior court the cases were consolidated for trial, defendants pleaded not guilty, a jury found them guilty as charged and from judgments imposing prison sentences, they gave notice of appeal to the Court of Appeals. For good cause shown as to why they were unable to docket their appeal within the time provided by our rules, we allowed defendants’ petition for certiorari.

*Attorney General Robert Morgan by James E. Magner, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.*

*Carlton & Rhodes by Graham M. Carlton and Gary C. Rhodes for defendant appellants.*

BRITT, Judge.

After a careful review of the record on appeal, with particular reference to the questions raised in defendants’ brief, we conclude that defendants received a fair trial free from prejudicial error.

No error.

Judges Parker and Vaughn concur.