alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NO. 06-14-00217-CR TRIAL NO. 44139-B PHYLLIS GWEN PRUITT 

### § 1N THE COURT OF APPEALS VS. § 6TH APPELLATE DISTRlCT STATE OF TEXAS 

### § STATE OF TEXAS



### APPELLANT'S MOTION FOREXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE BRIEF
TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT Now comes Kyle Dansby, attorney for Appellant Phyllis Gwen Pruitt and files this Motion for Extension ofTime to File Briefofthis cause in the filing ofthe appeal due February 23,2-15 and shows the following: 1. This motion is filed in accordance with the Texas Rules ofAppellate Procedure. 2. Attorney Kyle Dansby files this motion for request ofa one day extension to file Appellant's brief. 3. Major inclement weather all overthe Northeast Texas area forced the closing of Appellant's attorney's office early. At the time ofthe closing ofthe office attorney
was in the process ofcompleting the Anders brieffor Appellant, along with the requisite Motion to Withdraw as Appellate Counsel and letter to Appellant, along with copies ofthe entire appellate record. Attorney attempted to file the brieffrom home before 5PM yesterday, but attorney does not have conversion software on his home computer, and could not efile a Word document. 4. Attorney requests a one-time one day extension so that attorney'sAnders brief will be properly filed, and that Appellant is not harmed due to major inclement weather. 5. This is attorney's first, and only, request for an extension. 6. This motion is not made for purposes ofdelay but so thatjustice may be done.

WHEREFOREpremises considered, the Defendantrespectfullyrequeststhatthis, theMotion for Extension ofTime to File Brief, be granted. Respectfully Submitted ACCEPTED 06-14-00217-CR SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS TEXARKANA, TEXAS 2/24/2015 3:05:35 PM DEBBIE AUTREY

CLERK

# ~~;e~~ Attorney at Law P.O. Box 1914 Marshall, TX 75671 (903) 738-6162 (888) 410-1583 (fax) kdansbylaw@gmail.com SBN: 24059180

BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, onthis day personally appeared Kyle Dansby, who, being duly sworn, upon his oath stated thathe is the person who subscribed his name to the above and foregoing instrument, and that the matters stated herein are, to the best ofhis information and belief, true and correct.

SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME on this 

# theJ2Lf:1l:- day

# Of~ 2014.**~\\I\UIJIII l)~~!-'!**  f'.'-:i:::t PATRICIA l. YOUNT**~** : :"E Notary Public, State of Texas**;:~~**.....**i;.;~~** My Commission Expires**""'II~~I~\\\~"** May 05, 2016



### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Kyle Dansby, attorney for Appellant, hereby certifY that a true and correct copy ofthis motion was delivered to the Gregg County Criminal District Attorney's Office, via email to Zan Brown, appellate counsel for Appellee.

Attorney for Appellant
**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 amended Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Trevenex Resources, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Hon Kit Wong, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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.

| Dated:  June 3, 2010

By:  /s/ Hon Kit Wong

 

       Hon Kit Wong

 

       Chief Financial Officer 

 

       (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)

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 Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 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.

  |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-89,791-02

EX PARTE PIERRE DANIELRELL THOMAS, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. W08-30475-K(B) IN THE NO. 4 DISTRICT COURT

FROM DALLAS COUNTY

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of manslaughter 

and sentenced to twenty years’ imprisonment. He did not appeal his conviction.

Applicant contends that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance because he denied

Applicant the abilityto appeal his conviction byerroneouslyadvisingApplicant on the consequences

of an appeal. 

Applicant has alleged facts that, if true, might entitle him to relief. Strickland v. Washington,

466 U.S. 668 (1984); Ex parte Patterson, 993 S.W.2d 114, 115 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). In these
2

circumstances, additional facts are needed. As we held in Ex parte Rodriguez, 334 S.W.2d 294, 294

(Tex. Crim. App. 1960), the trial court is the appropriate forum for findings of fact. The trial court

shall order trial counsel to respond to Applicant’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. The

trial court may use any means set out in TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07, § 3(d).

If the trial court elects to hold a hearing, it shall determine whether Applicant is indigent. 

If Applicant is indigent and wishes to be represented by counsel, the trial court shall appoint an

attorney to represent Applicant at the hearing. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 26.04. 

The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law as to whether Applicant’s

trial counsel erroneously advised Applicant regarding the consequences of an appeal. The trial court

shall also make findings of fact and conclusions of law as to whetherthe performance of Applicant’s

trial counsel was deficient and, if so, whether counsel’s deficient performance prejudiced Applicant. 

The trial court shall also make findings of fact and conclusions of law as to whether the application

should be barred under laches. The trial court shall also make any other findings of fact and

conclusions of law that it deems relevant and appropriate to the disposition of Applicant’s claim for

habeas corpus relief.

This application will be held in abeyance until the trial court has resolved the fact issues. The

issues shall be resolved within 90 days of this order. A supplemental transcript containing all

affidavits and interrogatories or the transcription of the court reporter’s notes from any hearing or

deposition, along with the trial court’s supplemental findings of fact and conclusions of law, shall

be forwarded to this Court within 120 days of the date of this order. Any extensions of time must

be requested by the trial court and shall be obtained from this Court. 
3

Filed: September 11, 2019

Do not publish
Case 4:10-cv-00413-SPM -WCS Document 1 Filed 09/20/10 Page 1 of 21
Case 4:10-cv-00413-SPM -WCS Document 1 Filed 09/20/10 Page 2 of 21
Case 4:10-cv-00413-SPM -WCS Document 1 Filed 09/20/10 Page 3 of 21
Case 4:10-cv-00413-SPM -WCS Document 1 Filed 09/20/10 Page 4 of 21
Case 4:10-cv-00413-SPM -WCS Document 1 Filed 09/20/10 Page 5 of 21
Case 4:10-cv-00413-SPM -WCS Document 1 Filed 09/20/10 Page 6 of 21
Case 4:10-cv-00413-SPM -WCS Document 1 Filed 09/20/10 Page 7 of 21
Case 4:10-cv-00413-SPM -WCS Document 1 Filed 09/20/10 Page 8 of 21
Case 4:10-cv-00413-SPM -WCS Document 1 Filed 09/20/10 Page 9 of 21
Case 4:10-cv-00413-SPM -WCS Document 1 Filed 09/20/10 Page 10 of 21
Case 4:10-cv-00413-SPM -WCS Document 1 Filed 09/20/10 Page 11 of 21
Case 4:10-cv-00413-SPM -WCS Document 1 Filed 09/20/10 Page 12 of 21
Case 4:10-cv-00413-SPM -WCS Document 1 Filed 09/20/10 Page 13 of 21
Case 4:10-cv-00413-SPM -WCS Document 1 Filed 09/20/10 Page 14 of 21
Case 4:10-cv-00413-SPM -WCS Document 1 Filed 09/20/10 Page 15 of 21
Case 4:10-cv-00413-SPM -WCS Document 1 Filed 09/20/10 Page 16 of 21
Case 4:10-cv-00413-SPM -WCS Document 1 Filed 09/20/10 Page 17 of 21
Case 4:10-cv-00413-SPM -WCS Document 1 Filed 09/20/10 Page 18 of 21
Case 4:10-cv-00413-SPM -WCS Document 1 Filed 09/20/10 Page 19 of 21
Case 4:10-cv-00413-SPM -WCS Document 1 Filed 09/20/10 Page 20 of 21
Case 4:10-cv-00413-SPM -WCS Document 1 Filed 09/20/10 Page 21 of 21
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">Thamer Properties Corp., Petitioner-Landlord-Appellant,<br><br>against<br><br>Emilia Nava, Respondent-Tenant-Respondent, -and- Aisha Kurtpinar, Third-Party Respondent.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Landlord appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (Miriam M. Breier, J.), entered on or about March 13, 2017, after a hearing, which restored tenant to possession of the premises in a nonpayment summary proceeding.</p><p>Per Curiam.</p><p>Order (Miriam M. Breier, J.), entered on or about March 13, 2017, affirmed, with $10 costs.</p><p>We sustain so much of the order issued below as restored the long-term (18-year) rent stabilized tenant to possession of the apartment premises. A fair interpretation of the evidence supports the finding that tenant tendered money orders for the full amount of rent arrears due pursuant to the prior (January 10, 2017) order on January 31, 2017, more than two weeks prior to her eviction from the premises (<a href="../2016/2016_00253.htm" target="_blank"><i>see Matter of Lafayette Boynton Hsg. Corp. v Pickett</i>, 135 AD3d 518</a> [2016]; <i>102—116 Eighth Ave. Assoc. v Oyola</i>, 299 AD2d 296 [2002]; <i>Parkchester Apts. Co. v Scott</i>, 271 AD2d 273 [2000]; <a href="../2012/2012_05116.htm" target="_blank"><i>see also Harvey 1390 LLC v Bodenheim</i>, 96 AD3d 664</a> [2012]). However, given that tenant's tender occurred several days after the payment deadline set forth in the prior order, the hearing court's finding that the eviction was "unlawful" cannot be sustained.</p><p>The presence of a new tenant in the apartment, who was installed by landlord two days after tenant's eviction, pursuant to a nonstabilized lease, when the evicted tenant's possessions had not yet been removed, does not, in these circumstances, provide a basis to disturb the restoral order (see <a href="../2004/2004_24367.htm" target="_blank"><i>Pomeroy Co. v Thompson</i>, 5 Misc 3d 51</a>, 52 [2004]).</p><p>THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.</p><br>I concur I concur I concur<br>Decision Date: January 24, 2018<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_1_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

STUART W. RYAN, 

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO. 3:10-cv-336/RS-MD

THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF 

THE UNIVERSITY OF WEST FLORIDA, 

Defendant.

_________________________________________/

ORDER

The relief requested in Defendant’s Motion for Extension of Time to Conduct 

Discovery and File Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 52) is GRANTED. The new 

discovery deadline is May 21, 2011. Dispositive motions shall be filed fourteen days 

thereafter. All other dates remain unchanged. 

ORDERED on March 31, 2011. 

/S/ Richard Smoak 

RICHARD SMOAK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
# C_2010007EN.01000401.xml

| 13.1.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 7/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.1.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 7/4

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

12 January 2010

2010/C 7/03

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,4481 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 132,41 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4405 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,89720 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,2215 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,4743 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,1825 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 26,258 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 268,18 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7093 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,0838 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,1405 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,1084 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5668 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4959 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 11,2301 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,9573 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,0133 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 627,40 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 10,8264 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 9,8863 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,2753 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 13 281,14 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,8424 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 66,106 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 42,6974 |
| THB | Thai baht | 47,839 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,5309 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 18,4995 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 66,2100 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,4481

JPY

Japanese yen

132,41

DKK

Danish krone

7,4405

GBP

Pound sterling

0,89720

SEK

Swedish krona

10,2215

CHF

Swiss franc

1,4743

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,1825

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

26,258

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

268,18

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7093

PLN

Polish zloty

4,0838

RON

Romanian leu

4,1405

TRY

Turkish lira

2,1084

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5668

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4959

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

11,2301

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,9573

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,0133

KRW

South Korean won

1 627,40

ZAR

South African rand

10,8264

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

9,8863

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,2753

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

13 281,14

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,8424

PHP

Philippine peso

66,106

RUB

Russian rouble

42,6974

THB

Thai baht

47,839

BRL

Brazilian real

2,5309

MXN

Mexican peso

18,4995

INR

Indian rupee

66,2100

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
* 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. 95-50524

Summary Calendar

__________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

WILLIAM A. LUSK,

 Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. A-94-CA-586-JN

- - - - - - - - - -

February 26, 1996

Before GARWOOD, JONES and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

William A. Lusk appeals the dismissal of his post-conviction

motion. Lusk contends that the Government failed to produce

exculpatory evidence and witness statements to him in violation

of the rule in Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 86 (1963), and the

Jencks Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3500(b). Lusk also contends that he

received ineffective assistance of counsel. A careful review of

the record and the arguments of the parties reveals that Lusk has

shown no reversible error in the district court’s judgment. 

AFFIRMED.
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

TAMMY L. EZSOL,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 5:10cv97/RH/EMT

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,

Commissioner of the Social Security

Administration,

Defendant.

_______________________________ /

O R D E R

Plaintiff has filed a second amended complaint for judicial review of an adverse

administrative decision of the Defendant and a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Docs.

7, 3). It affirmatively appears that leave to proceed in forma pauperis should be granted. However, 

before service can be directed, Plaintiff must submit prepared USM 285 forms for Michael J. Astrue,

Commissioner of Social Security; the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Florida;

and the Attorney General of the United States. Additionally, Plaintiff must also provide service

copies of her second amended complaint.1

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 3) is GRANTED.

2. Within THIRTY (30) DAYS of the date of docketing of this order, Plaintiff shall

submit three (3) copies of the second amended complaint, as well as prepared USM 285 forms for

Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security; the United States Attorney for the Northern

District of Florida; and the Attorney General of the United States. Upon receipt of the service

1

 Counsel is advised that, with respect to future cases in which his client seeks to proceed

in forma pauperis, to save time he should simply submit the prepared USM 285 forms and service

copies of the complaint at the time the case is filed. 
Page 2 of 2

copies, the clerk is directed to send three certified copies of this order, the service copies of the

complaint, and the prepared USM 285 forms to the United States Marshal. 

3. The United States Marshal shall serve a copy of the complaint and summons upon

Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security and the Attorney General of the United States

by certified mail, and upon the office of the United States Attorney for this District by regular U.S.

Mail or by hand-delivery. 

4. After a response to the complaint has been filed by the Defendant, the Plaintiff shall

be required to mail to the attorney for the Defendant a copy of every pleading or other paper,

including letters, submitted for consideration by the court. The Plaintiff shall include with the

original paper to be filed with the clerk of court a certificate stating the date a correct copy of the

paper was mailed to each Defendant or to the attorney representing each Defendant. Any paper

submitted for filing after a response to the complaint has been filed by the Defendant which does

not contain a certificate of service shall be returned by the clerk and disregarded by the court.

DONE AND ORDERED this 6th day of May 2010.

/s/ Elizabeth M. Timothy 

ELIZABETH M. TIMOTHY 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case No: 5:10cv97/RH/EMT
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATIONS UNDER SECTION 906 OF SARBANES-OXLEY



In connection with the annual report of Angiotech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the Company) on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Dr. William L. Hunter, 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 the best of 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/ William L. Hunter



Name: Dr. William L. Hunter

Title: Chief Executive Officer

March 27, 2006





A signed original of this written statement required by Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 has been provided to the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



This certification accompanies the Form 40-F to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Registrant under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made before or after the date of the Form 40-F), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
2004 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 12-30-2004 

# U SA v . C ons t ant P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al : N on-P r e c e de n t i al D ocke t N o . 04-1025

F o l lo w thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a w . vi l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2004

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou gh t t o you for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Re posit or y

. It h as be e n a c c e pt e d for inclusion in 2004 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Re posit or y

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j amin . C a rl s on@l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " U SA v . C on s t a n t " (2004). 2004 D e cisio n s . P ape r 27. h tt p://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2004/27NOT PRE CEDENT IAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FO R T HE TH IRD CIR CU IT

___________ No. 04-1025

___________ UNITED S TATES OF AMERI CA

v. IVAN CONSTANT, Appellant

___________ On A ppeal from the Un ited States District Co urt for the Easte rn D istrict of P enns ylvania (D.C. Civi l No. 02-cr -00434-1) Distri ct Judge: The Honorable Anita B. Brody

___________ Submitte d Under Third Circ uit LAR 34.1(a)

December 13, 2004 Be for e: N YG AA RD , RO SE NN , and BE CK ER , Circu it Judges .

(Fil ed: December 30, 2004)

___________ OPINI ON OF THE COURT

___________NY GA AR D, Circu it Judge .

Arg uing that the felon -in-po ssessio n statute , 18 U .S.C. § 922 (g), is unco nstitution al on its face a nd as applie d to h im, A ppella nt Ivan Co nstan t challen ges h is convict ion under t

hat st atute . As we have previous ly consider ed and rej ected an i dentic al cl ai m, see United States v. Singlet ary , 268 F .3d 19 6 (3d Cir. 20 01), w e aff irm his convict ion.
EXHIBIT 32.1
  CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO
 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)
  In connection with the Quarterly Report of Strategic American Oil Corporation on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended October 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), Jeremy Glenn Driver, Chief Executive Officer and Sarah Berel-Harrop, Chief Financial Officer of Strategic American Oil Corporation, do hereby certify, pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350), that to his or her 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.
  December 20, 2011By:
“Jeremy Glenn Driver”Jeremy Glenn DriverChief Executive OfficerPrincipal  Executive Officer
 By:
“Sarah Berel-Harrop”Sarah Berel-HarropChief Financial OfficerPrincipal Accounting Officer
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signatures that appear in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.