alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Mill City Ventures
III, Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2013 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Douglas Polinsky, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and I, Joseph
A. Geraci, II, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|August 14, 2013 | /s/ Douglas Polinsky    
|--------------- | ------------------------
|                | Douglas Polinsky        
|                | Chief Executive Officer 
|                |                         
|August 14, 2013 | /s/ Joseph A. Geraci, II
|                | Joseph A. Geraci, II    
|                | Chief Financial Officer
### IN THE UNI TED STATES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCUIT

No. 12-40095 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JOSE ANTONIO IRUEGAS-VALDEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas No. 2:11-CR-784-1

Before SMITH, PRADO, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *

Jose Iruegas-Valdez a p peals the sentence imposed after his guilty-plea conviction of illegal reentry into the United States after deportation. He argues U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s

F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D Novembe r 26, 20 12 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Purs uant to 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court hasd ete rm inedthat this op inion sho uld not * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t forth in 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 12-40095 Document: 00512062100 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/26/2012No. 12-40095

that the sentence was procedurally and substantively unreasonable because the district court imposed a supervised-release term without explanation, notwithstanding that U.S.S.G. § 5D1.1(c) says that supervised release should not ordinarily be imposed on a deportable alien. Iruega s - Valdez also asserts that the district court did not give notice of its intent to depart from the guidelines’ advice concerning supervised release and that the sentence is substantively unreasonable because the court did not account for a factor that should have received significant weight

SSthe recommendation in § 5D1.1(c) against imposing supervised release on deportable ali e n s . As Iruegas-Valdez concedes, review is limited to plain error, because he did not raise these arguments in the district court. See Puckett v. United States , 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009). The court did not plainly e rr i n i m posing a term of supervised release. Because that term was within the statutory and guidelines range for the offense of conviction, it was not a departure, so no notice was requir ed. See United States v. Dominguez-Alvarado , 695 F.3d 324 (5th Cir. 2012). The court adopted the presentence report (“PSR”), which cited the current version of § 5D1.1(c) and listed I ru egas-Valdez’s extensive criminal history and substance-abuse problems. See United States v. Ollison , 555 F.3d 152, 164 (5th Cir. 2009). The court denied Iruegas-Valdez’s request for a downward departure, noting that he had

an extensive criminal hist ory; that the sentence was sufficient but not greater th a n necessary; and that the sentence was warranted based on the advisory gu i d e l i nes and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. The reasons for the sent e n c e based on the PSR and the § 3553(a) factors were sufficient to support the supervised-release term. See Dominguez-Alvarado , 695 F.3d at 330. AFFIRMED.

2 Case: 12-40095 Document: 00512062100 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/26/2012
#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. EARL FESPERMAN.

(Filed 7 April, 1965.)

Appeal by the State from *Latham, S.J.,*14 December 1964 Conflict Criminal Session of Mecklenbubg.

The defendant was charged in Bills of Indictment Nos. 43270 and 43271 that on or about September 1963 he wilfully and corruptly refused and neglected to discharge one of his official duties as a police officer of the City of Charlotte, North Carolina, said duty being to-wit: “the arrest, apprehension, and assisting in the arrest and apprehension of George Baker, 113 Sycamore Street, Charlotte, North Carolina, on the charge of flim-flam or larceny of property by trick or artifice, for the High Point, North Carolina, police department to the injury of the public and the people of the City of Charlotte, North Carolina, all in violation of his oath and duty to the public,” *et cetera.*

The defendant moved to quash these bills on the same grounds set out in the case of *S. v. Ilord,*filed this day, *ante*149. The motion was allowed as to both bills, and the State appeals pursuant to the provisions of G.S. 15-179, and assigns error.

*Attorney General Bruton, Deputy Attorney General Harry W. Mc-Galliard, Asst. Attorney General James F. Bullock for the State, appellant.*

*Bailey & Booe for defendant appellee.*

PER CüRiam.

On authority of *S. v. Hord, ante*149, we hold that a duly appointed policeman of the City of Charlotte, North Carolina, is an officer of said City within the meaning of G.S. 14-230.

The ruling of the court below, quashing these bills of indictment, will be upheld for the reasons stated in the case of S. *v. Stogner,*filed this day, *ante*163.

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 228 (Wednesday, November 28, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 67321]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-5871]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD


Meeting Agenda

    Time and Date: 9:30 a.m., Tuesday, December 4, 2007.
    Place: NTSB Conference Center, 429 L'Enfant Plaza SW., Washington, 
DC 20594.
    Status: The two items are open to the public.
    Matters to be Considered:
    7772A Aircraft Accident Report--Inflight Cargo Fire, United Parcel 
Service Company Flight 1307, McDonnell Douglas DC-8-71F, N748UP, 
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, February 7, 2006.
    7949 Highway Accident Brief and Safety Recommendation Letters--
Rear-End Chain Reaction Collision, Interstate 94 East, Near Chelsea, 
Michigan, July 16, 2004.
    News Media Contact: Telephone (202) 314-6100.
    Individuals requesting specific accommodations should contact Chris 
Bisett at (202) 314-6305 by Friday, November 30, 2007.
    The public may view the meeting via a live or archived Webcast by 
accessing a link under ``News & Events'' on the NTSB home page at 
http://www.ntsb.gov.
    For Further Information Contact: Vicky D'Onofrio, (202) 314-6410.

    Dated: November 23, 2007.
Candi R. Bing,
Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 07-5871 Filed 11-27-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7533-01-M
# C_2012229EN.01014301.xml

| 31.7.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 229/143 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.7.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 229/143

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directives 1999/4/EC, 2000/36/EC, 2001/111/EC, 2001/113/EC and 2001/114/EC as regards the powers to be conferred on the Commission’

COM(2012) 150 final — 2012/0075 (COD)

2012/C 229/28

On 18 April 2012 the European Parliament and on 30 April the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 43 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, on the

Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directives 1999/4/EC, 2000/36/EC, 2001/111/EC, 2001/113/EC and 2001/114/EC as regards the powers to be conferred on the Commission

Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directives 1999/4/EC, 2000/36/EC, 2001/111/EC, 2001/113/EC and 2001/114/EC as regards the powers to be conferred on the Commission

COM(2012) 150 final — 2012/0075 (COD).

Since the Committee endorses the contents of the proposal, it decided, at its 481st plenary session of 23 and 24 May 2012 (meeting of 23 May 2012), by 149 votes to 5 with 11 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 23 May 2012.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Staffan NILSSON

---
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

LAWRENCE S. WICK,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No.: 3:10cv358/MCR/EMT

CITIGROUP, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

_______________________________/

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This matter is before the court on the Notice of Settlement and Motion for Order of Dismissal

of Diamond Bank F.S.B. (Doc. 122). According to the notice, Plaintiff Lawrence Wick and

Defendant Diamond Bank F.S.B. (“Diamond”), have reached a settlement on all claims between

them in this matter (id.). These parties now request that Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant

Diamond be dismissed with prejudice, and without the assessment of costs and attorneys’ fees as

the parties have agreed to bear their respective attorneys’ fees and costs. Plaintiff’s claims against

the remaining Defendants are not affected by this dismissal.

 Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED that:

1. Defendant’s Notice of Settlement and Motion for Order of Dismissal of Diamond

Bank F.S.B. (Doc. 122) be GRANTED and that Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Diamond Bank

F.S.B. be DISMISSED with prejudice.

2. In the event settlement is not consummated for any reason, that the court reserve the

power, upon motion filed by any party within sixty (60) days after the date of an order adopting this

Report and Recommendation, to amend, alter or vacate and set aside the order of dismissal.

DONE AND ORDERED this 31st day of March 2011.

/s/ Elizabeth M. Timothy 

ELIZABETH M. TIMOTHY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Page 2 of 2

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Objections to these proposed findings and recommendations may be filed within

fourteen (14) days after being served a copy thereof. Any different deadline that may appear

on the electronic docket is for the court’s internal use only. A copy of objections shall be

served upon the magistrate judge and all other parties. Failure to object may limit the scope

of appellate review of factual findings. See 28 U.S.C. § 636; United States v. Roberts, 858 F.2d

698, 701 (11th Cir. 1988).

Case No.: 3:04cv55/MCR/EMT
[No. 24160.

Department Two.

February 6, 1933.]

#### The State of Washington, *on the Relation of W. J. Sutton et al., Respondents,*v. Roland H. Hartley, *Appellant.**1*

*Coleman & Fogarty,*for appellant.

*John H. Dunbar, Attorney General,*and *John C. Hurspool, Assistant,*for respondents.

1

 Reported in 18 P. (2d) 840.

Blake, J.

The relators are members of a committee appointed by the senate of the state of Washington for the session of 1931. They brought this action for a writ of mandamus to compel the defendant, as governor, to give them access to, and permit them to examine, the books, records and accounts of his own office and the offices under his control. From a judgment ordering the writ to issue, defendant appeals.

On the hearing in this court, respondents presented a motion to dismiss the appeal, on the ground that the questions involved had become moot by reason of the expiration of the life of the committee and the expiration of appellant’s term of office.

*608It has been held too often to warrant further discussion that where, by reason of a cessation of the controversy, no effectual judgment can be rendered, this court will not hear a case on the merits. *State ex rel. Taylor v. Cummings,*27 Wash. 316, 67 Pac. 565; *Vollman v. Industrial Workers of the World,*79 Wash. 192, 140 Pac. 337; *Standard Fire Insurance Co. v. Fishback,*86 Wash. 225, 149 Pac. 945.

The uniform practice in such cases has been to dismiss the appeal *(Mackay v. Dever,*49 Wash. 439, 95 Pac. 860) upon the motion of either appellant or respondent. *State ex rel. Daniels v. Prosser,*16 Wash. 608, 48 Pac. 262; *Wilson v. Fraser,*67 Wash. 347, 121 Pac. 829; *Barber Asphalt Paving Co. v. Hamilton,*80 Wash. 51, 141 Pac. 199; *Harper v. Crasser,*86 Wash. 475, 150 Pac. 1175.

The appeal is dismissed, without costs to either party.

Beals, C. J., Steinert, Tolman, and Main, JJ., concur.
Exhibit
99.2
 
 
 CERTIFICATE
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 (the “Report”) on the Form 10-Q of Plata
Resources, Inc. (the “Company”) for the three months ended March 31, 2009, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Dexter
R. Caliso, Chief Executive Officer, President and Director, 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 and belief:
 
 1. The
Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15
(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
 
 2. The
information contained in this Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the
Company.
  
 DEXTER R. CALISO Dexter R.
Caliso
 Chief
Executive Officer,
 President
and Director
 
 
 1
# C_2009153EN.01000101.xml

| 4.7.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 153/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.7.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 153/1

---

2009/C 153/01

Last publication of the Court of Justice in the Official Journal of the European Union

Official Journal of the European Union

OJ C 141, 20.6.2009

OJ C 141, 20.6.2009

Past publications

Past publications

OJ C 129, 6.6.2009

OJ C 113, 16.5.2009

OJ C 102, 1.5.2009

OJ C 90, 18.4.2009

OJ C 82, 4.4.2009

OJ C 69, 21.3.2009

These texts are available on:

EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu

---
Exhibit 23.1




                        INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement
No.333-54792 (effective February 1, 2001 and amended on February 13, 2001) of
Avenue Entertainment Group, Inc. and subsidiaries on Form S-3 of our report,
dated March 7, 2003, which includes an emphasis paragraph relating to an
uncertainty as to the Company's ability to continue as a going concern,
appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Avenue Entertainment Group,
Inc. and subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 2002.



SINGER LEWAK GREENBAUM & GOLDSTEIN LLP

Los Angeles, California
March 25, 2003
#### STATE v. LAMB

No. 7 PC.

Case below: 44 N.C. App. 251.

Petition by Attorney General for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 1 April 1980.
# C_2010033EN.01001401.xml

| 10.2.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 33/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.2.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 33/14

---

Corrigendum to the call for proposals — ENT/CIP/09/E/N08S03 — European Network of Female Entrepreneurship Ambassadors

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 311 of 19 December 2009
  )

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 311 of 19 December 2009

2010/C 33/07

On page 22, point 2 ‘Eligible applicants’, (d) second paragraph:

for:

‘the following EU Member States: Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Greece, Spain, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Hungary, Malta, Austria, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Finland and the United Kingdom’,

read:

‘the following EU Member States: Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Greece, Spain, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Hungary, Malta, the Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Finland and the United Kingdom’

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-6960

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

SIMON WILLIAMS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District

Judge. (CR-92-34, CA-96-572-AM)

Submitted: November 20, 1997 Decided: December 10, 1997

Before MURNAGHAN, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Simon Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Edward Rich, OFFICE OF

THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his

motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1994) (current version at 28

U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997)). We have reviewed the

record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible

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

district court. United States v. Williams, Nos. CR-92-34; CA-96-

572-AM (E.D. Va. Sept. 30, 1996). See Lindh v. Murphy, 521 U.S.

___, 65 U.S.L.W. 4557 (U.S. June 23, 1997) (No. 96-6298). We note

that Appellant carried the firearm at issue, as carry is defined by

this court in United States v. Mitchell, 104 F.3d 649, 653 (4th

Cir. 1997). 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
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

IVAN HARVEY,

 Plaintiff,

vs. Case No: 3:09cv402/WS/MD

EFIONG O. ANDEM, et al.,

 Defendants.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This civil rights case is before the court upon plaintiff’s motion for voluntary

dismissal of his claims against defendant Dr. Thayer. (Doc. 74). Pursuant to FED. R.

CIV. P. 41(a)(1), those claims should be dismissed.

Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED:

1. That plaintiff’s Motion for Voluntary Dismissal In Part (doc. 74) be

GRANTED.

2. That plaintiff’s claims against defendant Dr. Thayer be DISMISSED

WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

3. That this matter be referred to the undersigned for further proceedings on

plaintiff’s claims against the remaining defendants.

At Pensacola, Florida, this 6 day of December, 2010. th

 /s/ Miles Davis

MILES DAVIS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Page 2 of 2

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Any objections to these proposed findings and recommendations must be filed

within fourteen days after being served a copy thereof. Any different deadline that

may appear on the electronic docket is for the court’s internal use only, and does not

control. A copy of objections shall be served upon all other parties. Failure to

object may limit the scope of appellate review of factual findings. See 28 U.S.C. §

636; United States v. Roberts, 858 F.2d 698, 701 (11 Cir. 1988). th

Case No: 3:09cv402/WS/MD
EXHIBIT 31

                          CERTIFICATION

I, Martin Goldrod, certify that:

1.  I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Interactive Marketing
Technology, Inc.;

2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement
of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects
the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small
business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.  I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the
small business issuer and have:

      a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer,
including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within
those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;

      b)  Paragraph omitted in accordance with SEC transition instructions
contained in SEC Release No. 33-8238;

      c)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's
disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report my conclusions
about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the
end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

      d)  Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small
business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and

5.    I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control
over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the
audit committee of small business issuer's board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):

      a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and

      b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting.

Date:  March 26, 2004


                                   By: /s/Martin Goldrod
                                   -------------------------------
                                   Martin Goldrod,
                                   Chief Executive Officer and
                                   Chief Financial Officer
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

July 30, 2019

No. 04-19-00233-CR

Abrosia LERMA, Jr.,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 198th Judicial District Court, Kerr County, Texas

Trial Court No. B17636

Honorable Rex Emerson, Judge Presiding

ORDER

The Appellant’s Response to Notice of Late Brief and Motion to Extend Time to File 

Appellant's Brief is hereby GRANTED. Time is extended to August 28, 2019.

It is so ORDERED on July 30, 2019.

 PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO: _______________________

 Keith E. Hottle

 Clerk of Court
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 32-15 Filed 09/04/2008 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 32-15 Filed 09/04/2008 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-03345-RJS Document 32-15 Filed 09/04/2008 Page 3 of 3