alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Bluefly, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Patrick C. Barry,
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.


/s/ Patrick C. Barry
-------------------------
Patrick C. Barry
Chief Financial Officer
March 1, 2005
**MPD** IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 19 - 0477 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. TAMMY JANE SMITH ,

Defen d a nt an d Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 7 - day extension of time, and good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee is gran ted an extension of time to and including April 25 , 202 1 , within which to prepare, serve, and file its response brief.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

April 13 2021

04/13/2021

Case Number: DA 19-0477
Exhibit 32.2

Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, filed pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, of
Cadence Financial Corporation (the Corporation) for the period ended June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Richard T. Haston, the Chief Financial Officer
of the Corporation, 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 Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Corporation.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Richard T. HastonName:

Richard HastonTitle:

Executive Vice President and Chief Financial OfficerDate:

August 10, 2009


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Cadence
Financial Corporation and will be retained by Cadence Financial Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



48
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 16-3197

___________________________

Olga Yolanda Reyes-Bercian

lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner

v.

Jefferson B. Sessions, III, Attorney General of the United States

1

lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent

____________

Petition for Review of an Order of the

 Board of Immigration Appeals

____________

 Submitted: July 6, 2017

Filed: July 21, 2017

[Unpublished]

____________

Before WOLLMAN, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Guatemalan citizen Olga Reyes-Bercian petitions for review of an order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing her appeal from the decision of an

Jefferson B. Sessions, III has been appointed to serve as Attorney General of 1

the United States, and is substituted as respondent pursuant to Federal Rule of

Appellate Procedure 43(c).
immigration judge that denied Reyes’s application for withholding of removal and

relief under the Convention against Torture. Our review of the record satisfies us 2

that substantial evidence supports the denial of relief. See De Castro-Gutierrez v.

Holder, 713 F.3d 375, 379 (8th Cir. 2013). The petition is denied. See 8th Cir. R.

47B.

______________________________

Reyes’s asylum claim is not before this panel.

2

-2-
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

TYREKE SPENCER

,

Defendant Below

, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF DELAWARE

,

Plaintiff Below, Appellee. § § No. 178 , 2021 § § § § Court Below

– Superior Court § of the State of Delaware § § Cr. ID No. 1609004631A (N) § §

Submitted: July 19 , 2021 Decided: August 11 , 2021

ORDER

On June 2, 2021

, the appellant, Tyreke Spencer , filed a notice of appeal from

the Superior Court’s April 22, 2021 order denying his motion for postconvi ction

relief . Under Supreme Court Rule 6 (a)(iv) , a timely notice of appeal should have

been filed on or before May 24, 2021

. 1 On June 24 , 2021 , t he Senior Court Clerk

issued , by certified mail, a notice directing Spencer to show cause why his appeal

should not be dismissed as untimely filed

. Spencer received the notice to show cause

as evidenced by the undated return receipt that was filed with the Court on July 6

,

2021. A timely response to the notice to show cause was due on or before July 16

,

2021 . To date, Spencer has not responded to the notice to show cause. D ismissal of

1 Because the thirtieth day fell on a Saturday, the notice of appeal was due on or before the next business day , or May 24, 2021

. Del. Supr. Ct. R. 11(a).2

the appeal is therefore deemed to be unopposed.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, under Supreme Court

Rules 3(b)(2) and 29(b), that the appeal is DISMISSED.

BY T HE COURT:

/s/ James T. Vaughn, Jr. Justice
1 The Honorable James M. Moody, United St ates District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 08-2871

___________ Bobby Joe Olles, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the Eastern * District of Arkansas. Larry Norris, Director, Arkansas * Department of Correction; * [UNPUBLISHED] Harley Lappin; Ray Carnahan, * United States Marshal Service; * Randy Johnson, Sheriff, Pulaski * County Detention Facility, * * Appellees. *

___________ Submitted: November 2, 2009 Filed: November 13, 2009

___________ Before WOLLMAN, RILEY, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Bobby Joe Olles (Olles) app eals the district court’s 1 denial of his motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). Having carefully reviewed the record and Olles’s arguments, we find the district c ourt did not abuse its discretion. See Jones-2- v. Swanson , 512 F.3d 1045, 1048 (8th Cir. 2008) (explai ning that the district court has wide discretion in ruling on a Rule 60(b) motion and will be reversed only for clear abuse of that discretion). We affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________
(May 24, 1924.)

#### E. H. SHERMAN, Respondent, v. S. M. NIXON, Appellant.

[226 Pac. 1117.]

APPEAL from the District Court of the Ninth Judicial District, for Fremont County. Hon. James G-. Gwinn, Judge.

Action for conversion. Judgment for plaintiff.

*Affirmed.*

Appellant S. M. Nixon, *pro se.*

Miller & Ricks, for Respondent.

McCARTHY, C. J.

Appellant has filed no brief. At the hearing he appeared in person but pointed out no error in the record. Nevertheless we have examined the record for fundamental error and find none. The judgment is affirmed, with costs to respondent.

William A. Lee, J., concurs.

BUDGE, J.,

Concurring Specially. — I concur in the conclusion reached but not upon the ground stated in the majority opinion. Appellant was represented by counsel in *104the trial court but some time before the ease came on for hearing in this court, under notice duly and regularly given, appellant’s counsel withdrew but before withdrawing filed no brief. When the case was called for argument in this court, counsel for respondent made a motion that the judgment below be affirmed or the appeal be dismissed, for the reason that appellant had no standing in this court because of noncompliance with Rule 42, which provides, *inter alia,*that “Each party shall prepare and have printed an argument or brief of the points .and authorities relied upon . . . . The brief of appellant shall also contain a distinct enumeration of the several errors relied upon. Briefs of both parties shall state the several propositions of law claimed to be involved in the case and the authorities relied upon for the support of the same separately from the argument. The points and authorities must be first distinctly stated and the argument set forth supplementary thereto.....”

No brief having been filed by appellant containing a distinct enumeration of the several errors relied upon, he had no standing in this court and was not entitled to be heard. Respondent was not in a position, neither was he required to file a brief in the absence of one being served and filed by appellant. There being no brief on file by either of the parties to this cause, upon suggestion by respondent that the judgment be affirmed an order to that effect should be entered. At most, the court would do nothing more than examine the record for fundamental error.
**EXHIBIT
        32.1     CERTIFICATIONS**
 
  CERTIFICATION  PURSUANT
        TO
  18
        U.S.C.
        SECTION 1350
  AS
        ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
  SECTION
        906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  
  I,
        James
        D. Calver, Chief Executive Officer and President 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, the Quarterly
        Report of Hooper Holmes, Inc., on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September
        30,
        2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
        Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such
        Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects,
        the
        financial condition and results of operations of Hooper Holmes,
        Inc.
  Dated:  November
        9,
        2007
  
  /s/
        James D Calver
  __________________________
  James
        D.
        Calver
  Chief
        Executive Officer and President
  This
        certification shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the
        Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) or otherwise subject to the
        liability of Section 18 of the Exchange Act. Such certification shall not
        be
        deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities
        Act
        of 1933 or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically
        incorporates it by reference.
  A
        signed
        original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
        to
        Hooper Holmes, Inc. and will be retained by Hooper Holmes, Inc. and furnished
        to
        the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.9


                     Differences in Terms and Conditions of
        Executive Officer Employment Agreements, as of February 15, 2001

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                     2001              Target Bonus
Name of           Position                           Base              (as % of Annual
Executive         of Executive                       Salary            Base Salary)
---------         ------------                       ------            ------------
<S>               <C>                                <C>               <C>
Gary Anderson     Corporate Vice President,          $300,000          55%
                  Worldwide Operations
                  Technology

Alain Andreoli    Corporate Vice President           $340,000          60%
                  and General Manager,
                  International Operations,
                  Global Services and e-Business

Jeffrey Dumas     Corporate Vice President,          $270,000          50%
                  General Counsel

Robert Kocol      Corporate Vice President           $290,000          60%
                  and Chief Financial Officer
</TABLE>
____________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

July 21, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

127983 Michael F. Cavanagh 

& (38) Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, IN RE FORFEITURE OF $180,975.00 Justices 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 127983 

 COA: 249699 

Van Buren CC: 02-500459-CF 

$180,975.00 IN U.S. CURRENCY,

 Defendant,
 

and 

TAMIKA SHANTE SMITH,

Claimant-Appellant, 

and 

TODD FITZGERARLD FLETCHER, 

 Claimant. 
 

_________________________________________/ 

By order of November 2, 2005, this Court directed the Van Buren County 

Prosecuting Attorney to answer the application for leave to appeal. On order of the 

Court, the brief having been filed, the application for leave to appeal the December 28, 

2004 judgment of the Court of Appeals is again considered, and it is GRANTED. The 

parties shall include among the issues to be addressed: (1) the proper application of the 

exclusionary rule in a forfeiture proceeding in which the property subject to forfeiture has 

been illegally seized, and (2) whether In re Forfeiture of United States Currency, 166 

Mich App 81 (1988), was correctly decided. 

The Criminal Defense Attorneys of Michigan and the Prosecuting Attorneys 

Association of Michigan are invited to file briefs amicus curiae. Other persons or groups 
 _________________________________________ 

 

2 

interested in the determination of the issues presented in this case may move the Court 

for permission to file briefs amicus curiae. 

l0718 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

July 21, 2006 

 Clerk
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           4,252
<SECURITIES>                                    20,874
<RECEIVABLES>                                   30,184
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      4,100
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                65,533
<PP&E>                                       1,156,381
<DEPRECIATION>                                (302,849)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 952,953
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           60,406
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        65,598
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   952,953
<SALES>                                          8,471
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               200,603
<CGS>                                            2,536
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  172,977
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 33,371
<INCOME-TAX>                                    13,397
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             19,974
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    19,974
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .55
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .54


</TABLE>
Exhibit 31.2



CERTIFICATION



I, Sharon Doherty, certify that:



1.

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q (this Report) of Integrated Security Systems, 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)

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



(c)

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 most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuers fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting;



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 the 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:  May 20, 2009



/s/ SHARON DOHERTY

Sharon Doherty

Chief Financial Officer

Principal Financial Officer
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1




Schedule II - Valuation and Qualifying Accounts

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                   ADDITIONS            DEDUCTIONS
                                               BEGINNING           CHARGED TO           CHARGED TO            ENDING
                                                BALANCE              INCOME              RESERVE              BALANCE
                                            ----------------    -----------------    -----------------    ---------------
<S>                                         <C>                 <C>                  <C>                  <C>
Accounts receivable allowances - 2000           $1,200,000         $2,365,000           $2,580,000           $985,000
Accounts receivable allowances - 1999            1,058,000          3,166,000            3,024,000          1,200,000
Accounts receivable allowances - 1998              638,000          2,954,000            2,534,000          1,058,000
</TABLE>




<PAGE>   2





                    REPORT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We have audited in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards in the
United States the financial statements included in Advantage Learning Systems,
Inc.'s annual report to shareholders included in this Form 10-K, and have issued
our report thereon dated January 19, 2001. Our audit was made for the purpose of
forming an opinion on those statements taken as a whole. The schedule listed in
the index above as Exhibit 99.1 is the responsibility of the company's
management and is presented for purposes of complying with the Securities and
Exchange Commissions rules and is not part of the basic financial statements.
This schedule has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit
of the basic financial statements and, in our opinion, fairly states in all
material respects the financial data required to be set forth therein in
relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole.



                                                  /s/ Arthur Andersen LLP

                                                  ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP


Milwaukee, Wisconsin
January 19, 2001
EXHIBIT 32.2

                        CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL
                       FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO
                          18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                           AS ADOPTED PURSUANT BY
               SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Omega Ventures Group, Inc.
on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, John R. Rask, Principal Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.
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.



Date: November 14, 2006           /s/ John Ray Rask
                                  --------------------------------------
                                      John R. Rask,
                                      Principal Financial Officer