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

**CERTIFICATION**

The undersigned officer of Red Mile Entertainment, Inc. (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 

that: 

| 1. | the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2006 (the “Form 10-Q”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 2. | the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in the Form 10-Q                                     |

 

| Dated: August 14, 2006  | /s/ Chester P. Aldridge   |
|------------------------------|--------------------------------|
|                         | Chester P. Aldridge       |
|                         | Chief Executive Officer   |
Dismiss and Opinion Filed July 2, 2013 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-13-00591-CR 

NEIL NOBLE, Appellant 

V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

On Appeal from the 204th Judicial District Court 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. F06-86575 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Chief Justice Wright and Justices Myers and Evans 

Opinion by Chief Justice Wright 

Neil Noble filed a petition for writ of mandamus in the trial court asking that the trial 

court order the Dallas County District Attorney to review appellant’s motion to vacate his plea. 

The trial court did not rule on the petition for writ of mandamus and appellant filed a notice of 

appeal from the trial court’s “decision.” We conclude we lack jurisdiction over the appeal. 

“Jurisdiction concerns the power of a court to hear and determine a case.” Olivo v. State, 

918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). The jurisdiction of an appellate court must be 

legally invoked, and, if not, the power of the court to act is as absent as if it did not exist. See id.

at 523. As a general rule, an appellate court may consider appeals by criminal defendants only 

after conviction. Wright v. State, 969 S.W.2d 588, 589 (Tex. App.––Dallas 1998, no pet.). A 

court of appeals has no jurisdiction over an appeal absent a written judgment or an appealable 
 –2– 

order. See Gutierrez v. State, 307 S.W.3d 318, 321 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010); Nikrasch v. State, 

698 S.W.2d 443, 450 (Tex. App.––Dallas 1985, no pet.). 

In this case, the trial court did not rule on appellant’s petition for writ of mandamus. 

Therefore, there is neither a judgment nor an appealable order, leaving us without jurisdiction. 

See Gutierrez, 307 S.W.3d at 321; Nikrasch, 698 S.W.2d at 450. 

We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. 

Do Not Publish 

TEX. R. APP. P. 47 

130591F.U05 

 

/Carolyn Wright/ 

CAROLYN WRIGHT 

CHIEF JUSTICE 
 –3– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

NEIL NOBLE, Appellant 

No. 05-13-00591-CR V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

 On Appeal from the 204th Judicial District 

Court, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. F06-86575. 

Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright, 

Justices Myers and Evans participating. 

 Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal for want of 

jurisdiction. 

Judgment entered July 2, 2013 

/Carolyn Wright/ 

CAROLYN WRIGHT 

CHIEF JUSTICE
**EXHIBIT      32(a)**

| 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                Registrant. |
|----|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                                                          |   |   |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|
|  By:              /s/ Michael J. Quillen                                 |   |
|                  Michael J. Quillen                                      |   |   |
| Chairman                of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer |   |   |
| (Principal                Executive Officer)                                  |   |   |
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

January 23, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-4128

Scosche Industries, Inc:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20. 

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request failed to show that the imposition of additional duties on 

the particular product would cause severe economic harm to you or other U.S. interests.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
**Exhibit 31.1**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

          I, Martin Tuchman, certify that:

          1.     Ihave reviewed this report on Form 10-K of Interpool, Inc.; 

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

          3.      Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, and other financial information included in this report, fairlypresent in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;

          4.      The registrant's other certifying officers andI are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:

                     (a)      Designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;

                     (b)      Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant'sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the endof the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

                     (c)      Disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarterin the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financialreporting; and

          5.      The registrant's other certifying officers andI have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant'sauditors and the Audit Committee of the registrant's Board of Directors (orpersons performing the equivalent functions):

                     (a)      All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant'sability to record, process, summarize and report financial data; and

                     (b)      Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant'sinternal control over financial reporting.

Date:  January 9, 2004
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 73 (Monday, April 17, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 19251]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9382]



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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-5192-8]


Notice of Open Meetings of the Environmental Financial Advisory 
Board on June 12-14, 1995

    The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Environmental Financial 
Advisory Board (EFAB) will hold an open meeting of the full Board in 
Washington, D.C. on June 13-14, 1995. The meeting will be held at The 
Madison Hotel located at 1177 15th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. The 
Board will meet on June 13 from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. and on June 14 from 
8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.
    EFAB is chartered with providing authoritative analysis and advice 
to the EPA Administrator on environmental finance. This will be a 
working meeting to review and comment on ongoing EFAB advisories and 
reports. These advisories and reports address important environmental 
financing issues including the redevelopment of urban brownfields, 
state revolving loan funds for water and wastewater, fee systems and 
ecosystem management.
    Prior to the meeting of the entire Board, EFAB's Environmental 
State Revolving Fund Workgroup will meet at The Madison Hotel on June 
12, 1995, from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. This Workgroup will discuss the 
development of an advisory on the benefits of establishing 
Environmental State Revolving Funds.
    Both meetings are open to the public, but seating is limited. For 
further information, please contact Joanne Lynch, U.S. EPA on (202) 
260-1459.

    Dated: April 7, 1995.
George Ames,
Acting Director, Resource Management Division.
[FR Doc. 95-9382 Filed 4-14-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-M
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Thomas WOODWARD, Appellant.

No. 64649.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.

March 14, 1995.

Daniel L. Veits, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Becky Owenson Kilpatrick, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for appellee.

Before SMITH, P.J., and KAROHL and WHITE, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals the judgment entered on his convictions by a jury of possession of a controlled substance, possession of less than thirty-five grams of marijuana and driving while intoxicated. Defendant was sentenced to concurrent terms of imprisonment of ten years for the possession of a controlled substance conviction, one year for the possession of marijuana conviction and six months for the D.W.I. conviction. The single claim of error the trial court erred in not declaring, sua sponte, a mistrial is without merit. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).
* 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. 95-50698 

USDC No. W-95-CV-77

__________________

JOHN WHITSON,

 Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR,

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL

JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION,

 Respondent-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

- - - - - - - - - -

February 22, 1996

Before WIENER, PARKER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appellant requests that this court issue a certificate of

probable cause (CPC) and allow him to proceed in forma pauperis

(IFP). A CPC is required to appeal in a habeas corpus proceeding

only "where the detention complained of arises out of process

issued by a state court." See 28 U.S.C. § 2253. In this case,

the issuance of a CPC is unnecessary to establish appellate

jurisdiction because the detention complained of does not arise 

out of process issued by a state court. Id. CPC should be

DENIED as unnecessary.
No. 95-50698

-2-

To qualify for IFP, Whitson must show that he has a

nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Carson v. Polley, 689 F.2d 562,

586 (5th Cir. 1982). Appellant contends that his due process

rights were violated by prison officials because: 1) they

refused to remove unspecified erroneous information from his

prison file; 2) he was wrongly denied parole; and 3) he lost good

time credits due to a prison directive that directed that

forfeited good time credits would no longer be restored to

certain classes of prisoners. We find no nonfrivolous issue for

appeal for essentially the reasons stated by the district court. 

Accordingly, Whitson's motion to proceed IFP is DENIED and his

appeal is DISMISSED.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 75 (Wednesday, April 19, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19590-19591]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9633]



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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[WT Docket No. 95-35; DA 95-705]


Designation of Amateur License Renewal Application for Hearing

agency: Federal Communications Commission.

action: Hearing designation order.

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

summary: This Order designates the application of George E. Rodgers to 
renew his amateur radio station license (N3LR) and his Amateur Extra 
Class operator license for hearing on the basis of a criminal 
conviction.

for further information: Thomas D. Fitz-Gibbon, Enforcement Division, 
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, 
Washington, D.C. 20554; or telephone (202) 418-0693.

supplementary information: 1. This is a summary of the Order adopted 
March [[Page 19591]] 31, 1995, and released April 12, 1995. The 
complete text of this Order may be purchased from the Commission's copy 
contractor, International Transcription Service, (202) 857-3800, 2100 M 
Street, N.W., Suite 140, Washington, D.C. 20037.
    2. The Order asserted that Mr. George E. Rodgers has applied for 
renewal of his amateur service station and operator licenses.
    3. The Order asserted further that, in Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 
v. Rodgers, Docket No. 2300-93 (Court of Common Pleas, Chester County, 
Pa.), Mr. Rodgers was convicted upon four counts of violating Section 
6301(a) [corruption of minors] of the Pennsylvania Criminal Code and 
upon four counts of violating Section 3126(a)(1) [indecent assault] of 
the Pennsylvania Criminal Code.
    4. The Order alleged that, in view of the criminal convictions 
described above, Mr. Rodgers apparently lacks the requisite 
qualifications for a renewal of his amateur service licenses.
    5. The Order designated Mr. Rodger's application for hearing before 
an Administrative Law Judge and at a time and location to be determined 
by the order of the Chief Administrative Law Judge upon the following 
issues:
    (a) To determine whether, in light of the facts determined in 
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Rodgers, supra, George E. Rodgers is 
qualified to renew his amateur service licenses.
    (b) To determine, in light of the foregoing issue, whether granting 
George E. Rodger's application would serve the public interest, 
convenience and necessity.
    6. The Order placed the burden on proceeding with the introduction 
of evidence and the burden of proof upon the respondent as to all 
issues.

Federal Communications Commission.
Howard Davenport,
Chief, Enforcement Division.
[FR Doc. 95-9633 Filed 4-18-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-M
1

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Robyn L. Weber, Esq. Weber Law Firm 221 5th Avenue Helena, MT 59601 Te1. (406) 449-4433 Robyn@weberlawhelena.com Attorney for Petitioner/Appellee KATIE MARIE THORNTON 

# FILED AUG 7 0 2021 Bowen Greenwood Clerk of Supreme Court State of Montana IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

IN RE THE PARENTING PLAN FOR: A.J.B., A Minor Child, KATIE MARIE THORNTON,

Petitioner/Appellee,
v. GREGORY STEVEN BALLARD,

Respondent/Appellant. Cause No. DA 21-0168

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

Upon motion ofthe Petitioner/Appellee, KATIE MARIE THORNTON, byand through her counsel of record, Robyn L. Weber, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Petitioner/Appellee IS GRANTED an additional 30 days to prepare and file the Response Brief, up to and including September 27, 2021. SO ORDERED this

.2 ._6 41- '\— day ofAugust, 20

c: Robyn Weber, Esq. Brian Miller, Esq. Clerk, Supreme Court



# ORIGINAL 08/20/2021

Case Number: DA 21-0168
EXHIBIT 32.2

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION

In connection with this Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q of Foundation Coal Corporation for the period ended March 31, 2006, I, Frank J. Wood, Chief Financial Officer of Foundation Coal Corporation, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:



| | 1. | This Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2006 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 this Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2006 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of Foundation Coal Corporation.
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                   |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |                                      
|------------------ |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | -------------------------------------
|                   |  |  |  | 
|                   |  |  |  | 
|Date: May 12, 2006 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | /s/     FRANK J. WOOD                
|                   |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Frank J. Wood Chief Financial
Officer
Exhibit 21

UWHARRIE CAPITAL CORP

SUBSIDIARIES OF THE
REGISTRANT

At December 31, 2009



|                                      |  |                       
|------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------
|Subsidiaries of Uwharrie Capital Corp |  | State of Incorporation
|Bank of Stanly                        |  | North Carolina        
|Anson Bank & Trust Co.                |  | North Carolina        
|Cabarrus Bank & Trust Company         |  | North Carolina        
|Strategic Investment Advisors, Inc.   |  | North Carolina        
|Uwharrie Mortgage, Inc.               |  | North Carolina        
|                                      | 
|Subsidiaries of Bank of Stanly        |  | State of Incorporation
|The Strategic Alliance Corporation    |  | North Carolina        
|BOS Agency, Inc.                      |  | North Carolina        
|Gateway Mortgage, Inc.                |  | North Carolina        



98
#### Bank of Abbeville *v.*Georgia Fertilizer & Oil Co. *et al.*

No. 2870.

August 17, 1922.

Description, and names of counsel, as in case next before.

Atkinson, J.

The bill of exceptions in this ease assigns error upon a judgment overruling the demurrers interposed by one of several defendants to the original petition as amended. The petition is the same as was involved in the ease of *Cook*v. *Georgia Fertilizer & Oil Company,*ante 41; and the rulings made therein are controlling upon the assignments of error made in this bill of exceptions.

*■Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur, except Gilbert, J., absent.*
EXHIBIT
32.1




CERTIFICATION




OF




CHIEF
EXECUTIVE OFFICER




AND




CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICER





PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




I,
Richard Man Fai LEE, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q of China Premium Lifestyle Enterprise, Inc. for the quarter ended September
30, 2010 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of China Premium Lifestyle Enterprise,
Inc.




I, Joseph
Tik Tung WONG, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q of China Premium Lifestyle Enterprise, Inc. for the quarter ended September
30, 2010 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of China Premium Lifestyle Enterprise,
Inc.




November
      15, 2010
            By:
            /s/
      Richard Man Fai LEERichard
      Man Fai LEEChief
      Executive OfficerNovember
      15, 2010
            By:
            /s/
      Joseph Tik Tung WONGJoseph
      Tik Tung WONGChief
      Financial Officer,
              Treasurer
      and Secretary




This
certification accompanies the Form 10-Q 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 China Premium Lifestyle Enterprise, Inc. under
the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-Q),
irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such
filing.