alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





Pursuant to the requirement set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (the “Exchange Act”) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. §1350), Robert K. Eulau, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Sanmina-SCI Corporation (the “Company”) hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:





|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|1. | The Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year endedOctober 2, 2010, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.2 (the “Periodic Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and




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




IN WITNESS WHEREOF , the undersigned has set his hand hereto as of November 24, 2010 .





/s/ ROBERT K. EULAURobert K. EulauExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)





This certification accompanies the Form 10-K 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 Sanmina-SCI Corporation 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-K), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 76 (Thursday, April 20, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 19750]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9758]



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


DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Agency for Health Care Policy and Research


Notice of Health Care Policy and Research Special Emphasis Panel 
Meeting

    In accordance with section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act (5 U.S.C., Appendix 2) announcement is made of the following 
special emphasis panel scheduled to meet during the month of June 1995:

    Name: Health Care Policy and Research Special Emphasis Panel
    Date and Time: June 15-16, 1995, 8:30 a.m.
    Place: Ramada Inn, 1775 Rockville Pike, Montrose Room, 
Rockville, MD 20852.
    Open June 15, 8:30 a.m. to 9:30 a.m. Closed for remainder of 
meeting.
    Purpose: This Panel is charged with conducting the initial 
review of grant applications on research that will provide 
convincing evidence for or against the effectiveness and cost 
effectiveness of alternative clinical interventions used to prevent, 
diagnose, treat, and manage common clinical conditions.
    Agenda: The open session for the meeting on June 15, from 8:30 
a.m. to 9:30 a.m. will be devoted to a business meeting covering 
administrative matters. During the closed session, the committee 
will be reviewing grant applications dealing with complex, clinical 
medical effectiveness issues in response to the medical treatment 
effectiveness PORT II initiative. In accordance with the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act, section 10(d) of 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2 and 5 
U.S.C., 552b(c)(6), the Administrator, AHCPR, has made a formal 
determination that this latter session will be closed because the 
discussions are likely to reveal personal information concerning 
individuals associated with the grant applications. This information 
is exempt from mandatory disclosure.
    Anyone wishing to obtain a roster of members or other relevant 
information should contract Gerald E. Calderone, Ph.D., Agency for 
Health Care Policy and Research, Suite 602, 2101 East Jefferson 
Street, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Telephone (301) 594-2462.
    Agenda items for this meeting are subject to change as 
priorities dictate.

    Dated: April 13, 1995.
Clifton R. Gaus,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 95-9758 Filed 4-19-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-90-M
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-13-00647-CR

BRUCE DUNCAN

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

On Appeal from the

347th District Court of Nueces County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 13CR1861-H

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be AFFIRMED. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

May 1, 2014
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT
TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Raymond Cook, Chief Financial Officer of STEC, Inc. (the Company), certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



|(1) | the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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/ RAYMOND COOKRaymond CookChief Financial Officer


March 11, 2009

This certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-K pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange
Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
#### In the Matter of Joseph P. Menaldino, as Commissioner of the Warren County Department of Social Services, Respondent, v Carol Johnson et al., Appellants.

Mahoney, P. J.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Warren County (Austin, J.), entered November 10, 1988, which granted petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, for support of respondents’ child.

In 1988, respondents’ son was placed in petitioner’s custody as a person in need of supervision. Petitioner sought an order directing respondents to pay for support of their child during the period of custody. At a preliminary hearing, a temporary order of support was entered and a trial date set. The trial was adjourned until September 30, 1988, at which time respondents did not appear. The Hearing Examiner entered a default order directing respondents to pay $848 per week for support. Respondents filed written objections to the support order and Family Court dismissed those objections. Respondents appeal.

Respondents’ failure to appear for the hearing resulted in a default. It is well settled that defaults are subject to challenge not by direct appeal but by acting pursuant to CPLR 317 or 5015. Since respondents have not pursued these avenues, they are not entitled to relief on this appeal *(see, Matter of Wideman v Murley,*155 AD2d 841). Contrary to respondents’ suggestion, their letter to Family Court dated September 26, 1988 cannot be read as a request for an adjournment.

Appeal dismissed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Yesawich, Jr., Levine and Mercure, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 23.1

CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-100657) pertaining to the Employee Stock Purchase Plan and the 2002 Equity Incentive Plan of U.S.I. Holdings Corporation of ourreport dated February 12, 2003, (except Note 20, as to which the date is March 1, 2003), with respect to the consolidated financial statements of U.S.I. Holdings Corporation included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31,2002.

|                    | /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP |
|-------------------------|---------------------------|
|                    |                           |
| Los Angeles, California |
| March 25, 2003          |
#### STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. David L. McDERMOTT, Defendant/Appellant.

No. 69172.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

March 12, 1996.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied May 15, 1996.

Application to Transfer Denied June 25, 1996.

David L. McDermott, Moberly, pro se.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General, Breck K. Burgess, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before REINHARD, P.J., and KAROHL and GRIMM, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals from the court’s orders denying his “MOTION TO CORRECT CLERICAL MISTAKE IN JUDGMENT TO CONFORM TO STATUTE” and his “MOTION TO VACATE SENTENCE, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO ALLOW PE*365TITIONER TO WITHDRAW GUILTY PLEA.” We affirm. Rule 30.25(b).
f10q0310ex10ii_covenant.htm


Exhibit 10.2

 


FIRST AMENDMENT TO EQUITY CREDIT AGREEMENT


 


THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE EQUITY CREDIT AGREEMENT (this "Amendment") is made and entered into as of May 17, 2010 by and between COVENANT GROUP OF CHINA INC., a Nevada corporation (the "Company"), and SOUTHRIDGE PARTNERS II, LP, a Delaware limited partnership (the "Investor").


 


BACKGROUND


 


A.           On January 31, 2010, the Company and the Investor entered into an Equity Credit Agreement (the "Original Agreement").


 


B.           On March 31, 2010, the Company filed a registration statement on Form S-1 (the “Registration Statement”) with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) in accordance with the terms of a Registration Rights Agreement entered into by the Parties dated January 31, 2010 between the Company and the Investor.


 


C.           The Company and the Investor now desire to amend the Original Agreement as set forth herein based on the SEC’s comments to the Registration Statement.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, and for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto, intending to be legally bound, hereby agree as follows:


 


1.   All capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Agreement.


 


2.   Section 10.3 of the Agreement is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows:


 


“ASSIGNMENT. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Company and Investor and their respective successors. Neither this Agreement nor any rights or obligations of Investor or the Company hereunder may be assigned or delegated by either party to any other person.”







3.   Except as expressly modified in this Amendment, all of the remaining terms and conditions of the Original Agreement shall continue in full force and effect and are hereby ratified and confirmed.


 


[signature page follows]


 






  





1











  








IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment has been duly executed by the parties hereto as of the date first written above.


 




	 	COVENANT GROUP OF CHINA INC.	 
	 	 	 	 
	
 

	
By: 

	/s/Kenneth Wong  	 
	 	 	Kenneth Wong,	 
	 	 	President	 
	 	 	 	 







 




                                          




	 	SOUTHRIDGE PARTNERS II, LP	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	By:         SOUTHRIDGE ADVISORS LLC	 
	 	 	 	 
	
 

	
By: 

	/s/Stephen Hicks	 
	 	 	Stephen Hicks	 
	 	 	Manager	 
	 	 	 	 










2
UN PUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18

- 1233

AKWASI ACHEAMPONG, a/k/a Charles Boateng

,

Petitioner

,

v.

JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General

,

Respondent

.

On Petition for Review of a n Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

.

Submitted : September 20, 2018 Decided: October 15, 2018

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, DUNCAN , Circuit Judge , and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petition dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Mariam Masumi Daud, JOHNSON & MASUMI, P.C., Vienna, Virginia, for Petitioner. Chad A. Readler, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Terri J. Scadron, Assistant Director, Lisa Morinelli, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Akwasi Acheampong, a native and citizen of Ghana, petitions for review of an

order of the Boa rd of Immigration Appeals denying his motion to reconsider the agency’s

previous denial of hi s motion to reopen sua sponte . We have reviewed the administrative

record and Acheampong’s claims and conclude that we lack jurisdiction to review how

the agency exercises its sua sponte discretion

. See Lawrence v. Lynch , 826 F.3d 198,

206

- 07 (4th Cir. 2016); Mosere v. Mukasey , 552 F.3d 397, 400

- 01 (4th Cir. 2009). We

accordingly dismiss the petition for review for lack of jurisdiction . We dispense with

oral arg ument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DISMISSED
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-1254

In re: RAYMOND ALAN GRIFFIN,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (5:18-cr-00096-BO-1)

Submitted: June 13, 2019 Decided: June 17, 2019

Before WYNN and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petitions denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Raymond Alan Griffin, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Raymond Alan Griffin has filed both a petition and an amended petition for a writ 

of mandamus in which he seeks an order from this court directing the district court to rule 

on several motions Griffin filed in his criminal matter. Griffin also asks this court to 

correct numerous errors and constitutional violations he alleges have occurred during his 

criminal proceedings. Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in 

extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Ct., 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); United 

States v. Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 516-17 (4th Cir. 2003). Further, mandamus relief is

available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought, In re First Fed. 

Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988), and may not be used as a

substitute for appeal. In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987); see In re Lockheed 

Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007).

We conclude that Griffin is not entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, we 

deny Griffin’s mandamus petitions. We dispense with oral argument because the facts 

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITIONS DENIED
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14

- 20708 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
OLIVERIO VALENCIA

- GARCIA, also known as Oliverio Garcia Valencia, also known as Oliverio Garza Valencia, also known as Oliverio Valencia Garcia , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:14

- CR

- 203

- 1

Before DAVIS, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Oliverio Valencia

- Garcia raises an argument that he concedes is foreclosed by United States v. Morales

Mota , 704 F.3d 410, 412 (5th Cir. 2013), which rejected the argument that the Texas offense of “burglary of a habitation” is broader than the generic, contemporary definition of “burglary of a dwelling” under U.S.S.G.

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED June 1 6 , 2015 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 14-20708 Document: 00513079121 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/16/2015No. 14

- 20708

2 § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) because i t defines the “owner” of a habitation as a person with a “greater right to possession of the property than the actor.” Accordingly,
the motion for summary disposition is GRANTED, and the judgment of the
district court is AFFIRMED. Case: 14-20708 Document: 00513079121 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/16/2015
Exhibit 31.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Kerry M. Frey, certify that:



1.

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of BioForce Nanosciences Holdings, 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.

The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a  15(f) and 15d  15(f)) for the registrant and have:



(a)

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



(b)

Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;



(c)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our 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 registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting.



4.

The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrant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 registrant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 registrants internal control over financial reporting.



Date:  November 14, 2008





/s/ Kerry M. Frey

Kerry M. Frey

Principal Executive Officer
## In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07 - 14 - 00409 - CV IN THE INTEREST OF A .J.R., A CHILD On Appeal from the 223rd District Court

Gray County, Texas Trial Court No. 37,116, Honorable Phil N. Vanderpool, Presiding



### April 1 6 , 2015 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ. Through his attorney, Jaime Resendiz has filed a motion to voluntarily dismiss the appeal. Without passing on the merits of the case, we grant the motion pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.1(a) and dismiss the appeal. Having dismissed the appeal at the party’s request, no mot ion for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith. Per Curiam
Exhibit
32.1









Certification


Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


(Subsections
(a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States
Code)





Pursuant
to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of the
undersigned officers of Excelsior Venture Partners III, LLC (the "Company"),
does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:





The
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009 (the "Form
10-K") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in
the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of the Company.








Date:     01/29/10
                /s/James
      D. BowdenName:
      James D. BowdenTitle:
      Chief Executive Officer and PresidentDate:     01/29/10
                /s/ Steve L. SussName:
      Steve L. SussTitle:
      Chief Financial Officer and
Treasurer








The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63
of title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of a separate
disclosure document.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 5734 

To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to extend the 

Administrative Fine Program for certain reporting violations. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 26, 2023 

Mr. STEIL (for himself and Mr. MORELLE) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on House Administration 

A BILL 

To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to 

extend the Administrative Fine Program for certain reporting violations. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF ADMINISTRATIVE FINE PRO4 GRAM. 

5 Section 309(a)(4)(C)(v) of the Federal Election Cam6 paign Act of 1971 (52 U.S.C. 30109(a)(4)(C)(v)) is 

7 amended by striking ‘‘December 31, 2023’’ and inserting 

8 ‘‘December 31, 2033’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB