alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32.6

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER OF

UNIVERSAL CITY FLORIDA HOLDING CO. II

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the quarterly report of Universal City Florida Holding Co. II (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 29, 2009 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Tracey L. Stockwell, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
        pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:





| | (1) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





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

Dated: May 8, 2009



> By:
> 
>                                                                                         
> 
>                                                                                         /s/ Tracey L. StockwellTracey L. StockwellPrincipal Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 84 (Tuesday, April 30, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19085-19086]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10611]



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

[[Page 19086]]


DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Advisory Commission

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice sets the schedule for the forthcoming meeting of 
the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Advisory Commission. Notice 
of this meeting is required under the Federal Advisory Committee Act 
(P.L. 92-463).

MEETING DATE AND TIME: Friday, July 12, 1996; 9:30 a.m. until 12 noon.

ADDRESSES: Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Headquarters, 9922 
Front Street, Empire, Michigan 49630.

AGENDA TOPICS INCLUDE: The Chairman's welcome; minutes of the previous 
meeting; statement of purpose; public input; update on park activities; 
old business; new business; next meeting date; adjournment. The meeting 
is open to the public.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The advisory commission was established by 
the law that established the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, 
Public Law 91-479. The purpose of the commission, according to its 
charter, is to advise the Secretary of the Interior with respect to 
matters relating to the administration, protection, and development of 
the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, including the establishment 
of zoning by-laws, construction, and administration of scenic roads, 
procurement of land, condemnation of commercial property, and the 
preparation and implementation of the land and water use management 
plan.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Superintendent Ivan Miller at the 
above address or telephone 616-326-5134.

    Dated: April 6, 1996.
David N. Given,
Acting Field Director, Midwest Field Area.
[FR Doc. 96-10611 Filed 4-29-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-70-P
#### Steven HOVEN, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 42144.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

March 6, 1990.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied March 27, 1990.

Application to Transfer Denied May 15, 1990.

David S. Durbin, Appellate Defender, John L. Vohs, Asst. Appellate Defender, State Public Defender’s Office, Kansas City, for appellant.

William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, Philip M. Koppe, Asst. Atty. Gen., Kansas City, for respondent.

Before NUGENT, C.J., and SHANGLER and FENNER, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Appeal from denial of Rule 24.035 motion for postconviction relief after an evidentia-ry hearing.

Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
**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 Rubicon Financial Incorporated (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Terence Davis, Principal 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/ Terence Davis                   

Terence Davis

Principal Financial Officer

April 27, 2007
#### STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Bernard SUTTON, Defendant/Appellant.

No. 63747.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.

April 25, 1995.

N. Scott Rosenblum, Barbara L. Green-berg, Wittner, Poger, Rosenblum & Spewak, P.C., St. Louis, for appellant.

*544Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Cheryl A. Caponegro, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

PUDLOWSKI, Judge.

Defendant appeals from his conviction for murdering his wife. He expressly waives any objections to the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion. We affirm.

Defendant claims that the trial court erred in overruling his motions for acquittal because the only eyewitness to the crime, the eleven year old son of the victim, was so inconsistent and contradictory as to lose all probative value. We disagree.

In the usual case, we view all evidence and all reasonable inferences therefrom in the light most favorable to the verdict. *State v. Bernard,*849 S.W.2d 10, 21 (Mo. bane 1993). However, when a witness at trial makes several patently contradictory statements about vital elements of the case at trial, they may rob that witness’ testimony of all probative force. *State v. Eyman,*828 S.W.2d 883, 887 (Mo.App.W.D.1992). This is called the rule of destructive testimony, or destructive contradictions. *Id.*

Defendant alleges that the child’s testimony at trial was not consistent with his statements made in a taped police interview, which were also read at trial. Defendant admitted at oral argument that the child’s live trial testimony was internally consistent. The rule of destructive contradictions is not applicable to contradictions between trial testimony and prior out of court statements. *State v. Burns,*671 S.W.2d 306, 311-12 (Mo. App.W.D.1984). This limitation on the destructive contradictions doctrine is provided to safeguard the prerogative of the jury to believe or disbelieve the evidence put before it. *Id.*at 312. Therefore, the child’s out of court statements did not rob his trial testimony of all probative force, and the trial court did not err in submitting this case to the jury. Point denied.

We have examined defendant’s other numerous points on appeal and find that they have no merit. We decline to discuss these points pursuant to Rule 30.25(b) because they have no precedential value.

Defendant originally filed a *pro se*Rule 29.15 motion and his attorney filed an amended motion. The motion was denied by the lower court. No exception to this denial was raised before this court and defendant acknowledged at oral argument before this court that he was abandoning his Rule 29.15 claims.

Judgment affirmed.

SMITH, P.J., and WHITE, J., concur.
EXHIBIT
32


CERTIFICATION


OF


PRINCIPAL
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, Rick
H. Luk, 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/A of
Jingwei International Limited for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 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 Jingwei International Limited.




I, Yong
Xu, 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/A of
Jingwei International Limited for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 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 Jingwei International Limited.




By:
            /s/
      Rick H. LukRick
      H. LukChief
      Executive Officer (Principal Executive
              Officer)By:
            /s/
      Yong XuYong
      XuChief
      Financial Officer(Principal
      Financial and Accounting Officer)




July 12,
2010
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

JON ROGER LEE,

Petitioner

v.

MICHELLE CORRELL,

Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 87 MAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

MICHELLE CORRELL,

Respondent

v.

J.R. LEE CONTRACTING, JON ROGER 

LEE D/B/A JON ROGER LEE, JR. 

INDIVIDUALLY,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 88 MAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 10th day of July, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
Case 2:17-mj-00481-MHB Document 1 Filed 10/25/17 Page 1 of 4
Case 2:17-mj-00481-MHB Document 1 Filed 10/25/17 Page 2 of 4
Case 2:17-mj-00481-MHB Document 1 Filed 10/25/17 Page 3 of 4
Case 2:17-mj-00481-MHB Document 1 Filed 10/25/17 Page 4 of 4
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**





**MMC
      ENERGY, INC.**


**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 of MMC Energy, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form
      10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Denis Gagnon,
      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.





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





November
                8, 2007/s/
                Denis GagnonDenis
                GagnonChief
                Financial Officer




The
      foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of
      the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and is not being filed as part of this Report or
      as a
      separate disclosure document.
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Robert L. MORTELL, Appellant.

No. WD 52208.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Oct. 1, 1996.

Judith C. LaRose, Asst. Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General, Becky Owenson Kilpatrick, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before ELLIS, P.J., and LOWENSTEIN and LAURA DENVIR STITH, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

Robert Mortell appeals from his conviction of one count of possession of a controlled substance, § 195.202,1 and sentence of two years imprisonment.

The judgment is affirmed. Rule 30.25(b).

1

. All statutory references are to RSMo 1994, unless otherwise noted.
Exhibit
10.9


August 2, 2006


Michael Chambrello

Chief Operating Officer

Scientific Games Corporation

750 Lexington Avenue

New York, New York


Dear Mike:


As you know, management
has been working to both standardize the executive contracting processes and to
simplify the payroll administration of certain contractual benefits, with the
support of the Board.   Consistent
with that effort, we have been working to eliminate such benefits as car
allowances and housing and transportation payments to executives.  To further that objective, effective January
1, 2006, your base salary will be increased to $855,000 in consideration of
your agreement to forgo the housing and transportation benefits of your
contract retroactive to that date and throughout the remainder of your
contract.


Please indicate
your agreement to the foregoing by countersigning and returning an original
signed copy of this letter to me.


	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Very truly yours,

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Scientific Games Corporation

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Name:

  	
  Ira H. Raphaelson

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Title:

  	
  Vice President, General Counsel & Secretary

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Accepted and Agreed to:

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  By:

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Michael
  Chambrello
<PAGE>

                                                                 EXHIBIT 10.9(a)

                    SECOND AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

     This SECOND AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (this "Amendment") is made
and entered into as of October 16, 2006 by and between HELIX BIOMEDIX, INC., a
Delaware corporation ("Helix"), and R. STEPHEN BEATTY ("Employee").

                                    RECITALS

     WHEREAS, Helix and Employee entered into an Employment Agreement effective
July 1, 2003, as amended (the "Agreement"); and

     WHEREAS, Helix and Employee wish to further amend the Agreement as provided
herein.

                                    AGREEMENT

     NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, the mutual covenants of
the parties hereinafter set forth and other good and valuable consideration, the
receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto
agree as follows:

     1. Section 2 of the Agreement is hereby amended and restated in its
entirety as follows:

     "Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the term hereof
("Term") shall commence on July 1, 2003 and will continue in effect unless and
until terminated by either the Company or Executive as set forth herein."

     2. The second sentence of Section 3(a) of the Agreement is hereby amended
and restated in its entirety as follows:

     "The Board shall review Executive's compensation and performance annually,
and Executive shall be eligible for an increase in his base salary or other
compensation based on such review."

     3. Section 3(e) of the Agreement is hereby amended and restated in its
entirety as follows:

     "Executive shall be entitled to receive four weeks paid vacation and all
benefits (such as medical, dental, sick leave, disability, and retirement
benefits) as are generally available from time to time to employed senior
executives of the Company."

     4. The effective date of this Amendment shall be June 30, 2006.

     5. The parties hereto hereby acknowledge the continuing effect of the
Agreement except as specifically modified by this Amendment.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of
the day and year first above written.

HELIX BIOMEDIX, INC.                   EXECUTIVE:


------------------------------------   -----------------------------------------
By: Jeffrey A. Miller, Ph.D            R. Stephen Beatty
    Director
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. John L. ZEIGENBEIN, Appellant.

No. 18655.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District, Division Two.

June 27, 1994.

*513Wayne Gifford, Waynesville, for appellant.

No appearance for respondent.

CROW, Judge.

A commercial vehicle inspector of the Missouri State Highway Patrol issued John L. Zeigenbein (“Defendant”) a citation averring he “FAILED TO REGISTER COMM MTR VEH FOR BEYOND LOCAL OPERATION,” an alleged violation of § 301.020, RSMo Cum.Supp.1992.

The trial court heard the case without a jury on March 1, 1993, and found Defendant guilty. Defendant’s lawyer thereupon announced Defendant waived the right to file a motion for new trial and requested immediate sentencing. The trial court assessed a fine of $100 and costs. Defendant paid the fine and costs that day (March 1, 1993).

On March 9,1993, Defendant filed a notice of appeal in the trial court. He thereafter filed a record on appeal and a brief in this Court. The sole point relied on in his brief asserts the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction.

*State v. Welch,*701 S.W.2d 770, 771 (Mo. App.E.D.1985), holds:

> “No appeal will lie in a criminal case where a defendant is judged guilty and the sentence is a fine and costs, and the judgment is satisfied by defendant voluntarily. Under these circumstances, the state is no longer an interested party and the issues are moot.”

The court in *Welch*explained: ‘We do not decide the effect of payment after appeal if made under an express reservation of the issues. Posting an approved bond would be the better procedure.” *Id.*

*Welch*was followed in *State v. Hamm,*807 S.W.2d 692 (Mo.App.W.D.1991), where an accused paid a fine and costs without first filing a notice of appeal or an appeal bond, and without making any record that the payment was made under protest or that it was made with any reservations. The appellate court dismissed the appeal.

The circumstances in the instant case are identical to *Welch*and *Hamm.*

Appeal dismissed.

FLANIGAN, P.J., and PREWITT, J., concur.
IB 

House Calendar No. 75 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5754 

[Report No. 118–503] 

To designate the United States courthouse located at 350 W. 1st Street, 

Los Angeles, California, as the ‘‘Felicitas and Gonzalo Mendez United 

States Courthouse’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 27, 2023 

Mr. GOMEZ (for himself, Mr. AGUILAR, Ms. BARRAGA ́N, Ms. CARAVEO, Mr. 

CARBAJAL, Mr. CA ́RDENAS, Mr. CASTRO of Texas, Mr. CORREA, Mr. 

COSTA, Mr. CUELLAR, Ms. ESCOBAR, Mr. ESPAILLAT, Mr. FROST, Mr. 

GALLEGO, Mr. GARCI ́A of Illinois, Mr. ROBERT GARCIA of California, Mr. 

VICENTE GONZALEZ of Texas, Mr. GRIJALVA, Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ, 

Mr. MENENDEZ, Mrs. NAPOLITANO, Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ, Mr. RUIZ, Ms. 

SALINAS, Ms. SA ́NCHEZ, Mr. SOTO, Mrs. TORRES of California, Mrs. 

TRAHAN, Mr. VARGAS, and Ms. VELA ́ZQUEZ) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

MAY 14, 2024 

Additional sponsors: Ms. CHU, Mr. DESAULNIER, Mr. HUFFMAN, Mr. LEVIN, 

Mr. MULLIN, Mrs. STEEL, Mr. BERA, Ms. BROWNLEY, Mr. HORSFORD, 

Ms. KAMLAGER-DOVE, Mr. SWALWELL, Mr. PANETTA, Mr. TAKANO, Ms. 

ESHOO, Mrs. GONZA ́LEZ-COLO ́N, Mrs. KIM of California, Ms. MATSUI, 

Mr. LIEU, Ms. LEE of California, Mr. MIKE GARCIA of California, Mr. 

PETERS, Mr. SHERMAN, Ms. LOFGREN, Ms. WATERS, Ms. PORTER, Ms. 

PELOSI, Mr. THOMPSON of California, Mr. OBERNOLTE, Mr. KHANNA, 

Mr. HARDER of California, Mr. VALADAO, Ms. JACOBS, Mr. SCHIFF, Mr. 

GARAMENDI, and Mr. DUARTE

MAY 14, 2024 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 5754 RH

A BILL 

To designate the United States courthouse located at 350 

W. 1st Street, Los Angeles, California, as the ‘‘Felicitas 

and Gonzalo Mendez United States Courthouse’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•HR 5754 RH

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

4 The United States courthouse located at 350 W. 1st 

5 Street, Los Angeles, California, shall be known and des6 ignated as the ‘‘Felicitas and Gonzalo Mendez United 

7 States Courthouse’’. 

8 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

9 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

10 paper, or other record of the United States to the United 

11 States courthouse referred to in section 2 shall be deemed 

12 to be a reference to the ‘‘Felicitas and Gonzalo Mendez 

13 United States Courthouse’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
House Calendar No. 75 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5754 

[Report No. 118–503] 

A BILL 

To designate the United States courthouse located 

Courthouse’’. the ‘‘Felicitas and Gonzalo Mendez United States at 350 W. 1st Street, Los Angeles, California, as 

MAY 14, 2024 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
Exhibit 32.1

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 of Four Rivers BioEnergy Inc. (the Company) for the quarterly period ended July 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Gary Hudson, as Chief Executive Office of the Company, and Martin Thorp, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of each such officers knowledge:



(1)           The Report 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 Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.







By:

/s/ Gary Hudson

Gary Hudson

Chief Executive Officer



Date: September 11, 2009





By:

/s/ Martin Thorp

Martin Thorp

Chief Financial Officer



Date: September 11, 2009





This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.