alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

December 21, 2009 

1214 

Order 

 

December 21, 2009 

139775 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 139775 

 COA: 284566 

Wayne CC: 07-020805-FC 

JOHN L. NORRIS, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 25, 2009 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5946 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 5946

 To prohibit the diminution of the District of Columbia National Guard.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 12, 2023

                Ms. Norton introduced the following bill

                           November 13, 2023

              Referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To prohibit the diminution of the District of Columbia National Guard.

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

SECTION 1. PROHIBITION OF DIMINUTION OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 
              NATIONAL GUARD.

    Neither the Secretary of Defense nor the Commanding General of 
District of Columbia National Guard may transfer personnel or equipment 
of the District of Columbia National Guard to--
            (1) a unit of the Department of Defense; or
            (2) the National Guard of another State (as such term is 
        defined in section 901 of title 32, United States Code).
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER OF

UNIVERSAL CITY FLORIDA HOLDING CO. I

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the quarterly report of Universal City Florida Holding Co. I (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending April 2, 2006 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report), I, Michael J. Short, 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 11, 2006



By:

/S/ MICHAEL J. SHORTMichael J. ShortPrincipal Financial Officer




32
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 99 (Tuesday, May 21, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 25500]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-12753]



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


DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

State of Arizona Resource Advisory Council Meeting

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Arizona Resource Advisory Council Meeting, notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the fifth meeting of the Arizona 
Resource Advisory Council. The meeting will be held June 13, 1996, 
beginning at 8:30 a.m. in the Washington Room at the Bureau of Land 
Management National Training Center, 9828 N. 31st Avenue, Phoenix, 
Arizona. The agenda items to be covered at the business meeting include 
review of previous meeting minutes, report to the Council on Standards 
and Guidelines briefings with Federal and State organizations, 
discussion of standards and guidelines draft working group document, 
discussion of an open forum session for the Council to receive 
information from other organizations within Arizona, and a report from 
the Public Relations working group. A public comment period will take 
place at 11:30 a.m. on June 13, 1996 for any interested publics who 
wish to address the Council.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Clinton Oke or Ken Mahoney, Bureau of 
Land Management, Arizona State Office, 3707 North 7th Street, Phoenix, 
Arizona 85014, (602) 650-0512.
Michael A. Ferguson,
Deputy State Director, Resource Planning, Use and Protection Division.
[FR Doc. 96-12753 Filed 5-20-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-32-P
Exhibit 31.2 

CERTIFICATION 

I, James E. Hines, Chief FinancialOfficer, certify that: 

1.              I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Terra Block International,          Inc.; 

2.              Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual report; 

3.              Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information          included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the          financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as          of, and for, the periods presented in this annual 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          registrant and we 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 registrant is made known to us by others          within the Corporation, particularly during the period in which this annual          report is being prepared; 

    b)                 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 

    c)                 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; and 

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

    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.
Exhibit 32. 1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE AND FINANCIAL OFFICERS

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

The following certification shall not be deemed filed for purposes of section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or otherwise subject
to the liabilities of that section, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, whether made before or after the date hereof and irrespective of any general
incorporation language in any filings.

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 on Form 10-K of Advanced Analogic Technologies Incorporated, a Delaware corporation, for the year ended
December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, each of the undersigned officers of Advanced Analogic Technologies Incorporated certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his respective knowledge:

(1) the accompanying report on Form 10-K of the
Company for the year ended December 31, 2006, 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, as amended;
and

(2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of Advanced Analogic Technologies Incorporated for the periods presented therein.

Date: March
7, 2007



/S/    RICHARD K.
WILLIAMSRichard K. Williams Chief Executive Officer


Date: March 7, 2007



/S/    BRIAN R.
MCDONALDBrian R. McDonald Chief Financial Officer


A signed original of the above certification has been provided to Advanced Analogic
Technologies Incorporated and will be retained by Advanced Analogic Technologies Incorporated and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Richard V. McCOOL, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 50108.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Nov. 7, 1995.

Lew Kollias, Office of the State Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Breck K. Burgess, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before BERREY, P.J., and ULRICH and ELLIS, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Richard McCool pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit murder in the first degree, section 565.016, and was sentenced to fifteen years incarceration. He filed a Rule 24.035 postconvietion motion, and it was denied. He appealed the judgment denying his post-conviction motion. Although Mr. McCool is provided a written opinion stating the court’s reasoning,, a published opinion would have no precedential value.

The judgment denying the Rule 24.035 motion is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 09**  **- 7807** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. CECIL MCDONALD DAVIS , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Easter n District of Virginia , at Alexandria
. T. S. Ellis, III, Senior District Judge. ( 1:94

- cr - 00370

- TSE

- 1 )

Submitted : April 12 , 2010 Decided: April 22, 2010

Before NIEMEYER and KING , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge
.
Affirmed by u n published per curiam opinion
. Cecil McDonald Davis, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Cecil McDonald Davis appeals the district court ’ s order s denying his petition to reopen the appeal per iod and his motion for reconsideration . We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Davis , No. 1:94

- cr - 00370

- TSE

- 1 (E.D. Va. filed Aug. 24, 2009 & entere d Aug. 27, 2009; filed Sept. 22, 2009 & entered Sept. 23, 2009)
. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 92 (Friday, May 10, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 21476]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-11594]



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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
[AK-(962)-1410-00-P]


Notice for Publication; F-19155-22; Alaska Native Claims 
Selection

    On July 20, 1983, a Decision to Issue Conveyance (DIC) was issued 
to Doyon, Limited and published in the Federal Register (48 FR 33753, 
July 25, 1983). The DIC was modified in part on August 10, 1984, and 
published in the Federal Register (49 FR 32468, August 14, 1984).
    The DIC of July 20, 1983, is hereby modified by adding a rejection 
in part of State selection application F-026787 and by adding right-of-
way grant F-91558.
    A notice of the modified DIC will be published once a week, for 
four (4) consecutive weeks, in the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner. Copies 
of the modified DIC may be obtained by contacting the Alaska State 
Office of the Bureau of Land Management, 222 West Seventh Avenue, #13, 
Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7599.
    Any party claiming a property interest which is adversely affected 
by the decision, an agency of the Federal government, or regional 
corporation, shall have until June 10, 1996, to file an appeal on the 
issue in the modified DIC.
    However, parties receiving service by certified mail shall have 30 
days from the date of receipt to file an appeal. Appeals must be filed 
in the Bureau of Land Management at the address identified above, where 
the requirements for filing an appeal may be obtained. Parties who do 
not file an appeal in accordance with the requirements in 43 CFR part 
4, subpart E, shall be deemed to have waived their rights.
    Except as modified by this decision, the decision of July 20, 1983, 
as modified on August 10, 1984, stands as written.
Elizabeth Sherwood,
Land Law Examiner, ANCSA Team, Branch of 962 Adjudication.
[FR Doc. 96-11594 Filed 5-9-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-$$-P
#### Andrew R. AKRIDGE, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. 57464.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

July 24, 1990.

Ellen H. Flottman, Columbia, for appellant.

William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Andrea K. Spillars, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Andrew R. Akridge, appeals from the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion after an evidentiary hearing. Appellant had pled guilty to one count each of burglary in the first degree and rape and was sentenced to consecutive fifteen and twenty year terms. We have reviewed appellant’s claims of error, the entire record before us, and the findings and conclusions of the motion court and we do not find the court’s action to be clearly erroneous. *Day v. State,*770 S.W.2d 692, 695 (Mo.banc 1989); Rule 24.035(j). Since we also find that an extended opinion would serve no precedential value, we affirm pursuant to Rule 84.16(b). The parties have been provided a memorandum, solely for their infor*700mation, which explains the basis for our decision.
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 report of Spark Networks, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2008 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his 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.



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Adam S. Berger     
|Adam S. Berger         
|Chief Executive Officer
|May 14, 2008           
|                       
|/s/ Brett A. Zane      
|Brett A. Zane          
|Chief Financial Officer
|May 14, 2008           

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Spark Networks, Inc.
and will be retained by Spark Networks, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 31.2CERTIFICATIONI, Mark Thompson, certify that:1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Spark Networks plc;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) forthe registrant and have:     a. designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;     b. evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, 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 registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee 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 internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and     b. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.   /s/ Mark Thompson Mark Thompson  Chief Executive Officer  May 8, 2006
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v.

DEREK BLUFORD,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 23

- 1529

D.C. No.
2:18

- cr

- 00008

- JAM

- 1

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
John A. Mendez

, District Judge

, Presiding

Submitted August 20, 2024 **

Before: S.R. THOMAS, RAWLINSON, and COLLINS, Circuit Judges

.

Derek Bluford appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his

second motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). We

have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Reviewing for abuse of discretion

, see

United States v. Aruda , 993 F.3d 797, 799 (9th Cir. 2021) , we affirm.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

AUG 27 2024

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 

# FILED

AUG 27 2024

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 23

- 1529

Bluford sought compassionate release on the basis of his serious medical

conditions , the Bureau of Prisons’ alleged failure to provide adequate medical care,

and his rehabilitative efforts. The district court concluded that (1) Bluford had

failed to establish extraordinary and compelling circumstances arising from his

receipt of medical care , and (2) the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors did not

support relief given the amount of time remaining on Bluford’s sentence and the

seriousness of his offenses

. The district court did not abuse its discretion in

reaching these conclusions, which are supported by the record. See United States

v. Robertson , 895 F.3d 1206, 1213 (9th Cir. 2018) ( a district court abuses its

discretion only if its decision is illogical, implausible, or without support in the

record).

AFFIRMED

.
EXHIBIT 23.3

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

The
Board of Directors
Crown Media Holdings, Inc.:

We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No. 333-37588) on Form S-8 of Crown Media Holdings, Inc. of our
report dated February 24, 2003 (except as to notes 1 and 17, which are as of March 11, 2003), relating to the consolidated balance sheet of Crown Media Holdings, Inc. as of
December 31, 2002, and the related consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss, stockholders' equity and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2002, which report
appears in the December 31, 2002 annual report on Form 10-K/A of Crown Media Holdings, Inc.

Denver, Colorado
February 23, 2004

---

QuickLinks