alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**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 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, Joseph Mangiapane, Jr., Chief Executive 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/ Joseph Mangiapane                         

Joseph Mangiapane, Jr.

Chief Executive Officer

April 27, 2007
Exhibit 32

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 Form 10-QSB of Avicena Group, Inc. (the Company) for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), the undersigned certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of their knowledge and belief, that:



| | 1) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/    Belinda Tsao NivaggioliName:

Belinda Tsao NivaggioliTitle:

Chief Executive OfficerDate:

November 20, 2006/s/    Mike SullivanName:

Mike SullivanTitle:

Acting Chief Financial OfficerDate:

November 20, 2006


This certification shall not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of
the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, or the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of Section 18 of the Exchange Act. Such certification shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities
Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

**RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATION**

          I,Richard Rakowski, certify that:

          1.I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of TrueYou.Com Inc.;

          2.Based on my knowledge, this Quarterly Report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this QuarterlyReport; 

          3.Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this Quarterly Report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theRegistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this Quarterly Report; 

          4.The Registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange 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 andcontrol procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the Registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this Quarterly Report is being prepared;

                    b)evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this Quarterly Report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this Quarterly Report, based on such evaluation; and

                    c)disclosed in this Quarterly Report any change in the Registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the Registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and

          5.The Registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theRegistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of Registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

                    a)all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the Registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

                    b)any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the Registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.

Date: July 12, 2006
1

FILED

July 8, 1998

Cecil Crowson, Jr.

Appellate C ourt Clerk

COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE

ETTA MECHELLE PARKS, ) C/A NO. 03A01-9711-GS-00519

 )

Plaintiff-Appellant, )

 )

 )

 )

v. ) APPEAL AS OF RIGHT FROM

 ) THE CAMPBELL COUNTY

 ) GENERAL SESSIONS COURT

 )

 )

 )

 )

CRAIG DEWAYNE PARKS, )

 ) HONORABLE ROCKY H. YOUNG,

Defendant-Appellee. ) JUDGE

For Appellant For Appellee

JOHNNY V. DUNAWAY J. STEPHEN HURST

Dunaway Law Office Rogers, Hurst & Kruskenski

LaFollette, Tennessee LaFollette, Tennessee

MEMORANDUM OPINION

AFFIRMED AND REMANDED Susano, J.
1

Rule 10(b), Rules of the Court of Appeals, provides as follows:

The Court, with the concurrence of all judges

participating in the case, may affirm, reverse or

modify the actions of the trial court by memorandum

opinion when a formal opinion would have no

precedential value. When a case is decided by

memorandum opinion it shall be designated “MEMORANDUM

OPINION,” shall not be published, and shall not be

cited or relied on for any reason in a subsequent

unrelated case.

2

In this divorce case, the appellant Etta Mechelle Parks

argues that the trial court erred in awarding her former husband,

Craig Dewayne Parks, custody of their two boys, ages seven and

almost four. We do not find that the evidence preponderates

against the trial court’s custody decree. See Rule 13(d),

T.R.A.P.; Hass v. Knighton, 676 S.W.2d 554, 555 (Tenn. 1984). 

Accordingly, we cannot say that the trial court abused its

discretion in placing the children’s sole custody with Mr. Parks. 

See Grant v. Grant, 286 S.W.2d 349, 350 (Tenn.App. 1954).

The appellee seeks damages for a frivolous appeal

pursuant to the provisions of T.C.A. § 27-1-122. While we have

decided appellant’s sole issue adverse to her, we do not find her

appeal to be frivolous.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed pursuant to

the provisions of Rule 10(b), Rules of the Court of Appeals.1

Costs on appeal are taxed to the appellant and her surety. This

case is remanded to the trial court for enforcement of the

judgment and for collection of costs assessed below, all pursuant

to applicable law.

___________________________

Charles D. Susano, Jr., J.
3
4

CONCUR:

________________________

Houston M. Goddard, P.J.

________________________

Don T. McMurray, J.
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATION
OF CO-CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I,
Michael A. Reisner, Co-Chief Executive Officer and Co-President of ICON Capital
Corp., the Manager of the Registrant, in connection with the Quarterly Report of
ICON Leasing Fund Eleven, LLC (the “LLC”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended June 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the “Quarterly Report”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 
 1.
              The
      Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      the LLC.
 
 
 Date: August
13, 2010





/s/Michael A. Reisner


Michael
A. Reisner


Co-Chief
Executive Officer and Co-President


ICON
Capital Corp.


Manager
of ICON Leasing Fund Eleven, LLC
Exhibit 32.1




CERTIFICATIONS OF CEO AND CFO PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. § 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


§ 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Kandi Technologies, Corp. (the “Company”) for the quarterly period ending June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Hu Xiaoming, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Zhu Xiaoying, 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, to the best of his knowledge, 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/ Hu XiaomingName: Hu XiaomingTitle: President and Chief Executive OfficerDate: June 8, 2011
  /s/ Zhu XiaoyingName: Zhu XiaoyingTitle: Chief Financial OfficerDate: June 8, 2011
CERTIFICATIONS

I, Rajesh Raniga, Chief Financial Officer of EYI Industries,
Inc., certify that;

(1) I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of EYI
Industries, Inc.;

(2) Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any
untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material
fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

(3) Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other
financial information included in this report, fairly present
in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for,
the periods presented in this report;

(4) The registrant's other certifying officers and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure c
ontrols and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e)) 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 registrant, 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) 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 that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

(5) The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of the 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 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:   		April 15, 2005



	/s/ Rajesh Raniga
By: 	Rajesh Raniga
Title:	Chief Financial Officer
#### David Alan GLENN, Appellant, v. Cynthia Marie GLENN, Respondent.

No. 67585.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Jan. 16, 1996.

David *A.*Glenn, St. Louis, pro se.

Heagney & Forst, Michael A. Forst, St. Louis, for Respondent.

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

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Husband appeals custody and visitation provisions contained in dissolution decree. The parties have two children: a daughter, seven years of age and a son, four years of age. The decree was entered after an uncontested hearing where Husband appeared without counsel. Husband appears before this court pro se.

This appeal is subject to Wife’s request for dismissal for failure of Husband to comply with Rule 84.04. There are a num*442ber of procedural deficiencies in the presentation of the appeal. However, we affirm on the merits because the sole issue in dispute involves the children. This issue was understood by wife, as evidenced in her brief; and the procedural deficiencies create no undue hardship on this court.

The custody and visitation provisions in the decree of dissolution were approved by the parties during the trial and are supported by the evidence. In accord with Rule 73.01 and *Murphy v. Carron,*536 S.W.2d 30, 32 (Mo. banc 1976), we affirm.
Exhibit 99.1

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 Annual Report of Peoples First, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the year-ending December 31, 2002, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Hugh J. Garchinsky, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     the Report full complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Company.







                                 BY:____________________________
                                    Hugh J. Garchinsky
                                    President and
                                    Chief Executive Officer

                                    March  18, 2003




03/17/03/SL1 337589v1/33608.001
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-31222

Summary Calendar

DANNY PEREDA,

Petitioner-Appellant

v.

CALVIN JOHNSON, Warden, United States Penitentiary Pollock,

Respondent-Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 1:18-CV-1218

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, HO, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Danny Pereda, federal prisoner # 12769-111, appeals the district court’s 

dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition. Relying on Mathis v. United States, 

136 S. Ct. 2243 (2016), Pereda argues that his prior California drug conviction 

no longer qualifies as a predicate felony offense for purposes of a sentence 

enhancement under 21 U.S.C. § 851. We review the denial of Pereda’s petition 

de novo. See Pack v. Yusuff, 218 F.3d 448, 451 (5th Cir. 2000).

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

October 7, 2019

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 18-31222 Document: 00515147730 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/07/2019
No. 18-31222

2

A prisoner may use § 2241 to challenge his conviction only if the remedy 

under § 2255 is inadequate or ineffective to contest the legality of his detention. 

§ 2255(e). A § 2241 petition is not a substitute for a § 2255 motion, and Pereda

must establish the inadequacy or ineffectiveness of a § 2255 motion by meeting 

the savings clause of § 2255. See § 2255(e); Jeffers v. Chandler, 253 F.3d 827, 

830 (5th Cir. 2001); Reyes-Requena v. United States, 243 F.3d 893, 904 (5th 

Cir. 2001). Under that clause, Pereda must show that his petition sets forth a 

claim based on a retroactively applicable Supreme Court decision that supports 

that he may have been convicted of a nonexistent offense and that the claim 

was foreclosed when it should have been asserted in his trial, direct appeal, or 

original § 2255 motion. Reyes-Requena, 243 F.3d at 904. 

Pereda disputes his enhanced sentence, not the underlying conviction. 

This court has repeatedly held that challenges to the validity of a sentencing 

enhancement do not satisfy the savings clause of § 2255(e). See, e.g., In re 

Bradford, 660 F.3d 226, 230 (5th Cir. 2011); Padilla v. United States, 416 F.3d 

424, 426-27 (5th Cir. 2005). 

In light of the foregoing, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. 

Pereda’s motion to consolidate and motion for the appointment of counsel are 

DENIED.

 Case: 18-31222 Document: 00515147730 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/07/2019
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.43

                       ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT

         THIS ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT is dated as of December 12,
2000 by and between Spinneret Financial Systems, Ltd., (ASSIGNOR) and GMF
Holdings Inc. (ASSIGNEE).

         WHEREAS, Assignor, has entered into an equity line of credit agreement
(the Agreement), dated as of the 18th day of September 2000 with Advanced Viral
Research Corp (the "Company").;

         WHEREAS, Assignor desires to transfer all of its right, title and
interest in the Agreement to the Assignee:

         NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of good and valuable
consideration, the parties hereto agree as follows:

         1.       Assignor hereby assigns and transfers all of its right, title
                  and interest in and to the Agreement to Assignee.

         2.       Assignee hereby assumes and agrees to comply with and perform
                  for the benefit of the Company, all of the representations,
                  covenants, agreements, conditions, terms and obligations on
                  the part of the Investor , as defined in the Agreement, to be
                  complied with and performed under the Agreement. accruing from
                  and after the date of this instrument.

         3.       Assignee shall do nothing nor permit anything to be done that
                  would constitute a breach, violation or default under the
                  terms of the Agreement, and Assignee hereby indemnifies
                  Assignor and holds Assignor harmless from and against any and
                  all claims of any kind by reason of any breach, violation or
                  default on the part of Assignor under the Agreement.

         4.       Assignor shall give Assignee copies of notices of any alleged
                  breach, violation or default by Assignor under the terms of
                  the Agreement it may receive from the Company immediately upon
                  receipt.


<PAGE>   2



         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Assignor and Assignee have caused their respective
duly authorized officers to execute this instrument.

SPINNERET FINANCIAL SYSTEMS, LTD.        GMF HOLDINGS. INC.

By: /s/ Alfred Hahnfeldt                 By: /s/ Diego Davis
    ------------------------------       ----------------------------------
Name: Alfred Hahnfeldt                   Name: Diego Davis
Title: President                         Title: President


The Company hereby consents to the assignment of the Agreement to and assumption
by Assignee. and hereby releases Spinneret Financial Systems, Ltd. from its
obligations under the Agreement. The Company further acknowledges and agrees
that except as modified by this instrument, the Agreement is ratified and
affirmed and is in full force and effect.

Dated: December 12, 2000

ADVANCED VIRAL RESEARCH CORP.

By: /s/ Shalom Z. Hirschman, M.D.
    -----------------------------
Name:  Shalom Z. Hirschman, M.D.
Title: President
#### Peggy Lynn BOEHRINGER, Petitioner/Appellant, v. Russell Lee BOEHRINGER, Respondent.

No. 62520.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

July 20, 1993.

Lester H. Goldman, St. Ann, for appellant.

Michael L. Lyons, Clayton, for respondent.

Before AHRENS, P.J., and REINHARD and CRIST, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

In this dissolution action, wife appeals from the trial court’s order denying maintenance and awarding husband’s pension plan to husband with no finding of the present value of the pension.

The motion court’s findings are not clearly erroneous, and no error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).