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

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

** **

In connection withthe Quarterly Report of CombiMatrix Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the quarterly period ended September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on November 7, 2007 (the “Report”), I, Amit Kumar,Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

 

1. The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

2. The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
|   | By:                            |
|--------|--------------------------------|
|   |                           |
|   | /s/  Amit Kumar                |   |
|   | Amit  Kumar                    |
|   | Chief  Executive Officer       |
|   | (Principal  Executive Officer) |
|   | November  7, 2007              |

 

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“Section906”), or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adoptingthe signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of thiswritten statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company andwill be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

 

1

----
---

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

The undersigned Henian Wu, the President and Chairman of CHINA TMK BATTERY SYSTEMS INC. (the “Company”), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that:

1. The Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2. Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned has executed this statement this
 15th day of November, 2010.

/s/ Henian WuHenian Wu        
       President and Chairman        (Principal Executive Officer)

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

The forgoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be
incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.

---
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7317

ANGELA JAMES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DEBORAH A. HICKEY, Warden, Federal Prison Camp at Alderson, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, Chief District Judge. (1:04-cv-01029) Submitted: November 15, 2006 Decided: January 30, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Angela James, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Lee Keller, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.* The district court appeared to construe the petition as a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000), and dismissed it for failure to state a claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) (2000). Because the district court did not have jurisdiction under § 2255 to consider the validity of James’ sentence on her convictions arising out of the Western District of North Carolina, we decline to consider this case under § 2255. - 2 - PER CURIAM: Angela James filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000), raising a claim under Blakely v. Washington , 542 U.S. 296 (2004). However, James failed to meet the standard under In re Jones , 226 F.3d 328, 333-34 (4th Cir. 2000), and is therefore not entitled to proceed under § 2241. *Accordingly, we deny James’ motions for appointment of counsel, for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and to hold her appeal in abeyance, and dismiss the appeal. 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.

DISMISSED
EXHIBIT 32.11



STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 1350



I, Radha R. Basu, the chief executive officer of SupportSoft, Inc. (the
Company), certify for the purposes of section 1350 of chapter 63 of title 18 of the United States Code that, to the best of my knowledge,



(i)  the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 (the Report), fully complies
with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and



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



/S/    RADHA R.
BASURadha R. Basu Chief Executive Officer and President




Date:  March 16, 2005





A signed original of this written statement required by 18 U.S.C. § 1350 has been provided to SupportSoft, Inc. and will be retained by SupportSoft, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---

|1 | The material contained in this Exhibit 32.1 is not deemed filed with the SEC and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company 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 contained in such filing, except to the extent that the registrant specifically
incorporates it by reference.
|- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#### Timothy R. STEGALL, Movant-Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. 69115.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

April 2, 1996.

Gary E. Brotherton, Office of the State Public Defender, Columbia, for Appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General, Mary Moulton Bryan, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, for Respondent.

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

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

The motion court denied movant’s Rule 24.035 motion -without an evidentiary hearing. Movant sought relief from a sentence after an *Alford*plea on the charge of stealing. In accord with a plea agreement the state dismissed two felonies and a misdemeanor when movant entered the *Alford*plea. The court imposed a four year sentence consecutive to an unrelated existing sentence.

We find no error of law and the findings of fact of the trial court are not clearly erroneous. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).
0 ON DW BR WN

bo Ye Ye NY YY NY KY KY YS FS
eurane ERE FSERKRIRAREORLS

ELIZABETH A. STRANGE

First Assistant United States Attorney

District of Arizona

ANNA WRIGHT

Assistant U.S. Attorney

United States Courthouse

405 W. Congress Street, Suite 4800

Tucson, Arizona 85701

Telephone: 520-620-7300

Email: anna.wright@usdoj.gov :
Attorneys for Plaintiff 4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America, .
CR18-223-TUC-RCC (BPV)

Plaintiff,
STIPULATION AND JOINT MOTION
vs. FOR RELEASE OF MATERIAL
WITNESSES AFTER TAKING VIDEO
Scott Daniel Warren, DEPOSITION
Defendant.

The United States of America, through undersigned counsel, and the defendant,
individually and through counsel, do hereby agree and stipulate as follows:

(1) Material witnesses, Kristian Perez-Villanueva and Jose Arnaldo Sacaria-
Goday, are not natural born or naturalized citizens, legal permanent residents, or nationals
of the United States;

(2) Material witnesses, Kristian Perez-Villanueva and Jose Arnaldo Sacaria-
Goday, entered the United States illegally on or about January 12, 2018;

(3) A video deposition of the material witnesses, Kristian Perez-Villanueva and
Jose Arnaldo Sacaria-Goday, was conducted on March 7, 2018;

(4) The parties jointly agree that material witnesses, Kristian Perez-Villanueva
and Jose Arnaldo Sacaria~-Goday, may be released to the Department of Homeland Security
for return to their country of origin;

(5) The parties also jointly agree that as a result of this stipulation material
witnesses, Kristian Perez-Villanueva and Jose Arnaldo Sacaria-Goday, will be returned to

their country of origin and thus unavailable as defined in Rule 804 of the Federal Rules of



oOo IDA BRB WY

boy wb NY Y NN NY Yee
® UF FESS SF CR ARAREBEHRES

Evidence. Therefore, the parties agree that the video deposition may be used as substantive
evidence in any hearing or trial in the above captioned matter.

Based on the foregoing, the parties jointly move for the release of the above-named
material witnesses to the Department of Homeland Security for return to their country of
origin.

; at
Respectfully submitted this_7___ day of March, 2018.
ELIZABETH A. STRANGE

First Assistant United States Attorney
District of Arizona

fr

ANNA WRIGHT
Assistant U.S. Attorney

ay
Dated this Zo oe day of March, 2018.

WILL
Attorney bh Detlfian vl

I understand and agree to the terms of this stipulation.

Scott Daniel Warren
Defendant
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 111 (Friday, June 7, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 29085]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-14350]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. CP96-546-000]


Trunkline Gas Company; Notice of Request Under Blanket 
Authorization

June 3, 1996.
    Take notice that on May 29, 1996, Trunkline Gas Company 
(Trunkline), Post Office Box 1642, Houston, Texas 77251-1642, filed a 
request with the Commission in Docket No. CP96-546-000, pursuant to 
Sections 157.205 and 157.211 of the Commission's Regulations under the 
Natural Gas Act (NGA) for authorization to construct, own and operate 
two hot taps and associated facilities to provide firm transportation 
service for Central Louisiana Electric Company (CLECO) authorized in 
blanket certificate issued in Docket No. CP83-84-000, all as more fully 
set forth in the request on file with the Commission and open to public 
inspection.
    Trunkline proposes to construct a 10-inch tap valve and a 10-inch 
tap valve and associated piping and electronic gas measurement 
equipment including RTU transmitters, electrical, instrumentation and 
communications equipment to provide firm transportation service of up 
to 120 Mmcf/d of natural gas to CLECO. The estimated cost of the 
proposed facilities would be approximately $262,000 and would be 
reimbursed by CLECO.
    Any person of the Commission's staff may, within 45 days after the 
Commission has issued this notice, file pursuant to Rule 214 of the 
Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to intervene or 
notice of intervention and pursuant to Section 157.205 of the 
Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.205) a protest to the request. If 
no protest is filed within the allowed time, the proposed activity 
shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day after the time 
allowed for filing a protest. If a protest is filed and not withdrawn 
within 30 days after the time allowed for filing a protest, the instant 
request shall be treated as an application for authorization pursuant 
to Section 7 of the NGA.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-14350 Filed 6-6-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 114 (Wednesday, June 12, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 29748]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-14836]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. GT96-66-000]


Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline Company; Notice of Filing

June 6, 1996.
    Take notice that on June 4, 1996, Williston Basin Interstate 
Pipeline Company (Williston Basin), tendered for filing as part of its 
FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1, the following revised 
tariff sheets to become effective June 4, 1996:

Second Revised Volume No. 1
Second Revised Sheet Nos. 5-6
Original Sheet No. 6A
First Revised Sheet No. 8
Second Revised Sheet No. 9
Fourth Revised Sheet Nos. 775-776
Sixth Revised Sheet No. 777
Ninth Revised Sheet No. 778
Eleventh Revised Sheet No. 779
Tenth Revised Sheet No. 780
Ninth Revised Sheet No. 781
Eleventh Revised Sheet Nos. 782-784
Thirteenth Revised Sheet No. 785
Fourteenth Revised Sheet Nos. 786-788
Fifteenth Revised Sheet Nos. 789-790
Fourteenth Revised Sheet No. 791
Fifteenth Revised Sheet Nos. 792-794
Sheet Nos. 795-824 (Reserved)
Sixth Revised Sheet No. 825
Ninth Revised Sheet No. 826
Tenth Revised Sheet No. 827
Ninth Revised Sheet No. 828
Twelfth Revised Sheet Nos. 829-830
Eleventh Revised Sheet No. 831
Thirteenth Revised Sheet No. 832
Fourteenth Revised Sheet No. 833

    Williston Basin states that the revised tariff sheets are being 
filed simply to update its system maps and Master Receipt/Delivery 
Point List.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed as provided 
in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-14836 Filed 6-11-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

James Strouse, 

Plaintiff,

v. 

Unknown Madrid, et al.,

Defendants.

NO. CV-18-00111-TUC-RCC 

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE

Decision by Court. This action came for consideration before the Court. The 

issues have been considered and a decision has been rendered.

IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that pursuant to the Court=s order filed

April 13, 2018, judgment is entered in favor of defendants and against plaintiff. Plaintiff 

to take nothing, and complaint and action are dismissed without prejudice for failure to 

comply with the Court's order.

Brian D. Karth

District Court Executive/Clerk of Court

June 13, 2018

s/ Becky Ruiz

By Deputy Clerk

Case 4:18-cv-00111-RCC-PSOT Document 6 Filed 06/13/18 Page 1 of 2
- 2 -

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Case 4:18-cv-00111-RCC-PSOT Document 6 Filed 06/13/18 Page 2 of 2
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

November 15, 2017

No. 04-17-00338-CV

Travis CROW, Britt A. Crow, Laurian Crow Edison, and Karen A. Kraft,

Appellants

v.

Heddie Knappick LOOKADOO, Lisa Knappick Lucas, Mary Brown, Margaret Brown Nugent, 

Charles Brown, Joseph Gallagher, Josephine Brown Noll, Pamela Gallagher Palmer, and Irene 

B. Zoeller,

Appellees

From the 218th Judicial District Court, La Salle County, Texas

Trial Court No. 14-10-00188-CVL

Honorable Donna S. Rayes, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The Appellees’ (Brown Heirs) motion for extension of time to file their brief is granted. 

We order the brief due December 13, 2017.

_________________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 15th day of November, 2017.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
#### Naomi Lee ALBERS, Respondent, v. Walter Raymer ALBERS, Appellant.

No. 69721.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Dec. 17, 1996.

Paul E. Ground, Quinn, Ground & Banton, Manchester, for appellant.

Merle L. Silverstein, Rosenblum, Golden-hersh, Silverstein & Zafft, Clayton, for respondent.

Before DOWD, P.J., and REINHARD and GARY M. GAERTNER, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Walter Raymer Albers, appeals the judgment of St. Louis County Circuit Court denying his motion to modify the decree dissolving his marriage to respondent, Naomi Lee Albers, with respect to maintenance. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the legal file and find the judgment is supported by sufficient evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence, and no *239error of law appears. As an extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose, we affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

ANTONIO HESTER
, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA
, Appellee

.

No. 4D 16

- 3604

[ November 22, 2017 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Dennis D. Bailey , Judge; L.T. Case No. 14

- 009667

- CF

10A

.

Larry R. Handfield of Law Offices Larry R. Handfield, P.A. , Miami, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Allen R. Geesey, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appe llee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed

.

G ROSS

, M AY and K LINGENSMITH

, JJ., CONCUR

.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 1 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 2 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 3 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 4 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 5 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 6 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 7 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 8 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 9 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 10 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 11 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 12 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 13 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 14 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 15 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 16 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 17 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 18 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 19 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 20 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 21 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 22 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 23 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 24 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 25 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 26 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 27 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 28 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 29 of 30
Case 4:18-mc-00003 Document 1 Filed 02/22/18 Page 30 of 30
#### Kevin JUMPER, Movant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. 64930.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

June 21, 1994.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Aug. 4, 1994.

John A. Klosterman, St. Louis, for movant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Jennifer A. Glancy, Asst. Atty., Jefferson City, for respondent.

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

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Kevin Jumper, appeals from the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion without an evidentiary hearing.

The judgment of the motion court is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous; no error of law appears. An opinion would have no precedential value.

The judgment of the motion court is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

** **

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of CombiMatrix Corporation (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2008, as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 14, 2008 (the “Report”), I, Scott R. Burell, Chief FinancialOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1. TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

2. Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
|   | By:                                           |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------|
|   |                                          |
|   | /s/ SCOTT R. BURELL                           |
|   | Scott R. Burell                               |
|   | Chief Financial Officer                       |
|   | *(Principal Finance and Accounting  Officer)* |
|   | August 14, 2008                          |

 

 

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“Section 906”), orother document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting thesignature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of thiswritten statement required by Section 906, has been provided to theCompany and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----