alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 v. 

ALETHEIA RESEARCH 

MANAGEMENT, 

Defendant, 

and 

PETER J. EICHLER, Jr., 

Defendant-Appellant. 

No. 15-55887 

D.C. No. 2:12-cv-10692-JFW-RZ 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

John F. Walter, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 11, 2017**

Before: GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

 

* 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

APR 21 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 15-55887 

Peter J. Eichler, Jr., appeals pro se from the district court’s order granting the 

Securities Exchange Commission’s (“SEC”) motion for monetary remedies in its 

civil enforcement action alleging violations of the Investment Advisers Act of 

1940 and the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. We have jurisdiction under 28 

U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion. SEC v. First Pac. Bancorp, 

142 F.3d 1186, 1190 (9th Cir. 1998) (disgorgement); Fed. Election Comm’n v. 

Furgatch, 869 F.2d 1256, 1258 (9th Cir. 1989) (civil penalty). We affirm. 

The district court did not abuse its discretion in ordering the disgorgement of 

$1,655,923 and relying on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s expert in 

setting the disgorgement amount. See SEC v. JT Wallenbrock & Assocs., 440 F.3d 

1109, 1113 (9th Cir. 2006) (“[T]he district court has broad equity powers to order 

the disgorgement of ill-gotten gains obtained through the violation of federal 

securities laws” and “broad discretion in calculating the amount to be disgorged.” 

(citations and internal quotation marks omitted)).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in setting the civil penalty 

equal to the disgorgement amount. See 15 U.S.C. § 78u(d)(3)(B) (authorizing civil 

penalties equal to the amount of pecuniary gains as a result of securities 

violations); 15 U.S.C. § 80b-9(e)(2) (same).
3 15-55887 

We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on 

appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.
---

EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. §1350 AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Energy Fuels Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2016 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Daniel G. Zang, Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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/ Daniel G. ZangDaniel G. ZangChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)


Date: May 5, 2016

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, 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.

---
#### STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Charles LISTON, Defendant/Appellant. Charles LISTON, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.

Nos. 63996, 65468.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Aug. 9, 1994.

Robert E. Steele, Jr., Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Becky Owenson Kilpatrick, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

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

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals his conviction by a jury for second degree assault, § 565.060, RSMo Supp.1993. The court sentenced him as a prior and persistent offender to a prison term of ten years. Defendant also appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We affirm.

We have reviewed the record and find the claims of error are without merit; the judgment of the motion court is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).
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 

Timothy J. Eckstein, 018321 

Joseph Roth, 025725 

Sarah P. Lawson, 036436 

OSBORN MALEDON, P.A. 

2929 North Central Avenue, 20th Floor 

Phoenix, Arizona 85012-2793 

(602) 640-9000 

teckstein@omlaw.com 

jroth@omlaw.com

slawson@omlaw.com 

Attorneys for James Larkin 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

United States of America, 

Plaintiff, 

 

vs. 

James Larkin,

 Defendant. 

Case No. 2:18-cr-00422-PHX-DJH-2 

STATUS REPORT 

Pursuant to the Court’s December 19, 2020 Minute Entry (Doc. 1516), Counsel 

for Defendant James Larkin reports that prior counsel has transferred to current counsel 

all disclosures made by the Government. Counsel has separately confirmed with the 

Government that we are in possession of all disclosures made to date by the 

Government. Counsel takes no position on the completeness of those disclosures or 

whether the Government has satisfied its constitutional and ethical obligations, including 

those under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), or Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 

150 (1972). Counsel will raise as soon as we become aware of any issues regarding the 

completeness of the Government’s disclosures. 

. . . 

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1521 Filed 01/17/23 Page 1 of 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 

DATED this 17th day of January, 2023. 

OSBORN MALEDON, P.A. 

By /s/ Timothy J. Eckstein 

Timothy J. Eckstein 

Joseph Roth 

Sarah P. Lawson 

2929 North Central, 20th Floor 

Phoenix, Arizona 85012-2794 

Attorneys for James Larkin 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on January 17, 2023, the attached document was electronically 

transmitted to the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF System which will send 

notification of such filing and transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing to all CM/ECF 

registrants who have entered their appearance as counsel of record. 

/s/ Timothy J. Eckstein 

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1521 Filed 01/17/23 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 32.2    CERTIFICATE 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 (the Report) on the Form 10-Q of Siga Resources, Inc. (the Company) for the nine months ended April 30, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Robert Malasek, Chief Accounting Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Director, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:  1. The Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and  2. The information contained in this Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.   Date: June 20, 2011   /s/ ROBERT MALASEK Robert Malasek Chief Accounting Officer Chief Financial Officer and Director
**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 Quarterly Report of Boatatopia (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Stephen N. Causey, President and Principal Accounting 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/ Stephen N. Causey |
|--------|-----------------------|

Michael J. Evangelista

President and Principal Accounting Officer

|   | October 26, 2007 |
|--------|------------------|
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America

Plaintiff,

v.

Andrew Padilla,

Defendant.

CR-18-00422-06-PHX-DJH

ORDER 

Upon motion of Defendant and good cause appearing,

IT IS ORDERED granting Defendant Andrew Padilla’s motion to appear by telephone

or video conference at the status conference in this case set for August 18, 2023 at 9:30 a.m. and

at the Frye/Cooper hearing set for August 18, 2013 at 11:30 a.m. (Doc. ). 

Instructions will be provided for his remote appearance by separate e-mail notification. 

Dated this day of August, 2023.

 

 Honorable Diane J. Humetewa

 United States District Judge

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1700-1 Filed 08/15/23 Page 1 of 1
<PAGE>

Exhibit 23 Consent

                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

         We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K of Northway Financial, Inc. of our report dated January 15, 2002,
relating to the consolidated statements of financial condition of Northway
Financial, Inc. and Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2001 and 2000, and the
related consolidated statements of income, changes in stockholders' equity,
comprehensive income and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year
period ended December 31, 2001.

                                         /S/ Shatswell, Macleod & Company, P.C.
                                         --------------------------------------
                                         SHATSWELL, MacLEOD & COMPANY, P.C.

West Peabody, Massachusetts
March 27, 2002
EXHIBIT 32.1



Statement of Chief Executive Officer



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of SDG&E Funding LLC (the "Company") certifies that:



(i)

the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission for the year ended December 31, 2006 (the "Annual Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and



(ii)

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







March 27, 2007

/s/ Charles A. McMonagleCharles A. McMonagleChief Executive Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 632 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 632

    Congratulating Jockey Calvin Borel for his victory at the 135th 
                            Kentucky Derby.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 10, 2009

Mr. Melancon submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
            the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
    Congratulating Jockey Calvin Borel for his victory at the 135th 
                            Kentucky Derby.

Whereas Calvin Borel, born and raised in St. Martin Parish, Louisiana, began 
        riding match horse races at the age of 8 in the State of Louisiana;
Whereas Mr. Borel began his professional career as a jockey at the age of 16;
Whereas Mr. Borel is known for his work ethic and, even while ranked as a 
        leading rider, often gallops horses and does stable chores for his 
        brother before working horses in the morning;
Whereas Mr. Borel won his second Kentucky Derby riding Mine That Bird after 
        riding Street Sense to victory in 2007;
Whereas, on May 2, 2009, Mr. Borel won the Kentucky Derby on Mine That Bird, a 
        50-1 long shot, a day after winning the Kentucky Oaks aboard favorite 
        Rachel Alexandra;
Whereas it was only the second time since 1993 that a jockey has won the Oaks-
        Derby combo and just the seventh jockey overall to accomplish this feat 
        in the same year;
Whereas, on May 2, 2009, in 2 minutes and 2.17 seconds Mr. Borel and Mine That 
        Bird completed the race and placed first;
Whereas, on May 16, 2009, Mr. Borel won the Preakness Stakes on Rachel 
        Alexandra; and
Whereas it was the first time that a jockey has won the first two legs of the 
        Triple Crown on different horses: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives congratulates Calvin 
Borel for his victory at the 135th Kentucky Derby.
                                 <all>
```
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

United States of America,

Plaintiff,

v.

Michael Lacey, et al,

 Defendants.

CR-18-422-PHX-DJH

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Based on the United States’ Motion for Protective Order, and pursuant to the 

authority afforded this Court under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16(d)(1), and for 

good cause shown,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the United States’ Motion for Protective Order is 

GRANTED pursuant to the terms of this Protective Order.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defense counsel shall securely maintain in their 

custody any and all “identifying information” including victims' names, social security 

numbers, addresses, telephone numbers, and images of individuals contained in the 

discovery and designated exhibits in this matter, namely advertisements that were posted 

on Backpage, including but not limited to the trial exhibits listed in the United States’ 

Attachment A to the instant Motion.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1948-1 Filed 11/08/23 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

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that reproduction and dissemination of such

“identifying information” and images shall be limited to defense counsel and defense 

experts, as necessary, for purposes of this matter, with any such reproduced copies being 

returned to defense counsel at the conclusion of the case.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendants shall not possess the 

aforementioned “identifying information” and images outside of defense counsel’s 

presence, and shall not maintain any such images in his or her custody.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the “identifying information” and images of the 

individuals depicted in the ads and exhibits are for use only in this case by counsel and the 

defendant, and may not be disseminated or used for any other purpose; and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all “identifying information” and images of the 

individuals depicted in the ads and exhibits shall be returned to the United States or 

destroyed at the conclusion of this case. If defense counsel chooses to destroy rather than 

return, each counsel shall provide a sworn statement to the United States stating the date 

on which the documents were destroyed and the Bates numbers and/or Exhibit numbers of 

the documents destroyed.

This Order shall be presented to any individual to whom, under the terms of this 

Order, defense counsel discloses images covered by this Order. By accepting the covered 

images, such persons agree to submit to the jurisdiction of the United States District Court 

for the District of Arizona for the sole purpose of enforcing the terms of this Order.

Dated this ______ day of ____________________, 2023.

________________________

Honorable Diane J. Humetewa

United States District Judge

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1948-1 Filed 11/08/23 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 32
 Certification pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  1.
    
    the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the Year ended December 31, 2008 (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and2.
    
    that as of the date of this statement, the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 March 4, 2009
    
    /s/ William J. WagnerDate
    
    William J. WagnerPresident and Chief Executive OfficerMarch 4, 2009
    
    /s/ William W. Harvey, Jr.Date
    
    William W. Harvey, Jr.Executive Vice President, Finance andChief Financial Officer
Filed: June 3, 1997

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7897

(CR-94-39-H)

United States of America,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

Barry McCormick,

Defendant - Appellant.

ORDER

The Court amends its opinion filed March 13, 1997, as follows:

On the cover sheet, section 3, line 3 -- the district court

case number is corrected to read "CR-94- 39-H."

For the Court - By Direction

/s/ Patricia S. Connor

Clerk
2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7897

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

BARRY MCCORMICK,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District

Judge. (CR-94-39-H)

Submitted: February 27, 1997 Decided: March 13, 1997

Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Barry McCormick, Appellant Pro Se. William Arthur Webb, Assistant

United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
3

PER CURIAM:

Appellant filed an untimely notice of appeal. We dismiss for

lack of jurisdiction. The time periods for filing notices of appeal

are governed by Fed. R. App. P. 4. These periods are "mandatory and

jurisdictional." Browder v. Director, Dep't of Corrections, 434

U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S.

220, 229 (1960)). Parties to criminal actions have ten days within

which to file in the district court notices of appeal from judgments or orders. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b). The only exception to the

appeal period is when the district court extends the time to appeal

upon a showing of excusable neglect.

The district court entered its order on November 20, 1996;

Appellant's notice of appeal was filed on December 9, 1996. Appellant's failure to note a timely appeal or obtain an extension of

the appeal period leaves this court without jurisdiction to consider the merits of Appellant's appeal. We therefore 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
99.4
 CERTIFICATE
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 (the “Report”) on the Form 10-Q of Siga
Resources, Inc. (the “Company”) for the nine months ended April 30, 2009, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Rohit
Singh, Chief Accounting Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Director, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and
belief:
 
 1. The
Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15
(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
 
 2. The
information contained in this Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the
Company.
 
 
 Date: 
June 1, 2009
 
 
 ROHIT
SINGH
 Rohit
Singh
 Chief
Accounting Officer
 Chief
Financial Officer and Director
 
 
 -1-
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATER ORLANDO, ETC.,

Appellant,

v. Case No. 5D 14

- 2920 MMB PROPERTIES, ETC.,

Appellee. ________________________________/ Opinion filed April 13, 2017 Non

- Final Appeal from the Circuit Court for Osceola Co unty, John E

. Jordan , Judge. Donald E. Christopher and Kyle A. Diamantas , of Baker, Donelson , Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC., Orlando, for Appellant. Derek J. Angell and Dennis R. O'Connor , of O'Connor & O'Connor , LLC, Winter Park and Maureen A. Arago and Keith P. Arago , of Arago Law Firm, Kissimmee , for Appellee.

ON REMAND FROM THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT PER CURIAM. In accordance with the mandate from the Florida Supreme Court, the temporary injunction entered by the trial court is quashed. Planned Parenthood of Greater Orlando v. MMB Prop. , 42 Fla. L. Weekly S204 (Fla. Feb. 23, 2017) (Case No. SC15-1655). The2

stay entered by this C ourt is lifted , and the matter is remanded back to the trial court to conduct permanent injunction proceedings

. REVERSED and REMANDED with directions

.
PALMER and EVANDER, J J , and JACOBUS, B.W., Senior Judge , concur.