alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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-Q
for the quarter ended June 30, 2008, 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


Stephen
N. Causey,


President
and


Principal
Accounting Officer


August
13, 2008
#### KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION, Complainant v. Leslie Richardson SMITH, Respondent.

No. 94-SC-555-KB.

Supreme Court of Kentucky.

Sept. 29, 1994.

Barbara S. Rea, Kentucky Bar Ass’n, Frankfort, for complainant.

William E. Johnson and Stephen R. Turn-bull, Frankfort, for respondent.

OPINION AND ORDER

This is a disciplinary case in which Leslie Richardson Smith was charged with neglect of a probate matter in violation of SCR 3.130-1.3 which requires due diligence. She was charged with failure to file an estate inventory as required by statute, failure to provide periodic settlements, failure to file estate tax returns in a timely manner, and she is additionally charged with violations of SCR 3.130-1.4(a), (b) which require an attorney to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a case.

Smith served as administrator of an estate for 113⁄8 years. The estate, which was opened in 1981 was not concluded until January 1993.

Smith admits that she delayed and neglected to complete the estate proceedings and deflected the attempts by heirs to determine the reasons for the delay. She has reimbursed the estate for financial losses and penalties paid as a result of her failure to file timely estate tax returns. It now appears that no estate funds were misapplied or diverted to the attorney’s own use. However, this Court has historically determined that the neglect of legal matters by an attorney is a basis for a finding of unprofessional and unethical conduct. *Kentucky Bar Association v. Richards,*Ky., 796 S.W.2d 363 (1990). The Board of Governors of the Kentucky Bar Association found Smith guilty of two counts of unprofessional conduct and recommended a public reprimand. We agree.

There are numerous cases which disapprove of any conduct by an attorney which indicates neglect or failure to perform their requisite professional responsibilities. We recognize that this problem can be serious in any field, but particularly in the area of probate practice. *See, Connell v. Kentucky Bar Association,*Ky., 792 S.W.2d 369 (1990); *Coleman v. Kentucky Bar Association,*Ky., 786 S.W.2d 67 (1990); *Durham v. Kentucky Bar Association,*Ky., 779 S.W.2d 199 (1989).

Leslie Richardson Smith is hereby publicly reprimanded and ordered to pay the costs of these proceedings.

All concur.

ENTERED: September 29, 1994.

/s/ Robert F. Stephens Chief Justice
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

This
certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and accompanies the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB (the
"Form 10-QSB") for the quarter ended September 30, 2007 of Manhattan Bancorp (the "Company").

I,
Jeffrey M Watson, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify that, to the best of my knowledge:

|Date: November 7, 2007 | /s/JEFFREY M. WATSONJeffrey M. Watson President and Chief
Executive Officer
|---------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

---



QuickLinks
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<CIK> 0001042024
<NAME> PEOPLES PREFERRED CAPITAL
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                             959
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                          0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                         70,699
<ALLOWANCE>                                        253
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  72,393
<DEPOSITS>                                           0
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                 42
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               14
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      72,337
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  72,393
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  5,491
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                    0
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   130
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 5,621
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            5,621
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                    483
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,138
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,138
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.69
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   253
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  253
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               253
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3644 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3644

     To prohibit the advertising of distilled spirits on radio and 
                              television.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 13, 1996

Mr. Kennedy of Massachusetts (for himself, Mr. Hansen, Mr. Conyers, Mr. 
Kasich, Mr. Hinchey, Ms. Norton, Mr. Hoke, Mr. Moran, Mr. Smith of New 
  Jersey, Mr. Fattah, and Mr. Faleomavaega) introduced the following 
         bill; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To prohibit the advertising of distilled spirits on radio and 
                              television.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Just Say No Act''.

SEC. 2. ADVERTISING PROHIBITION.

    (a) Prohibition.--It shall be unlawful to advertise distilled 
spirits on any medium of electronic communication subject to the 
jurisdiction of the Federal Communications Commission.
    (b) Penalty.--Any person who violates subsection (a) shall be 
subject to a fine of not more than $10,000.
                                 <all>
```
15-1823 Francis v. Kings Park Manor, Inc.



# United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT

_________________



### At a stated term of the United Stat es Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thur good Marshall United States C ourthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 5 th 

### day of April, two thousand nineteen.

Present: Rosemary S. Pooler, Debra Ann Livingston, Raymond J. Lohier, Jr., Circuit Judges

.

Donahue Francis,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v. 15-1823

Kings Park Manor, Inc., Corrine Downing,

Defendants – Appellees,

Raymond Endres,

Defendant.

It is hereby ORDERED that th is Court’s decision and opini ons, issued on March 4, 2019,

are WITHDRAWN.

FOR THE COURT: Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk of Court
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 130 (Friday, July 5, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 35200]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-17078]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. CP96-589-000]


Koch Gateway Pipeline Company; Notice of Application

June 28, 1996.
    Take notice that on June 21, 1996, Koch Gateway Pipeline Company, 
P.O. Box 1478, Houston, Texas 77251-1478, filed in Docket No. CP96-589-
000 an application pursuant to Section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act for 
authorization to acquire and operate by sale certain facilities in 
southeast Louisiana and offshore Louisiana, permission to abandon by 
sale certain offsystem/offshore facilities in offshore Louisiana, and a 
declaratory order disclaiming jurisdiction over certain facilities it 
will acquire from Southern, all as more fully set forth in the 
application on file with the Commission and open to public inspection.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to make any protest with 
reference to said application should on or before July 19, 1996, file 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20426, 
a motion to intervene or a protest in accordance with the requirements 
of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 
385.211) and the Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.10). 
All protests filed with the Commission will be considered by it in 
determining the appropriate action to be taken but will not serve to 
make the protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to 
become a party to a proceeding or to participate as a party in any 
hearing therein must file a motion to intervene in accordance with the 
Commission's Rules.
    Take further notice that, pursuant to the authority contained in 
and subject to the jurisdiction conferred upon the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission by Sections 7 and 15 of the Natural Gas Act and 
the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, a hearing will be 
held without further notice before the Commission or its designee on 
this application if no motion to intervene is filed within the time 
required herein, if the Commission on its own review of the matter 
finds that a grant of the certificate is required by the public 
convenience and necessity. If a motion for leave to intervene is timely 
filed, or if the Commission on its own motion believes that a formal 
hearing is required, further notice of such hearing will be duly given.
    Under the procedure herein provided for, unless otherwise advised, 
it will be unnecessary for Gateway to appear or be represented at the 
hearing.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-17078 Filed 7-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-40728

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

VERSUS

MILLARD DEAN LOFTIS,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Eastern District of Texas

(2:92-CR-9)

May 16, 1997

Before DAVIS, STEWART, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Millard Dean Loftis (“Loftis”) appeals the district court’s

denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. On appeal, Loftis asserts

that his indictment was insufficient, that his counsel was

ineffective for failing to appeal the district court’s admission of
2

the length of his prior sentence, that his trial counsel was

ineffective for not challenging a search warrant of his home for

“staleness” of information, that he was denied his right to testify

in his own behalf, and that the district court should have treated

his untimely objections to the magistrate judge’s report on

Loftis’s § 2255 motion as a Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. For the

following reasons, we affirm the district court’s denial of the §

2255 motion. 

After reviewing the record and considering Loftis’s claims and

the parties’ arguments, we find no merit in Loftis’s contentions.

Under any standard of review, the indictment adequately stated the

essential elements of Loftis’s offense under 28 U.S.C. § 5861(d)

and was sufficient. Regarding the introduction of the length of

Loftis’s prior sentence, he has made an insufficient showing of

prejudice and we thus reject his claim. See United States v.

Fuller, 769 F.2d 1095, 1098 (5th Cir. 1985). We likewise reject

Loftis’s assertion of error in relation to the issuance of a search

warrant for his home. See United States v. McKeever, 5 F.3d 863,

866 (5th Cir. 1993). Loftis also claims that his counsel prevented

him from testifying, in violation of his constitutional right to

testify, and we review this claim for plain error. See Highlands

Ins. Co. v. Nat’l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, 27 F.3d 1027,

1031-32 (5th Cir. 1994). The record does not present evidence to

support Loftis’s claim. Given the overwhelming evidence supporting
3

his convictions, there is no suggestion that the alleged prevention

of Loftis’s testifying presented the necessary prejudice, or

serious effect on the fairness or integrity of the proceedings,

that is required to justify a finding of plain error. See United

States v. Calverley, 37 F.3d 160 (5th Cir. 1994) (en banc).

Loftis’s last assertion of error also fails. Loftis did not

demonstrate that the district court abused its discretion in not

construing Loftis’s late objections as a Rule 59(e) motion nor did

he demonstrate any resulting prejudice. In addition, his attempted

presentation to the district court should have been accomplished

through a motion for leave to file a second § 2255 motion. See

Southern Constructors Group, Inc. v. Dynalectric Co., 2 F.3d 606,

611-12 (5th Cir. 1993).

AFFIRMED.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

ORDER ESTABLISHING TRIAL DOCKET FOR THE MONTHS OF JULY AND

 AUGUST, 2009, BEFORE THE HONORABLE PATRICK J. DUGGAN*

Listed below are the cases on this Court's trial docket for the months of July and August,

2009. Counsel will be notified when their case reaches No. 5. After such notice, counsel

should be prepared to begin trial any time on 48 hours notice. It is counsel's responsibility

in all cases after they have been so notified to contact my clerk, Marilyn Orem, at 234-

5147, to ascertain the status of the trial docket. Unless otherwise notified, this Court

commences trial at 8:45 a.m. PLEASE BE PROMPT!

1. 08-14750 CBS OUTDOOR V. CITY OF EASTPOINTE

2. 08-14320 HEALY V. SEARS, ROBUCK & CO.

3. 08-12929 CYRS V. PEAKE

4. 08-13158 LOCAL 324 PENSION FUND, ET.AL V. WEST MICHIGAN EARTH

 MANAGEMENT, ET. AL

5. 08-14793 COLMAR USA V. SOMMA

6. 09-10033 SALEH V. HOME LOAN SERVICES

7. 08-13501 HOWARD V. WAYNE COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE, ET.AL

8. 07-13132 FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH V. H.A.HOWELL PIPE ORGANS, ET.AL

9. 08-11326 MAXWELL V. DODD, ET.AL

10.08-14467 FLANAGAN V. STEWART, ET.AL

s/Patrick J. Duggan 

Patrick J. Duggan

United States District Judge

Dated: June 9, 2009

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record

on June 9, 2009, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

s/Marilyn Orem 

Case Manager

*PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT TRIAL WILL NOT BEGIN BEFORE THE FINAL

PRETRIAL CONFERENCE DATE.

IF THERE IS A MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT PENDING, FINAL PRETRIAL

CONFERENCE WILL BE RESCHEDULED APPROXIMATELY 10 DAYS AFTER ANY

DECISION ON SUCH MOTION.

2:08-cv-14467-PJD-DAS Doc # 13 Filed 06/09/09 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 85
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

DENISE JOSHUA,

Plaintiff(s), CASE NUMBER: 08-14012

HONORABLE VICTORIA A. ROBERTS

v.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

Defendant(s).

 /

 

 

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

On April 2, 2009, Magistrate Judge Charles E. Binder submitted a Report and

Recommendation (Doc. #11) recommending that the Court: (1) GRANT Plaintiff’s

Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. #8); (2) DENY Defendant’s Motion for Summary

Judgment (Doc. #9); and (3) REMAND this case to the Commissioner for further

proceedings.

Because the Court has not received objections from either party within the time

frame provided for in 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and E.D. Mich. LR 72.1(d)(3), the Court

ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, GRANTS Plaintiff’s

Motion for Summary Judgment, DENIES Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment,

and REMANDS this matter to the Commissioner. 

On remand, the Commissioner must evaluate Plaintiff’s medical evidence,

including her test results, to determine if her impairments meet or medically equal

3.02(A), 3.02(B), and 3.02(C)(1) of the Listing of Impairments. The ALJ must fully

2:08-cv-14012-VAR-CEB Doc # 12 Filed 04/23/09 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 295
2

explain the reasoning behind his conclusion, including why he accepts certain medical

evidence and rejects other evidence.

IT IS ORDERED. 

s/Victoria A. Roberts 

Victoria A. Roberts

United States District Judge

Dated: April 23, 2009

The undersigned certifies that a copy of this

document was served on the attorneys of

record by electronic means or U.S. Mail on

April 23, 2009.

s/Linda Vertriest 

Deputy Clerk

2:08-cv-14012-VAR-CEB Doc # 12 Filed 04/23/09 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 296
EXHIBIT 32

CERTIFICATIONS 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 Ridgewood Energy V Fund, LLC (the
Fund) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008 as furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each
of the undersigned hereby certifies, 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
Fund.

|                         |  |     |        |                               |                                                       | 
|------------------------ |  | --- | ------ | ----------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------- | 
|Dated: November 3,
 2008 |  |     |        | RIDGEWOOD
 ENERGY V FUND, LLC
|                         |  |     |        |                               |                                                       | 
|                         |  | By: | /s/    |                               | ROBERT E.
 SWANSON                                   
|                         |  |     |       
|                         |  |     | Name:  |                               | Robert E.
 Swanson                                   
|                         |  |     | Title: |                               | President
 and Chief Executive Officer               
|                         |  |     |        |                               | (Principal
 Executive Officer)                       
|                         |  |     |        |                               |                                                      
|Dated: November 3,
 2008 |  |     |        |                              
|                         |  | By: | /s/    |                               | KATHLEEN P.
 McSHERRY                                
|                         |  |     |       
|                         |  |     | Name:  |                               | Kathleen P.
 McSherry                                
|                         |  |     | Title: |                               | Executive
 Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|                         |  |     |        |                               | (Principal
 Financial and Accounting Officer)        

A signed original of this written statement or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement has been
provided to Ridgewood Energy V Fund, LLC and will be retained by Ridgewood
Energy V Fund, LLC and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.

---