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 quarterly report of Greater Asia Realty Holdings, Ltd.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending June 30, 2008, as
filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Tay Chong Weng, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my knowledge, 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 result of operations of the Company.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, another
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.


/s/ Tay Chong Weng
---------------------------------
By: Tay Chong Weng
Title: Chief Executive Officer,
Principal Financial Officer and Director

Dated: August 12, 2008




                                      17
I

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3877

To designate the United States Post Office building in Camden, Arkansas,

as the ‘‘Honorable David H. Pryor Post Office Building’’.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 23, 1996

Mr. DICKEY (for himself, Mr. HUTCHINSON, Mrs. LINCOLN, and Mr. THORNTON) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Government Reform and Oversight

A BILL

To designate the United States Post Office building in Camden, Arkansas, as the ‘‘Honorable David H. Pryor Post

Office Building’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. HONORABLE DAVID H. PRYOR POST OFFICE

4 BUILDING.

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The United States Post Office

6 building located at 351 Washington Street in Camden, Ar7 kansas, is designated as the ‘‘Honorable David H. Pryor

8 Post Office Building’’.
2

•HR 3877 IH

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in any law, map,

2 regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United

3 States to the United States Post Office building referred

4 to in section 1 is deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Honor5 able David H. Pryor Post Office Building’’.

Æ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

THE WEATHER UNDERGROUND, INC.,

a Michigan corporation,

Plaintiff,

v.

NAVIGATION CATALYST SYSTEMS, INC., etal,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NUMBER: 09-10756

HON. MARIANNE O. BATTANI 

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE 

Pending before the Court is Defendants Connexus Corporation, Firstlook, Inc. And

Navigation Catalyst Systems, Inc.’s Motion to Continue Trial Date (Doc #271), filed on March 5,

2012. For reasons more fully discussed during a telephonic conference held on March 7, 2012,

the motion is GRANTED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Marianne O. Battani 

MARIANNE O. BATTANI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

____________________________________________________________________________

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Copies of this Order were mailed and/or electronically filed to all counsel of record on this

date.

s/Colette Motowski 

Secretary

March 8, 2012

2:09-cv-10756-MOB-VMM Doc # 278 Filed 03/08/12 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 7154
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 132 (Tuesday, July 9, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 36080]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-17340]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
[ES-960-1420-00; ES-48108, Group 29, Missouri]


Notice of Filing of Plat of Survey; Missouri

    The plat of the dependent resurvey of the north, east, and west 
boundaries; a portion of the south boundary, and a portion of the 
subdivisional lines, and the subdivision of certain sections, Township 
32 North, Range 5 East, Fifth Principal Meridian, Missouri, will be 
officially filed in Eastern States, Springfield, Virginia at 7:30 a.m., 
August 12, 1996.
    The survey was requested by the U.S. Forest Service.
    All inquiries or protests concerning the technical aspects of the 
survey must be sent to the Chief Cadastral Surveyor, Eastern States, 
Bureau of Land Management, 7450 Boston Boulevard, Springfield, Virginia 
22153, prior to 7:30 a.m., August 12, 1996.
    Copies of the plat will be made available upon request and 
prepayment of the reproduction fee of $2.75 per copy.


    Dated: June 27, 1996.
Stephen G. Kopach,
Chief Cadastral Surveyor.
[FR Doc. 96-17340 Filed 7-8-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-GS-M
* After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### December 23, 2009 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

SEDRICK LATROY MCKINNEY, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v. PAUL LAIRD, Associate Warden; LEON EGGLESTON, Lieutenant; STEVEN HANSEN, Officer, Defendants-Appellees. No. 09-1189 (D.C. No. 1:02-CV-00490-RPM-CBS) (D. Colo.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Before KELLY, PORFILIO, and O’BRIEN , Circuit Judges.
Sedrick Latroy McKinney, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, appeals the dismissal of his civil rights lawsuit for failure to prosecute and the denial of his motion for reconsideration. The dismissal came seven years into the action, after the second time that Mr. McKinney caused his court-appointed attorneys to1 The first attorney withdrew at Mr. McKinney’s request two weeks before the trial set for April 3, 2007. The attorneys who were later appointed withdrew one month before the trial set for January 12, 2009, on the ground that Mr. McKinney made the representation unreasonably difficult. -2- withdraw just before trial. 1 On appeal, Mr. McKinney argues that he was prepared to proceed to trial pro se and that he so informed the district court. Our review of the record, however, indicates that he also informed the district court that he would “not be able to prosecute his case with assurance and effectively,” without calling two expert witnesses who had not previously participated in the case. R., Vol. 2 at 529-30; see also Aplt. Br. at 17-20 (repeating need for witnesses). Thus, the district court did not err in concluding that Mr. McKinney

was notprepared to proceed to trial and that he had failed to prosecute his action. It follows that it was not an abuse of discretion for the court to deny the motion for reconsideration under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) and 60(b). The appellees’ motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction is DENIED. Mr. McKinney’s motion to proceed without prepayment of fees is DENIED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED for substantially the reasons stated in the district court’s Order for Dismissal dated March 23, 2009.

Entered for the Court

John C. Porfilio Circuit Judge
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

DINO DROP, INC., a Michigan Case No: 09-cv-10759 

Corporation, Hon: Paul D. Borman 

Plaintiff,

vs.

THE CHASE BAR & GRILL, L.L.C., a 

Michigan Corporation; BACMAR, LLC, a

Michigan Corporation, MARTINEZ 

MANAGEMENT GROUP and, PHILIP M. 

MARTINEZ, TERY MARTINEZ, ADAM 

MASON, BRET C. KONOL and DAVE 

BASTIANELLI, Individually and Severally,

Defendants.

_____________________________________________________________________________

ORDER DISMISSING BRET KONOL AND DAVE BASTIANELLI, ONLY

This matter having come before the Court and the Court being otherwise fully advised in the

premises; 

 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Bret Konol and Dave Bastianelli are dismissed without

prejudice and without costs or attorneys fees.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

S/Paul D. Borman 

PAUL D. BORMAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: December 23, 2010

Case 2:09-cv-10759-PDB-MJH Document 107 Filed 12/23/10 Page 1 of 2
2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Copies of this Order were served on the attorneys of record by electronic means or U.S. Mail on

December 23, 2010.

S/Denise Goodine 

Case Manager

Case 2:09-cv-10759-PDB-MJH Document 107 Filed 12/23/10 Page 2 of 2
Nebraska Court of Appeals Memorandum Opinions

NOT Selected for Posting to Court Website

(released May 2, 2023)

The following memorandum opinions were filed by the Nebraska Court of 

Appeals and can be viewed using SSCALES:

None Available

The above-listed memorandum opinions can be viewed online through the 

appellate court case search available by subscription through Nebraska.gov:

http://www.nebraska.gov/subscriber/.

Current subscribers to Nebraska.gov can search appellate court cases here:

https://www.nebraska.gov/courts/sccales/.
**Exhibit
      23.1**




**CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**





We
      hereby
      consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
      Forms S-8 (Nos. 333-76006 and 333-76008) of our report dated March 13, 2006,
      except with respect to Note 2 as to which the date is September 28, 2006,
      relating to our audit of the consolidated financial statements of CTI Industries
      Corporation and Subsidiaries included in the 2005 annual report on Form 10-K,
      Amendment no. 3.







Weiser
      LLP


New
      York,
      New York


October
        3, 2006
OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE

I, Joseph  Candelario,  hereby certify that I am the First Vice President,  Loan
Administration  of  Countrywide  Home  Loans,  Inc.,  fka,  Countrywide  Funding
Corporation, and further  certify with respect  to  the  Pooling  and  Servicing
Agreements for Series 1990-2 (Inv.# 251) by and among Ryland Mortgage Securities
Corporation and Countrywide Funding Corporation, as Servicer, as follows:

I have reviewed the activities and performance of the Servicer during the fiscal
year  ended  February  28,  1997  under the  Agreements  and,  to the best of my
knowledge,  based on my review,  the Servicer has  fulfilled  all of its duties,
responsibilities or obligations under the Agreements throughout the fiscal year.



                                              
                                              /s/Joseph Candelario    5-23-97
                                              Joseph Candelario         Date   
                                              First Vice President
                                              Loan Administration
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 149 (Friday, August 1, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 44983]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-17629]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER08-1106-001]


MATL LLP; Notice of Filing

July 25, 2008.
    Take notice that on July 23, 2008, MATL LLP tendered for filing a 
supplement amending their June 13, 2008 filing. The June 13, 2008 
filing changed the creditworthiness procedures set for in Attachment L 
of its Open Access Transmission Tariff in the above-referenced 
proceeding.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). 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 notice of 
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, 
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. 
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of 
that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#94d2d1c6d7dbfaf8fdfaf1c7e1e4e4fbe6e0d4f2f1e6f7baf3fbe2"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f9bfbcabbab6979590979caa8c8989968b8db99f9c8b9ad79e968f">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on August 1, 2008.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-17629 Filed 7-31-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

October 29, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

134274 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 134274 

 COA: 275872 

Lake CC: 02-003912-FC 

TONY KERR,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 12, 2007 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). 

KELLY, J., would grant leave to appeal. 

t1022 

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. 

October 29, 2007 

 Clerk
#### Joe D. COCHRUN, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 49412.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

July 19, 1994.

Laura G. Martin, Asst. Appellate Defender, Kansas City, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Millie Aulbur, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before LOWENSTEIN, P.J., and BERREY and SPINDEN, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

Appeal from dismissal of Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief.

Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

April 14, 2016

No. 04-16-00034-CV

Victoria Elizabeth FEIL,

Appellant

v.

Michael William FEIL,

Appellee

From the 81st Judicial District Court, Wilson County, Texas

Trial Court No. 10-11-0623-CVW

Honorable Russell H. Wilson, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Jason Pulliam, Justice

Appellant’s motion for extension of time to file motion to reconsider memorandum 

opinion dismissing appeal for want of prosecution is hereby DENIED.

The panel has considered the appellant’s motion to reconsider memorandum opinion 

dismissing appeal for want of prosecution, and the motion is DENIED.

It is so ORDERED on April 14, 2016.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO: ___________________________________

 Keith E. Hottle

 Clerk of Court
#### In the Matter of T.L.T.

No. 11-95-236-CV.

Court of Appeals of Texas, Eastland.

Oct. 5, 1995.

Wesley Wright, Wright *&*Assoc., Houston, for appellant.

Melinda Brents, Asst. County Attorney, Houston, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

After a hearing, the trial court committed T.L.T. to the Harris County Psychiatric Cen*950ter for 90 days.1 T.L.T. appeals.2 We reverse and remand.

In her first point of error, T.L.T. contends that the trial court failed to specify which of three criteria set forth in Section 574.034(a)(2) formed the basis for its decision. The trial court utilized a fill-in-the-blank form for its judgment. The form listed the three criteria in the disjunctive and provided a space for the court to mark the appropriate finding. The trial court marked all three spaces. T.L.T. argues that, because the trial court marked all three criteria which were submitted disjunctively and not con-junctively, there are no specific findings. We agree.

Section 574.034(b) states that the “judge or jury must specify which criterion listed in Subsection (a)(2) forms the basis for the decision.” We agree with the Texarkana and San Antonio Courts of Appeals that multiple marks on a fill-in-the-blank form which lists the grounds for commitment in the disjunctive does not constitute specific findings for the basis of the decision to commit. *In re J.J.,*900 S.W.2d 353 (Tex.App.—Texarkana 1995, no writ); *In re J.S.C.,*812 S.W.2d 92 (Tex.App. — San Antonio 1991, no writ). The first point of error is sustained.

In her second point of error, T.L.T. challenges the sufficiency of the evidence and seeks a remand. We interpret her point to be a challenge to the factual sufficiency of the evidence. In light of our holding on the first point, we do not reach the second point of error.

The judgment of the trial court is reversed, and the cause is remanded.

1

. See TEX.HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 574.001 et seq. (Vernon 1992 & Supp.1995).

2

. This appeal was transferred from the 14th Court of Appeals to this court pursuant to TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 73.001 (Vernon 1988).
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03
- 24
- 00325
- CR

In re Anthony Roberson

FROM THE 299TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY NO. D
- 1
- DC
- 95
- 953274 , KAREN SAG E , JUDGE PRESIDING

O R D E R A N D M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

PER CURIAM

Appellant Anthony Roberso n, an i nmate appearing pro se, has filed notice of appeal in this Court, seeking review of the trial court ’ s order under Chapter 64 of the Texas Code
of Cr imi nal Procedure. T he r eporter ’ s rec or d in thi s appeal was due on May 13, 2024. On May 22 , 2024, we n ot ified appellant by letter that the re porter ’ s record was overdue and that , according to the reporter, appellant had not requested pr eparati on of the reporter ’ s record and had not p aid or ma d e ar rangements to pay for the r eporter ’ s record

. In response t o our notice, appellant states that he has not made payment arrangement s for the reporter ’ s record because he
la c ks sufficient resources to p a y for it. In addition, appella n t has filed a dec la ration o f in ability to pay costs and a motion for a free record

.

The appeal is abated and remanded to the trial court. The trial court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether appellant is presently indigent. See Tex. R. App. P. 20.2

. If it
f inds that the appellant cannot pay or give security for the ap pellate record, it shall order the2

preparation of the reporter ’ s record at no cost to appellant. See id. In addition , the trial court
shall consid er appellant ’ s pending request , if any, fo r th e ap p ointm ent of appellate co unsel

. 1
See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 64.0 1 (c) (providing for limited statutory right to counsel in Chapter 64 proceedings ) ; see also In re King , N o. 03

- 17

- 00484

- CR, 2018 Tex. App. LEXIS 982, at *2 (Tex. App.

— Austin Feb. 1, 2 018, o rder ) (explaining that right to counsel under Chapter 64

“ does not diff

erentiate between trial and appellate sta ges ” ) ; cf. id. ( refusing to abate for appoi ntment of appellate counsel under Chapter 64 becau se trial court had previously denied
requ est for ap poin tment of counsel and appellant offered no reason why trial court might

reco nsider its ruling ). Following the hearing, w hich shall be transcribed, the trial court shall

o rder the appropriate supplement al clerk’s and reporter’s records

— includi ng a ll fin ding s and
orders

— to be prepared and forwarded to this Court no later than July 30 , 2024.

It is so ord ered J u ne 27, 2024.

Before C hief Justice Byrne, Justices Triana and Kelly
Abated and Remanded
Filed: June 27 , 2024
Do Not Publish

1 Accordi ng t o the appe llant , after filing his notic e of appeal, he filed a motion for appointment of counse l in the trial court by sending it to the district clerk by certified mail. T o date, the clerk ’ s record does not in clude a m otion for appoint ment of counse l

.
---

Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERPURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Dr. Amnon Gonenne, President, Chief Executive Officer and
Director of MabCure Inc. (the Company), hereby 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:

| | (a) | the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company, for the
      three month period ended June 30, 2010, and to which this certification is
      attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the Report) fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
      1934, as amended; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |     |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            
| | (b) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.                                                                                                                                                           



|By:    | /s/ Dr. Amnon Gonenne                                 | 
|------ | ----------------------------------------------------- | 
|Name:  | Dr. Amnon Gonenne                                     | 
|Title: | President, Chief Executive
      Officer and Director | 
|       | (Principal Executive Officer)                         | 
|Date:  | August 10, 2010                                       | 

A signed original of this written statement required by
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the
Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

This certification accompanies the Form 10-Q to which it
relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is
not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Registrant under the
Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made
before or after the date of this Form 10-Q), irrespective of any general
incorporation language contained in such filing.

---