alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.2


                           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 Tag Events Corp. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, in the
capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

   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.


Date:  August 14, 2007


/S/ Artiom Balykin
---------------------------------------
Artiom Balykin
Principal Financial Officer
Principal Accounting Officer
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 127 (Monday, July 1, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 33938]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-16719]


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


DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis 
Panel (SEP) meeting:

    Name of SEP: Master Agreement for HIV Preclinical Vaccine 
Development Category B: Evaluation of AIDS Vaccines in Non-Human 
Primates (Telephone Conference Call).
    Date: July 3, 1996.
    Time: 12:00 p.m.
    Place: Telephone Conference Call, 6003 Executive Blvd., Solar 
Bldg., Room 4C03, Bethesda, MD 20892-7610, (301) 402-4596.
    Contact Person: Dr. Christopher E. Beisel, Scientific Review 
Adm., 6003 Executive Boulevard, Solar Bldg., Room 4C03, Bethesda, MD 
20892-7610, (301) 402-4596.
    Purpose/Agenda: To evaluate contract proposals.

    The meeting will be closed in accordance with the provisions set 
forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5, U.S.C. 
Applications and/or proposals and the discussions could reveal 
confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable 
material and personal information concerning individuals associated 
with the applications and/or proposals, the disclosure of which 
would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the urgent need to meet timing limitations imposed by 
the review and funding cycle.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Programs Nos. 93.855, 
Immunology, Allergic and Immunologic Diseases Research; 93.856, 
Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes 
of Health)

    Dated: June 24, 1996.
Susan K. Feldman,
Committee Management Officer, NIH.
[FR Doc. 96-16719 Filed 6-28-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-1902

HANS ALEXANDER LAWRENCE, by his parents and

next friends, Trude and Dale Lawrence; TRUDE

LAWRENCE; DALE LAWRENCE,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

versus

MONTGOMERY COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS; PAUL L.

VANCE, Doctor, officially; MARY HELEN SMITH,

Doctor, officially; RAYMOND W. BRYANT, Doctor,

officially,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Greenbelt. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge.

(CA-96-330-JFM)

Submitted: April 15, 1997 Decided: May 29, 1997

Before WIDENER, MURNAGHAN, and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Dale Lawrence, Appellant Pro Se. Zvi Greismann, Assistant Attorney

General, Rockville, Maryland; Phillip Tyson Bennett, REESE &

CARNEY, Annapolis, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellants appeal from the district court's order granting Defendants' motion to dismiss for failing to state a claim upon which

relief could be granted and dismissing Appellants' action pursuant

to the civil remedies provisions of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C.A. § 1415(e)(4)(B) (West Supp. 1996).

We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning

of the district court. Lawrence v. Montgomery County Pub. Schools,

No. CA-96-330-JFM (D. Md. May 22, 1996). 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.

AFFIRMED
<page>
			            EXHIBIT 32.01



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




In connection with the Annual Report of Morgan Stanley Charter
MSFCM L.P. (the ?Partnership?) on Form 10-K for the period ended
December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the ?Report?), I, Jeffrey A.
Rothman, President, Demeter Management Corporation, the general
partner of the Partnership, 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:
(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 Partnership.





By:	  /s/	Jeffrey A. Rothman

Name:		Jeffrey A. Rothman
Title:	President

Date:		March 31, 2005
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

EDWIN FORD, III,

Petitioner, 

v.

NICK LUDWICK,

Respondent. 

 /

Case Number: 5:09-CV-10840

HON. JOHN CORBETT O’MEARA

ORDER CONSTRUING MOTION FOR CERTIFICATE

OF APPEALABILITY AS MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION, 

AND DENYING RECONSIDERATION

This matter is before the Court on Petitioner Edwin Ford, III’s Motion for

Certificate of Appealability. Petitioner filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus relief

challenging his conviction for first-degree premeditated murder. (ECF No. 1). The Court

denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus and denied a certificate of appealability. 

(ECF No. 8). Because the Court has already issued a ruling on the certificate of

appealability, the Court construes the Motion for Certificate of Appealability as a motion

for reconsideration. 

Motions for reconsideration may be granted when the moving party shows (1) a

“palpable defect,” (2) by which the court and the parties were misled, and (3) the

correction of which will result in a different disposition of the case. E.D. Mich. L.R.

7.1(h)(3). A “palpable defect” is a “defect which is obvious, clear, unmistakable,

manifest or plain.” Olson v. The Home Depot, 321 F. Supp. 2d 872, 874 (E.D. Mich.
2004). 

The Court denied a certificate of appealability (COA) because reasonable jurists

could not “debate whether (or, for that matter, agree that)” this claim “should have been

resolved in a different manner.” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000) (citation

omitted). Petitioner’s motion simply reasserts arguments advanced in his petition and,

therefore, fails to allege sufficient grounds upon which to grant reconsideration. See L.R.

7.1(h)(3) (“[T]he Court will not grant motions for rehearing or reconsideration that

merely present the same issues relied upon by the Court, either expressly or by reasonable

implication.”). 

Accordingly, the Court DENIES Petitioner’s “Motion for Certificate of

Appealability” (ECF No. 13), which the Court has construed as a “Motion for

Reconsideration.” 

SO ORDERED.

s/John Corbett O’Meara 

United States District Judge

Date: January 24, 2018

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

of record on this date, January 24, 2018, using the ECF system and/or ordinary mail.

s/William Barkholz 

Case Manager

2
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

          - [Docket No. CP07-208-000] 

On August 5, 2008, staff of the Office of Energy Projects (OEP) will hold a technical conference for the REX East Project. Rockies Express Pipeline LLC requested the Technical Conference to discuss compliance with Environmental Condition 147 of the Commission's May 30, 2008 Order. 

The technical conference will be held on Tuesday, August 5, 2008, at 9 a.m. (EDT) in Room 3M-2B at the Commission Headquarters, 888 1st Street, NE., Washington, DC. 

Information concerning any changes to the above may be obtained from the Commission's Office of External Affairs at (202) 502-8004 or toll free at 1-866-208-FERC (208-3372). 

Kimberly D. Bose, 

Secretary.

[FR Doc. E8-17877 Filed 8-4-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Tracy FREEMAN, Appellant.

Nos. WD 48129, WD 49718.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Sept. 19, 1995.

Patricia A. Richter, Asst. Appellate Defender, Kansas City, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Breck K. Burgess, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before SPINDEN, P.J., and BRECKENRIDGE and SMART, JJ.

*907
      *ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

Tracy Freeman appeals from the trial court’s judgment finding him guilty of trafficking drugs in the second degree, in violation of § 195.223, RSMo 1994.1 Freeman was sentenced as a prior and persistent offender to fifteen years imprisonment. Freeman also appeals from the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion, after an evidentiary hearing.

Judgment is affirmed. Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).

. All statutory references are to RSMo 1994 unless otherwise indicated.
2:09-cv-13366-MOB-RSW Doc # 2 Filed 08/26/09 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 12
DISMISS and Opinion F iled September 30, 2024 

# S

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-24-00182-CV IN THE INTEREST OF M.G.M., A CHILD On Appeal from the 303rd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF-20-19069 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Reichek, Nowell, and Carlyle Opinion by Justice Reichek Appellant’s brief in this appeal is ove rdue. After appellant failed to respond to our inquiry regarding the reporter’s record, we ordered the appeal submitted without the reporter’s record and for appell ant’s brief to be f iled by August 10, 2024. By postcard dated August 13, 2024, we info rmed appellant the brief was overdue and directed appellant to file a brief with in ten days. We cau tioned appellant that failure to do so would result in the dismissa l of this appeal without further notice.
See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 38.8(a)(1). To date, appellant has not filed a brief nor otherwise corresponded with the Court regarding th e status of this appeal.–2– Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 38.8 (a)(1); 42.3(b), (c).

240182F.P05 /Amanda L. Reichek / AMANDA L. REICHEK JUSTICE–3– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT

IN THE INTEREST OF M.G.M., A CHILD
No. 05-24-00182-CV On Appeal from the 303rd Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF-20-19069. Opinion delivered by Justice Reichek. Justices Nowell and Carlyle participating. In accordance with this Court’s opi nion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED

. Judgment entered September 30, 2024
#### STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Michael LUCAS, Defendant-Appellant. Michael LUCAS, Movant-Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent-Respondent.

Nos. 69035, 70752.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Jan. 28, 1997.

A. Renae Adamson, Asst. Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Joanne E. Joiner, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals the judgment upon his conviction by a court of eight counts of sodomy, § 566.060, RSMo 1994, and two counts of sexual abuse in the first degree, § 566.100, *294RSMo 1994, for which he was sentenced to concurrent terms of twenty years for seven of the eight counts of sodomy, a concurrent term of seven years for the remaining count of sodomy, and concurrent terms of five years for the remaining counts of sexual abuse in the first degree. Defendant also appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

444444444444444

NO. 03-05-00748-CV

444444444444444

In the Interest of J. A. S.

44444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF LEE COUNTY, 335TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 12,847, HONORABLE REVA TOWSLEE CORBETT, JUDGE PRESIDING

44444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444

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

David William Socha, the father of J.A.S., brought this appeal from a suit to modify

the parent-child relationship. He has now filed an unopposed motion to dismiss, stating that he no

longer desires to pursue this appeal. Accordingly, we grant the motion to dismiss this appeal. See

Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a).

__________________________________________

Bob Pemberton, Justice

Before Justices B. A. Smith, Patterson and Pemberton

Dismissed on Appellant’s Motion

Filed: April 21, 2006
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff, CRIMINAL NO. 09-mj-30132 

v.

CARY DALE VANDIVER, 

a/k/a “Gun Control”, 

Defendant.

_____________________________________/

MOTION FOR DISMISSAL OF COMPLAINT

Pursuant to Rule 48(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and 18 U.S.C. §

3161(d) by leave of Court endorsed hereon the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of

Michigan hereby moves for dismissal without prejudice the complaint against CARY DALE

VANDIVER, herein, 

The reasons for dismissal without prejudice are as follows:

1. That the Government requires additional time to develop and acquire sufficient

evidence.

2. That the Government requires additional time to investigate the extent of the

criminal act alleged and the participants in it.

3. That proceeding to indictment or information within the time limits of § 3161(b)

as extended by § 3161(h) would substantially impair the Government's ability to

accomplish the objectives of paragraphs 1-2 above. See United States v. Lovasco,

431 U.S. 738, 792-796 (1977).

 TERRENCE BERG

 United States Attorney

 s/SAIMA S. MOHSIN

s/MATTHEW J. SCHNEIDER

Assistant United States Attorney

United States Department of Justice

211 West Fort Street

Detroit, MI 48226

Saima.Mohsin@usdoj.gov

(313) 226-9163

Dated: April 20, 2009 

2:09-mj-30132-DUTY Doc # 9 Filed 04/20/09 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 17
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs. Criminal Case No. 09-cr-20349

Civil Case No. 13-cv-11094

VALENTINE BALOGUN,

Defendant.

_______________________________/

NOTICE AND ORDER FOR RESPONSE

The Defendant has filed a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence under 

28 § USC 2255 on March 11, 2013.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Government is to file a response and

brief to the “Motion to vacate, ...” by May 24, 2013. The reply, if any, is to be filed by

June 24, 2013. 

 S/Robert H. Cleland 

ROBERT H. CLELAND

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: April 12, 2013

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel and pro se

parties of record on this date, April 12, 2013, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

 S/Lisa Wagner 

Case Manager and Deputy Clerk

(313) 234-5522

2:09-cr-20349-RHC-RSW Doc # 61 Filed 04/12/13 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 895
**EXHIBIT 23**

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

The Board of Directors 

ModusLink Global Solutions, Inc.: 

We consent to the incorporation by reference inthe registration statements No. 333-71863, No. 333-90587, No. 333-93005 and No. 333-116417 on Form S-3 and No. 333-91117, No. 333-93189, No. 333-94479, No. 333-94645, No. 333-95977, No. 333-33864,No. 333-52636, No. 333-75598, No. 333-84648, No. 333-90608, No. 333-117878, No. 333-118596, No. 333-121235, No. 333-131670 and No. 333-164437 on Form S-8 of ModusLink Global Solutions, Inc., formerlyCMGI, Inc., of our reports dated October 14, 2010, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of ModusLink Global Solutions, Inc. and subsidiaries as of July 31, 2010 and 2009, and the related consolidated statements of operations,stockholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended July 31, 2010, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of July 31, 2010, which reports appear in the July 31,2010 annual report on Form 10-K of ModusLink Global Solutions, Inc. 

Our report dated October 14, 2010, on theeffectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of July 31, 2010, contains an explanatory paragraph that states that ModusLink Global Solutions, Inc. acquired TFL, LLC during the year ended July 31, 2010, and managementexcluded from its assessment of the effectiveness of ModusLink Global Solutions, Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting as of July 31, 2010, TFL, LLC’s internal control over financial reporting associated with total assetsof $23.3 million and total revenues of $23.7 million included in the consolidated financial statements of ModusLink Global Solutions, Inc. as of and for the year ended July 31, 2010. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting ofModusLink Global Solutions, Inc. also excluded an evaluation of the internal control over financial reporting of TFL, LLC. 

/s/ KPMG LLP 

Boston, Massachusetts 

October 14, 2010
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1109 EKANEM UFIA EKANEM, Petitioner,

versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A79-745-883) Submitted: May 25, 2005 Decided: July 5, 2005 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ekanem Ufia Ekanem, Petitioner Pro Se. Daniel Eric Goldman, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Ekanem Ufia Ekanem, a native and citizen of Nigeria, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board). The order denied his motion to reopen the Board’s summary dismissal of his appeal from the Immigration Judge’s order denying relief from removal. We have reviewed the record and the Board’s order and find no abuse of discretion in the Board’s denial of the motion to reopen. See 8 C.F.R. §§ 1003.1(d)(2)(i)(E); 1003.2(a)(2005). In addition, we deny Ekanem’s pending motion for a stay of removal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(f)(2) (2000). Accordingly, though we grant Ekanem’s motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis, we deny the petition for review. 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.

PETITION DENIED
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Small Business Administration
 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.
 ACTION: Notice.
 SUMMARY: This is a notice of an Administrative declaration of a disaster for the State of Georgia dated 07/28/2008. *Incident:*
                         Severe Storms and Tornadoes. *Incident Period:*
                         05/20/2008. *Effective Date:*
                         07/28/2008. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         09/26/2008. *Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         04/28/2009.
 ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of the Administrator's disaster declaration, applications for disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations. The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster:
                    ( print page 45266) *Primary Counties:*
                     Cherokee. *Contiguous Counties:*
                     Georgia: Bartow, Cobb, Dawson, Forsyth, Fulton, Gordon, Pickens. Percent*The Interest Rates are:*Homeowners With Credit Available Elsewhere
5.375Homeowners Without Credit Available Elsewhere
2.687Businesses With Credit Available Elsewhere
8.000Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives Without Credit Available Elsewhere
4.000Other (Including Non-Profit Organizations) With Credit Available Elsewhere
5.250Businesses and Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere
4.000
 The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 11340 C and for economic injury is 11341 0. The State which received an EIDL Declaration # is Georgia. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) Dated: July 28, 2008. Jovita Carranza, Acting Administrator.


[FR Doc. E8-17806 Filed 8-1-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P