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

The undersigned executive officers of the Registrant hereby certify that this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.



By:

/s/ Joseph J. BouffardName:

Joseph J. BouffardTitle:

PresidentBy:

/s/ Anthony R. ColeName:

Anthony R. ColeTitle:

Executive Vice President


Date: July 31, 2008
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>      5
<MULTIPLIER>   1

<S>                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                     JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                             6,781,556
<SECURITIES>                                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      3,688,878
<ALLOWANCES>                                         384,875
<INVENTORY>                                        2,682,434
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  12,781,689
<PP&E>                                             6,974,536
<DEPRECIATION>                                     3,349,176
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    19,753,408
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              4,425,531
<BONDS>                                            5,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                      0
<PREFERRED>                                                0
<COMMON>                                              64,501
<OTHER-SE>                                        10,173,435
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      19,753,408
<SALES>                                           27,080,509
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  27,080,509
<CGS>                                             17,913,770
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     17,913,770
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  10,578,763
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      60,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   (78,136)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (1,333,888)
<INCOME-TAX>                                          44,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                        0
<DISCONTINUED>                                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                            0
<CHANGES>                                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (1,377,888)
<EPS-BASIC>                                           (.22)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                           (.22)


</TABLE>
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-18-00408-CV

In re David D. Gonzalez, as an Individual and as Trustee,

and Gonzalez Financial Holdings, Inc.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY

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

The petition for writ of mandamus and relator’s motion for emergency temporary 

relief are denied. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a), 52.10.

__________________________________________

Bob Pemberton, Justice

Before Justices Puryear, Pemberton, and Bourland

Filed: June 20, 2018
### IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS No. 10
- 14 - 00346
- CR EX PARTE KIMLY RUSHA TERRELL

From the 54th District Court McLennan County, Texas Trial Court No. 2010
- 627
- C2

MEMORANDUM OPINION
On November 7, 2014, we received a document from Kimly Rusha Terrell related to an earlier appeal styled Terrell v. State which was docketed as 10

- 11

- 00022

- CR. The
conviction in 10

- 11

- 00022

- CR is final. Our mandate issued January 13, 2012. It is difficult to tell what request Terrell has made and who has acted or failed to act on her request. Based on the nature of the r elief requested from this Court, we have determined Terrell’s request to be a request for post

- conviction relief; that is, a petition for writ of habeas corpus under article 11.07. 1 See T EX
. C ODE C RIM
. P ROC
. A NN . art. 11.07

1 In the event this document is meant to be a petition for writ of mandamus to order the trial court or trial court clerk to provide Terrell a free copy of her criminal trial record, Terrell is not entitled to a free copy unless she can show that a post

- con viction proceeding is not frivolous and that she has a specific need forEx parte Terrell Page 2

(West 2005). We have no jurisd iction to grant post

- conviction relief in an attack on a final felony judgment. See id . art 11.05. Accordingly, we dismiss this proceeding for lack of jurisdiction.

TOM GRAY Chief Justice Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Just ice Scoggins Petition dismissed Opinion delivered and filed December 4, 2014 Do not publish OT06

the record. Escobar v. State , 880 S.W.2d 782, 784 (Tex. App.

— Houston [1st Dist.] 1993, order); see also In re Rodriguez , No. 10

- 13

- 00201

- CR, 2013 Tex. App. LEXIS 8662 (Tex. App.

— July 11, 2013, no pet.) (not designated for publication). The need for a record from a prior proceeding simply to search for possible post

- conviction issues is not enough. Id . Based on what Terrell filed here, she has not shown she is entitled to relief by mandamus. Therefore, we would deny her petition if her request was denied by the trial court and dismiss it for lack of jurisdiction if her request was denied by the trial court clerk.
#### Albert C. Munzie, Appellant, v. New York Zoological Society, Respondent.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. No opinion.
#### E. M. Fletcher v. State.

No. 25347.

June 13, 1951.

Appellant’s Motion to Reinstate Appeal Denied October 10, 1951.

*336Hon. R. L. Templeton, Judge Presiding.

*W. M. Tucker,*Wellington, for appellant.

*George P. Blackburn,*State’s Attorney, Austin, for the state.

WOODLEY, Judge.

The conviction is for the sale of whiskey in a dry area, wherein the punishment was assessed by the jury at a fine of $400.

Notice of appeal was given on March 21, 1951, when the motion for new trial was overruled.

The recognizance entered into by appellant and his sureties bears date of March 19, 1951, and appears to have been approved and entered on March 20, 1951, which was before the notice of appeal was given, and in fact before the motion for new trial had been filed.

Until an appeal has been taken, the trial court is not authorized to permit the accused to enter into a recognizance on appeal. See Hallman v. State, 113 Tex. Cr. R. 100, 18 S.W. 2d 652.

In the absence of a sufficient appeal bond or recognizance or a showing that appellant is in jail, this court is without jurisdiction of the appeal. See Locke v. State, 154 Tex. Cr. R. 104, 225 S.W. 2d 179; Brackeen v. State, 154 Tex. Cr. R. 98, 225 S.W. 2d 180.

The appeal is dismissed.

*337Opinion approved by the court.

on appellant’s motion to reinstate appeal.

DAVIDSON, Judge.

Appellant moves to reinstate his appeal, insisting that the recognizance was properly entered into.

No necessity exists to determine this question, for, in addition to the defective recognizance, no notice of appeal was properly given in the trial court.

The notice of appeal appears as a memorandum by the trial judge attached to appellant’s motion for new trial.

Under the mandatory provisions of Art. 827, C. C. P., notice of appeal in a criminal case must be entered of record, which means in the minutes of the court.

The motion to reinstate the appeal is overruled.

Opinion approved by the court.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

FREDERICK O. OPIYO, 

CASE NO. 09-CV-13609

Plaintiff, HONORABLE GEORGE CARAM STEEH

v.

DEPUTY H. BOEHM, DEPUTY J.

DARLING and DEPUTY WEDGE,

Defendants.

 /

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL (DOC. #49) AND STRIKING

MEDICAL MALPRACTICE COMPLAINT (DOC. #50)

The court denied plaintiff’s motion for relief from judgment in his prisoner civil rights

case finding that it was untimely under Rule 60(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure, and that he did not establish by clear and convincing evidence that defendants

committed fraud. Plaintiff appealed the court’s decision to the Court of Appeals for the

Sixth Circuit. Now before the court is plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel (Doc.

#49). Given plaintiff’s pending appeal, this court lacks jurisdiction to address plaintiff’s

motion. The motion is, therefore, DENIED. Plaintiff also filed a Federal Tort Claims Act

(FTCA) Medical Malpractice Complaint (Doc. #50). The court STRIKES the complaint as

an improper filing in this case. Plaintiff is directed to file any papers related to this case in

the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit where his appeal is currently pending.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 30, 2015

s/George Caram Steeh 

GEORGE CARAM STEEH

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2:09-cv-13609-GCS-CEB Doc # 51 Filed 03/30/15 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 551
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Copies of this Order were served upon attorneys of record on

March 30, 2015, by electronic and/or ordinary mail and also on

Frederick Opiyo #39194039, FCI Bastrop, 

P. O. Box 1010, Bastrop, TX 78602.

s/Barbara Radke

Deputy Clerk

2

2:09-cv-13609-GCS-CEB Doc # 51 Filed 03/30/15 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 552
Exhibit








Exhibit 10.20A 
Schedule of Named Executive Officers Party to Change of Control Employment Agreement (BE4 and Higher Version) 
(As of December 31, 2019) 
Ralph W. Babb, Jr. 
Curtis C. Farmer
Exhibit



Exhibit 10.38









PMI GLOBAL SERVICES INC.


120 PARK AVENUE, NEW YORK,  NY 10017. U.S.A  TELEPHONE (917) 663-4000







    
November 12, 2019


To:     André Calantzopoulos 






Re:  Time Sharing Agreement -Termination


Dear Sir, 


We refer to the Agreement between us dated May 8, 2013, as amended (the “Agreement”). The purpose of this letter is to confirm in writing the mutual agreement of both parties to terminate the Agreement effective as of November 12, 2019 (hereinafter, the “Termination Date”) without any further formalities, with both parties waiving the 30 days’ notice provision of Section 1 of the Agreement.


Parties’ obligations with respect to the reimbursement of expenses and fees under the Agreement incurred prior to the Termination Date will continue after the Termination Date.
Please sign and return to us the duplicate copy of this letter, thereby acknowledging your agreement to its terms.




Yours faithfully,




PMI Global Services Inc.
By:/s/ JOHN K. HAMMEL
Name: John K. Hammel
Title: Vice President


Accepted and agreed:
André Calantzopoulos


/s/ ANDRÉ CALANTZOPOULOS
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 638 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 638

 To abolish the National Board for the Promotion of Rifle Practice and 
 to eliminate the promotion of civilian marksmanship by the Department 
                              of Defense.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 23, 1995

  Mrs. Maloney (for herself, Mr. Stark, Mr. Shays, Mr. Gonzalez, Mrs. 
 Collins of Illinois, Mr. Meehan, Mr. Torricelli, Mr. Yates, Mr. Frank 
 of Massachusetts, Mr. Barrett of Wisconsin, Ms. Pelosi, Mr. Clay, Mr. 
   Nadler, Mr. Foglietta, Ms. Eshoo, Ms. Woolsey, Mr. Evans, and Mr. 
  Velazquez) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on National Security

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To abolish the National Board for the Promotion of Rifle Practice and 
 to eliminate the promotion of civilian marksmanship by the Department 
                              of Defense.

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

SECTION 1. ABOLISHMENT OF BOARD.

    The National Board for the Promotion of Rifle Practice is 
abolished.

SEC. 2. ELIMINATION OF PROMOTION OF CIVILIAN MARKSMANSHIP.

    Sections 4307, 4308, 4309, 4310, 4311, 4312, and 4313 of title 10, 
United States Code, are repealed.

SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    This Act, and the amendments made by this Act, shall take effect 90 
days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 504 Introduced in House (IH)]

  1st Session
                                H. R. 504

 To amend the formula for determining the Official Mail Allowance for 
                Members of the House of Representatives.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 13, 1995

  Ms. Danner introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on House Oversight

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the formula for determining the Official Mail Allowance for 
                Members of the House of Representatives.

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

SECTION 1. FORMULA REDUCTION.

    (a) In General.--Section 311(e)(2)(B)(i) of the Legislative Branch 
Appropriations Act, 1991 (2 U.S.C. 59(e)(2)(B)(i)) is amended by 
striking ``3'' and inserting ``1.5''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
with respect to sessions of Congress beginning with the first regular 
session of Congress beginning after the date of the enactment of this 
Act.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit
      31.1**





**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**





I,
      Deng
      Shan, certify that:





1.
      I have
      reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Largo Vista Group, Ltd.;





2.
      Based
      on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
      fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made,
      in
      light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading
      with respect to the period covered by this report;


3.
      Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
      included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
      condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer
      as
      of, and for, the periods presented in this report;


4.
      The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible
      for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
      in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over
      financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f))
      for the small business issuer and have:


a)
      designed
      such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls
      and
      procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
      information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated
      subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
      during the period in which this report is being prepared;


b)
      designed
      such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control
      over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide
      reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
      preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
      generally accepted accounting principles;


c)
      evaluated
      the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls and
      procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
      of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
      by this report based on such evaluation; and


d)
      disclosed
      in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal control over
      financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent
      fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case
      of
      an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
      materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial
      reporting.







Date:
      April 13, 2007





/s/Deng
      Shan


Deng
      Shan, Principal Executive Officer
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 22

- 00049

- CV

Mario Angel Diaz v. Marina Diaz

On Appeal from the 444th District Court of Cameron County , Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2020

- DCL

- 03823

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this c ause on appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed . The Court orders the appeal DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion . Costs of the appeal are adjudged against appellant.
We further order this decision certified below for observance. August 18, 20 22
#### Otto James HUMMEL, Appellant/Employee, v. EAGLE BOATS, LTD., Respondent/Employer, and Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., Respondent/Insurer.

No. 68905.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.

May 21, 1996.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied July 10, 1996.

Joseph S. Rubin, Ebert & Menees, Clayton, for appellant.

Daniel Steigerwald, Hayes, Newmark & Steigerwald, St. Louis, for respondent.

Before GERALD M. SMITH, P.J., and GARY M. GAERTNER and RHODES RUSSELL, JJ.

*MEMORANDUM DECISION*

PER CURIAM.

Employee appeals from the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission’s denial of compensation for disabilities he claims resulted when a forklift fell on his foot at work. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. The parties have been furnished with a statement of the reasons for the Court’s decision. The Commission’s denial of compensation is affirmed. 84.16(b). Rule
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-1779

FALINE ARNOLD,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

HUNTINGTON INGALLS INCORPORATED,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at 

Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, Senior District Judge. (2:22-cv-00384-RBS-DEM)

Submitted: November 16, 2023 Decided: November 21, 2023

Before AGEE and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Faline Arnold, Appellant Pro Se. Sharon Kerk Reyes, KAUFMAN & CANOLES, PC, 

Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1779 Doc: 8 Filed: 11/21/2023 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Faline Arnold seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting her motion for an 

extension of time in which to file an amended complaint, as well as her motion to file an 

amended complaint, but denying Arnold’s motion for appointment of counsel. This court 

may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and certain interlocutory 

and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292; Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. 

Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). The order Arnold seeks to appeal is neither a 

final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. See Miller v. Simmons, 814 

F.2d 962, 964 (4th Cir. 1987) (“Orders denying motions for appointment of counsel are 

not, prior to final disposition of the case in the district court, ‘final decisions’ of district 

courts as contemplated by 28 U.S.C. § 1291 [and] . . . are not within the parameters of the 

narrow exception to § 1291, articulated in Cohen.”). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal 

for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1779 Doc: 8 Filed: 11/21/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
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 Justice Drug Enforcement Administration
 Pursuant to § 1301.33(a) of Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), this is notice that on June 27, 2008, Cody Laboratories, 601 Yellowstone Avenue, Cody, Wyoming 82414, made application by renewal to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) as a bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances listed in schedules I and II: Drug
ScheduleDihydromorphine (9145)
IAmphetamine (1100)
IIMethamphetamine (1105)
IIAmobarbital (2125)
IIPentobarbital (2270)
IISecobarbital (2315)
IIPhenylacetone (8501)
IICocaine (9041)
IICodeine (9050)
IIDihydrocodeine (9120)
IIOxycodone (9143)
II( print page 45786)Hydromorphone (9150)
IIDiphenoxylate (9170)
IIEcgonine (9180)
IIHydrocodone (9193)
IIMeperidine (9230)
IIMethadone (9250)
IIMorphine (9300)
IIOxymorphone (9652)
IIAlfentanil (9737)
IIRemifentanil (9739)
IISufentanil (9740)
IIFentanyl (9801)
II
 The company plans on manufacturing the listed controlled substances in bulk for sale to its customers. Any other such applicant, and any person who is presently registered with DEA to manufacture such substances, may file comments or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.33(a). Any such written comments or objections should be addressed, in quintuplicate, to the Drug Enforcement Administration, Office of Diversion Control, Federal Register Representative (ODL), 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152; and must be filed no later than October 6, 2008. Dated: July 30, 2008. Joseph T. Rannazzisi, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration.


[FR Doc. E8-18047 Filed 8-5-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
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 annual report of Veracity Management Global, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the nine months ended March 31, 2010 (the “Report”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Marc L. Baker, Acting Chief Financial 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, as amended; 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/ Marc L. Baker





Marc L. Baker


Acting Chief Financial Officer


Dated: May 14, 2010





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Veracity Management Global, Inc. and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.