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

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 EFJ, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Jana Ahlfinger Bell, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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/ Jana Ahlfinger Bell
|                 |  | Jana Ahlfinger Bell    
|                 |  | Chief Financial Officer
|November 6, 2006 |  |
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Robert J. Gagalis

v. Case No. 08-cv-269-PB

United States of America

O R D E R

Robert Gagalis has filed a motion collaterally attacking his

conviction and sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. On June 3,

2007, Gagalis orally waived his right to collateral review of his

conviction and sentence and agreed to a 138-month sentence in

exchange for the government’s agreement not to challenge the

sentence on appeal. 

Gagalis argues that his collateral review waiver is

unenforceable because it was induced by the ineffective

assistance of his attorneys. Among other things, Gagalis claims

that his attorneys were ineffective because they were subject to

an impermissible conflict of interest when they advised him with

respect to the collateral review. 

The clerk shall set a date and time for an evidentiary

hearing on Gagalis’s motion. The hearing shall be limited to

Case 1:08-cv-00269-PB Document 16 Filed 05/19/09 Page 1 of 2
2

Gagalis’s claim that the collateral review waiver is invalid. If

I determine that the waiver is invalid, I will set a status

conference to establish a process for resolving the remaining

issues. 

SO ORDERED.

/s/Paul Barbadoro 

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

May 19, 2009

cc: Michael Artan, Esq.

Stephen M. Rasche, Esq.

Terry Ollila, Esq.

Case 1:08-cv-00269-PB Document 16 Filed 05/19/09 Page 2 of 2
#### Solomon and Lily TEKLE, Plaintiffs—Appellants, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant—Appellee.

No. 02-56118.

D.C. No. CV-01-11096-RSWL.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 10, 2003.*

Decided March 20, 2003.

Before CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Solomon and Lily Tekle, husband and wife, appeal the district court’s judgment dismissing their action which challenged the collection of federal taxes.

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, *Elias v. Connett,*908 F.2d 521, 523 (9th Cir.1990), and we affirm.

The district court properly concluded that it lacked jurisdiction over the Tekles’ suit for injunctive relief because the suit does not fall within any of the exceptions to the Anti-Injunction Act, 26 U.S.C. § 7421(a). *See id.*(explaining that any action to enjoin the assessment and collec*769tion of taxes by the Internal Revenue Service is barred unless it falls within one of several statutory exceptions or one judicial exception).

The district court properly dismissed the Tekles’ claim for damages premised on tortious misconduct against various Internal Revenue Service employees because the claim is time-barred. *See*26 U.S.C. § 7438(d)(3).

The Tekles’ remaining contentions also lack merit.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-40243

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

DAVID LESLIE ROSE

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:06-CR-685-1

Before KING, DAVIS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

David Leslie Rose appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea

to possession of child pornography. He argues that (1) the district court violated

his Fifth Amendment privilege in imposing an above-guideline sentence and,

alternatively, (2) the sentence was unreasonable. We affirm.

Rose argues that the district court violated his right against selfincrimination when it adversely inferred from his silence that he had committed

the allegations of sexual abuse contained in the Presentence Report (PSR) to

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

January 3, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 07-40243

2

upwardly depart from the advisory guideline range. Rose did not preserve this

constitutional issue for review, and, therefore, we review for plain error only.

See United States v. Martinez, 496 F.3d 387, 389 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 2007 WL

3265472 (U.S. Dec. 3, 2007) (No. 07-7436). When Rose invoked his Fifth

Amendment privilege, the district court construed his silence as a refusal to

controvert the allegations, thereby entitling the court to rely on them as a basis

for an upward departure. See FED. R. CRIM. P. 32(i)(3)(A); United States v.

Romero-Rendon, 220 F.3d 1159, 1163 n.4 (9th Cir. 2000). Rose has shown no

Fifth Amendment error on the part of the district court, plain or otherwise.

Rose alternatively argues that his non-guideline sentence was

unreasonable because the hearsay allegations of sexual abuse contained in the

PSR lacked sufficient indicia of reliability, but were nevertheless given

significant weight, and the sentence did not accountfor a factor that should have

received significant weight, i.e. his acceptance of responsibility for the offense.

The reliability of Rose’s ex-wife’s hearsay allegations was bolstered by his

daughter’s corroborative statement that her aunts had been sexually abused by

Rose and, additionally, by information that Rose’s post-divorce contact with his

daughters was restricted. The hearsay evidence, which Rose failed to rebut,

carried sufficient indicia of reliability such that the district court was entitled

to adoptthatinformation withoutfurther inquiry. See United States v. Ramirez,

367 F.3d 274, 277 (5th Cir. 2004); United States v. Golden, 17 F.3d 735, 736 (5th

Cir. 1994). Rose’s argument that his acceptance of responsibility precluded the

district court from upwardly departing to the statutory maximum is

unpersuasive. He has therefore not shown the sentence to be unreasonable. See

United States v. Smith, 440 F.3d 704, 706, 708 (5th Cir. 2006). 

AFFIRMED.
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-21-00288-CV

Castine McIlhargey and Jody McIntyre, Individually, and Derivatively on Behalf of A+ 

Pro Recovery and Towing, LLC

v.

Erik M. Hager, Jason Rios, Eduardo Pena, Joanna Pena, and South Padre Towing and 

Recovery, LLC

On Appeal from the

107th District Court of Cameron County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2020-DCL-03294-A

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion. No costs are assessed, as appellants filed 

affidavits of inability to pay costs. 

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

April 28, 2022
Exhibit 23.1

               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

Regarding:

      1)   Registration Statement on Form S-8 relating to the 1988 Stock
           Incentive Plan (File #33-38427).

      2)   Registration Statement on Form S-3 relating to the Dividend
           Reinvestment Plan (File #333-02063).

      3)   Registration Statement on Form S-8 relating to the 1992 Director
           Fee Plan (File #33-48031).

      4)   Registration Statement on Form S-3 relating to the Main Line
           Bancshares, Inc. Stock Option Agreements (File #33-50526).

      5)   Registration Statement on Form S-8 relating to the 1990 Non-
           Employee Directors' Stock Option Plan (File #33-59372).

      6)   Registration Statement on Form S-8 relating to the 1992 Stock
           Incentive Plan (File #33-68800).

      7)   Registration Statement on Form S-8 relating to the Elmwood Bancorp,
           Inc. Key Employee Stock Compensation Program (File #33-77358)

      8)   Registration Statement on Form S-8 relating to the Amended and
           Restated Nonqualified Stock Option Agreement with Donald E. Stone
           (File #33-77354).

      9)   Registration Statement on Form S-8 relating to The Frankford
           Corporation 1983 Incentive Stock Option Plan (File #33-82088).

      10)  Registration Statement on Form S-8 relating to the 1995 Employee
           Stock Purchase Plan (File #33-91572).

      11)  Registration Statement on Form S-8 relating to the 1995 Management
           Stock Purchase Plan (File #33-91574).

      12)  Registration Statement on Form S-8 relating to the National
           American Bancorp, Inc. 1994 Employee Stock Option Plan
           (File #333-02065).

      13)  Registration Statement on Form S-8 relating to the 1995 Non-Employee
           Director's Stock Option Plan (File # 333-04281).

      14)  Registration Statement on Form S-3 relating to the Senior/
           Subordinated Medium-Term Notes (File #333-25393).

      We  consent  to  the  incorporation  by  reference  in  the  above  listed
      Registration  Statements  of our report  dated,  January  30,  1998,  with
      respect to the consolidated  financial  statements of Keystone  Financial,
      Inc. and  subsidiaries  incorporated  by  reference in this Annual  Report
      (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1997.


                                                        /s/  ERNST & YOUNG LLP
                                                        ----------------------

      Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
      March 27 , 1998
<PAGE>
Exhibit 10(b)  




AMENDMENT TO
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 




        This
 Agreement  is made on this 5th day of  February,  2004,  between  Coeur d' Alene  Mines
 Corporation ("Coeur") and Wayne L. Vincent ("Vincent"). 





WITNESSETH: 




        Whereas,
the parties hereto entered into an employment agreement on or about March 11, 2003, with
a term commencing on May 31, 2003 and ending on May 31, 2004; and  





        Whereas
the parties desire to extend the term of said employment agreement heretofore made.  





        Now,
Therefore, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained herein, the
parties agree as follows:  





        1.     It
is hereby agreed between Coeur and Vincent that the duration of the           employment
agreement referred to above shall be extended.  





        2.     It
is hereby agreed that the new term of said agreement shall commence on June           1,
2004 and shall expire on May 31, 2005.  





        3.     All
of the other terms and conditions of the employment agreement referred to           above
shall remain unchanged.  





        In
Witness Whereof the parties hereto have set their hands on the date first written above.  






  

	
Coeur d’Alene Mines Corporation 


	
	By:   	/s/  Wayne L. Vincent 
	
		Wayne L. Vincent
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 08-cr-107-PB

Marcus Cherry

O R D E R

The defendant, through counsel, has moved to continue the

trial scheduled for August 18, 2009, citing the need for

additional time to complete the court-ordered psychiatric

evaluation of defendant and allow time for plea negotiations or

trial preparation. The government does not object to a

continuance of the trial date.

Accordingly, for the above reasons and to allow the parties

additional time to properly prepare for trial, the court will

continue the trial from August 18, 2009 to November 3, 2009. In

agreeing to continue the trial, the court finds pursuant to 18

U.S.C.A. § 3161(h)(8)(A) that for the above-stated reasons, the

ends of justice served in granting a continuance outweigh the

best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

Case 1:08-cr-00107-PB Document 25 Filed 07/28/09 Page 1 of 2
2

The court will hold a final pretrial conference on October

23, 2009 at 2:00 p.m. 

No further continuances in this matter. 

SO ORDERED.

/s/Paul Barbadoro 

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

July 28, 2009

cc: Tony F. Soltani, Esq.

Terry Ollila, AUSA

United States Probation

United States Marshal

Case 1:08-cr-00107-PB Document 25 Filed 07/28/09 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Kevin J. Bean

v. 06-cv-161-SM

Sanbornton Police Chief, et al. 

O R D E R

I herewith approve the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge

Muirhead dated November 14, 2006, no objection having been filed, for the

reasons set forth therein. Plaintiff’s Motion for Temporary Restraining Order is

denied as moot.

SO ORDERED.

December 7, 2006 _________________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief Judge

cc: Kevin J. Bean, pro se

Karen A. Schlitzer, Esq.

Corey M. Belobrow, Esq.

Case 1:06-cv-00161-SM Document 42 Filed 12/07/06 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 07-cr-122-PB

Larry N. Laing

O R D E R

The defendant, through counsel, has moved to continue the

February 5, 2008 trial in the above case, citing the need for

additional time to engage in plea negotiations or prepare for

trial. The government does not object to a continuance of the

trial date.

Accordingly, for the above reason and to allow the parties

additional time to properly prepare for trial, the court will

continue the trial from February 5, 2007 to May 6, 2008. In

agreeing to continue the trial, the court finds pursuant to 18

U.S.C.A. § 3161(h)(8)(A) that for the above-stated reasons, the

ends of justice served in granting a continuance outweigh the

best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial

Case 1:07-cr-00122-PB Document 16 Filed 01/28/08 Page 1 of 2
2

The January 29, 2008 final pretrial conference is continued

to April 28, 2008 at 4:15 p.m.

SO ORDERED.

/s/Paul Barbadoro 

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

January 28, 2008

cc: Arnold Huftalen, Esq.

Cathy Green, Esq.

United States Probation

United States Marshal

Case 1:07-cr-00122-PB Document 16 Filed 01/28/08 Page 2 of 2
##### 



Exhibit 32.2
 115




---



##### 



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
 I, Charles A. Caswell, state and attest that I am the Executive Vice President, Chief Financial
Officer and Treasurer of First Charter Corporation (the Company). I hereby certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
 
    
    the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the annual period
ended December 31, 2005 containing financial statements (the periodic 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 periodic report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company for the periods presented.
 /s/ Charles A. CaswellName: Charles A. CaswellTitle: Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and TreasurerDate: March 14, 2006
 116
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 07-cr-233-01-SM

Jeff Williams

O R D E R

Defendant Williams’ motion to continue the final pretrial conference and

trial is granted (document 10). Trial has been rescheduled for the April 2008

trial period. Defendant Cruz shall file a waiver of speedy trial rights not later

than February 11, 2008. On the filing of such waiver, his continuance shall be

effective. 

The Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance

outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, 18

U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), in that failure to grant a continuance would

unreasonably deny defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective

preparation taking into account the exercise of due diligence under the

circumstances. 

Final Pretrial Conference: March 17, 2008 at 1:30 p.m.

Jury Selection: April 1, 2008 at 9:30 a.m.

Case 1:07-cr-00233-SM Document 11 Filed 01/31/08 Page 1 of 2
2

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

 Chief Judge

January 31, 2008

cc: Jessica Brown, Esq.

Jennifer Davis, AUSA

US Probation

US Marshal

Case 1:07-cr-00233-SM Document 11 Filed 01/31/08 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE 

Guardian Angel Credit Union, 

On its own behalf and on behalf 

Of a class of persons similarly 

Situated 

 v. Case No. 08-cv-261-PB 

MetaBank and 

Meta Financial Group 

ORDER OF NOTICE 

 On the Plaintiff s Assented-To Motion to Approve Class 

Action Settlement (Doc. No. 173) ("Plaintiff’s Motion"), it is 

hereby ORDERED as follows: 

 1. The form of the Class Notice attached to the 

Plaintiff’s Motion as Exhibit 2, and the form of the Claim Form 

attached to Plaintiff’s Motion as Exhibit 3, each shall be, and 

hereby is, APPROVED. Class counsel shall send a Class Notice 

and Claim Form, in the form approved, to each class member at 

the addresses listed on the Class List, attached to Plaintiff’s 

Motion as Exhibit 1, or as updated, within five (5) days of this 

Order of Notice. 

Case 1:08-cv-00261-PB Document 175 Filed 02/06/12 Page 1 of 2
2 

 2. Any objection to the Proposed Settlement, motions to 

intervene, or objections to Class Counsel's request for 

attorney's fees from the Settlement Fund shall be filed, with 

copy to counsel of record, within twenty (20) days of this 

Order. 

 3. Written responses or objections to objections or 

motions to intervene shall be filed, with copy to counsel of 

record, within thirty (30) days of this Order. 

 4. A hearing on the remainder of the relief requested by 

Plaintiff’s Motion, including final approval of the proposed 

settlement on behalf of the class, and the application for 

attorney's fees, is scheduled for March 26, 2012 at 2:30 p.m. 

before this Court. 

 SO ORDERED. 

 /s/Paul Barbadoro 

 Paul Barbadoro 

 United States District Judge 

February 6, 2012 

cc: Counsel of Record 

Case 1:08-cv-00261-PB Document 175 Filed 02/06/12 Page 2 of 2
9

A.5. Average Effective Interest Rates on Non-real-estate Bank Loans Made to FarmersPercent

Size of loan Si

Purpose of loan (thousands of dollars) 

Other Farm 

current machinery 3 10 25 100

All Feeder Other operating and to to to and Sma

Period loans livestock livestock expenses1 equipment Other2 9 24 99 over mid-

1995...... 9.5 10.1 10.2 10.0 10.3 8.8 10.6 10.5 10.3 9.0 1996...... 8.4 8.8 9.5 8.6 9.7 8.0 10.2 10.1 9.8 7.8 1997...... 9.2 9.6 9.8 9.9 9.8 8.5 10.2 10.0 9.9 8.8 1998...... 9.0 9.4 9.7 9.6 9.3 8.0 10.1 9.9 9.7 8.4 1999...... 8.7 9.1 9.1 9.2 8.8 7.6 9.7 9.5 9.3 8.1 2000...... 9.7 9.8 9.9 9.9 9.3 9.3 10.3 10.2 10.1 9.4 2001...... 7.8 7.6 8.0 8.4 8.3 7.0 9.1 8.7 8.3 7.3 2002...... 5.9 6.1 5.8 6.4 6.7 4.8 7.3 7.0 6.5 5.3 2003...... 5.4 5.1 5.4 5.7 6.0 4.6 6.7 6.4 5.9 4.8 2004...... 5.4 5.3 5.5 5.7 5.5 4.8 6.6 6.4 5.9 5.0 2005...... 6.7 6.9 6.9 7.0 7.0 6.0 7.7 7.5 7.1 6.5 2006...... 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.4 8.4 7.7 8.9 8.9 8.6 8.0 2004: Q1... 5.3 5.1 5.9 5.6 5.5 4.6 6.6 6.2 5.8 5.0  Q2... 5.2 4.8 5.3 5.4 5.4 4.7 6.5 6.2 5.5 4.7  Q3... 5.5 5.4 5.5 5.8 5.6 5.0 6.6 6.5 5.9 5.1  Q4... 5.5 5.5 5.2 6.0 5.5 4.9 6.9 6.5 6.3 5.1 2005: Q1... 6.6 6.3 6.3 6.9 6.9 5.7 7.3 6.9 6.9 6.4  Q2... 6.5 6.5 6.7 6.8 6.8 6.0 7.6 7.4 6.9 6.3  Q3... 6.7 6.9 6.8 7.1 6.9 5.8 7.7 7.6 7.1 6.3  Q4... 7.4 7.5 7.7 7.5 7.7 6.7 8.3 8.1 7.7 7.1 2006: Q1... 8.0 7.9 8.0 8.1 8.1 7.3 8.5 8.5 8.2 7.8  Q2... 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.3 8.0 7.4 8.6 8.8 8.5 7.8  Q3... 8.6 8.4 8.8 8.8 9.0 8.3 9.3 9.2 8.7 8.4  Q4... 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.7 9.1 7.5 9.2 9.0 8.8 8.1 2007: Q1... 8.5 8.9 8.3 8.7 8.9 8.1 9.2 9.1 8.8 8.4  Q2... 8.6 9.0 8.5 8.9 8.7 7.9 9.2 9.1 8.9 8.4  Q3... 8.5 8.9 8.6 8.8 8.4 7.7 9.1 9.2 8.8 8.1  Note. Data are estimates from the Federal Reserve System’s Survey of the Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers. Effective (compoundcalculated from the stated rate and other terms of the loans and weighted by loan size. Quarterly estimates are expressed as an annual loans made during the first full week of the second month of the quarter. 1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses and the care and feeding of livestock (including p 2. Typically loans for which the lender does not know the purpose. 3. Portfolios with $25 million or less in farm loans. 4. Portfolios with more than $25 million in farm loans.
GK INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS, INC.
                             A Delaware corporation

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


     In connection with the Quarterly Report of GK Intelligent Systems, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the Quarter ended June 30, 2001 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Gary F. Kimmons, President, Chief Executive Officer, and Chief Financial
Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
ss.ss. 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.



Dated: March 25, 2003                   /S/ Gary F. Kimmons
                                        --------------------------------------
                                        By: Gary F. Kimmons
                                        Its: President, Chief Executive Officer
                                             and Chief Financial Officer