alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32.2

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of DCB Financial Corp (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John A. Ustaszewski,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as enacted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

      (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

/s/ John A. Ustaszewski

John A. Ustaszewski
Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer
May 6, 2005

                                                                              33
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                            5
<LEGEND>
     ILC Technology, Inc., Financial Data Sheet
</LEGEND>
<CIK>               0000719625
<NAME>              ILC Technology, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                         1,000

       
<S>                                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                        12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                    SEP-28-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                         SEP-28-1996
<CASH>                                               1,829
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        10,668
<ALLOWANCES>                                         312
<INVENTORY>                                          8,902
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     4,545
<PP&E>                                               32,389
<DEPRECIATION>                                       11,213
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       48,594
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                10,476
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0  
<COMMON>                                             6,815
<OTHER-SE>                                           22,976
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         48,594
<SALES>                                              54,206
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     54,206
<CGS>                                                36,180
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        36,180
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     11,503
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   462
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      6,061
<INCOME-TAX>                                         1,515
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  4,546
<DISCONTINUED>                                       (4,239)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         307
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        .06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        .06




        

</TABLE>
| Skip to Content*Release Date: December 8, 2005*Release dates |  Coded tables |  Historical dataCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB)**F.119 State and Local Government Employee Retirement Funds** |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
1

This minute order is issued pursuant to the express authority of the Honorable Robert E. 

Blackburn, United States District Judge for the District of Colorado.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Judge Robert E. Blackburn

Criminal Case No. 11-cr-00387-REB

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

PABLO HERNANDEZ-DIAZ,

Defendant.

MINUTE ORDER1

On November 14, 2011, the parties appeared in chambers to obtain a new date

for the change of plea hearing in this matter. After conferring with counsel and with their

consent,

IT IS ORDERED as follows:

1. That on November 30, 2011, commencing at 10:00 a.m., the court shall

conduct a change of plea hearing in this matter;

2. That, to the extent necessary, the United States Marshal for the District of

Colorado shall assist the court in securing the defendant’s appearance for this hearing;

and

3. That the telephonic setting conference set for November 8, 2011, is

VACATED. 

Dated: November 4, 2011
Exhibit 99.1        Officer's Certificate regarding Annual Statement of
                    Compliance of Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corp.

                   WASHINGTON MUTUAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES CORP.
                              OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE

     The undersigned officer of Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corp., a
Delaware corporation (the "Company") hereby certifies on behalf of the Company
and on his own behalf for purposes of the WASHINGTON MUTUAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES
CORP. MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2002-MS2, as follows:

     1. I am the duly appointed, qualified and acting President of the Company.

     2. Capitalized terms used and not defined herein shall have the meanings
ascribed to such terms in the Pooling and Servicing Agreement related to the
above-referenced series of Certificates.

     3. I am duly authorized to execute and deliver this Officer's Certificate
on behalf of the Company.

     4. A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the preceding
calendar year and performance under this Agreement has been made under my
supervision.

     5. To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer
has fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement throughout such year.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed my name as of March 15, 2004.





                   WASHINGTON MUTUAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES CORP.


                     By: /s/ Michael L. Parker
                         Michael L. Parker,
                         President and Director
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

CALVIN SMITH,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 84 EAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 28th day of June, 2017, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23

- 6684

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v.
GERALD DAMONE HOPPER , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Charlotte

. Max O. Cogburn, Jr. , District Judge. ( 3:95

- cr - 00119

- MOC

- SCR

- 1 )

Submitted : September 14, 2023 Decided: September 18, 2023

Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and RICHARDSON , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Gerald Damone Hopper, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-6684 Doc: 6 Filed: 09/18/2023 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM: Gerald Damone Hopper seeks to appe al the district court’s order denying his motion to recuse the magistrate judge and to quash an arrest warrant. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 129 2; Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541,
545

- 46 (1949) ; see United States v. Sueiro , 946 F.3d 637, 639 (4th Cir. 2020) (“ In the criminal context,

. . . this Court generally does not have appellate jurisdiction until after the imposition of a sentence. ”). The order Hopper seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. See, e.g. , Mischler v. Bevin , 887 F.3d 271 , 271 (6th Cir. 2018) (per curiam) (“[A]n order denying recusal is not i mmediately appealable under the collateral order doctrine.”). 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: 23-6684 Doc: 6 Filed: 09/18/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Senior District Judge Richard P. Matsch

Civil Action No. 02-cv-00337-RPM

(Consolidated with Civil Action No. 03-cv-02603-RPM)

DANIEL UNIS,

ROSA UNIS,

DAVID UNIS and

MARCOS UNIS,

Plaintiff,

v.

PAT A CROUCH, an agent of the Colorado Bureau of Investigation;

DAVID SANDERS, an agent of the Drug Enforcement Administration;

PAUL J. ROACH, an agent of the Drug Enforcement Administration;

KENT L. FLORENCE, an agent of the Drug Enforcement Administration;

WILLIAM ELDRIDGE, an agent of the Drug Enforcement Administration;

LUIS M. TORRES, an agent of the Drug Enforcement Administration;

ROBERT BERTON, an agent of the Drug Enforcement Administration;

JASON HEFLIN, a Pueblo police officer;

LEIDE DEFUSCO, a Pueblo police officer;

JEFFREY CARPENTER, a Pueblo police officer;

ANDREW McLACHLAN, a Pueblo police officer, all of whom are all sued in their

individual capacities; and

CITY OF PUEBLO, COLORADO and

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendants.

__________________________________________________________________

STAY ORDER

__________________________________________________________________

Pursuant to the Status Report and Uncontested Request for Stay, filed July 13,

2005, by the plaintiffs and defendant United States of America and upon the

representation that all counsel are in agreement, it is

Case 1:02-cv-00337-RPM Document 163 Filed 07/14/05 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

ORDERED that further proceedings in this matter will be stayed until

September 1, 2005.

Dated: July 14th, 2005

BY THE COURT:

s/Richard P. Matsch

_________________________________

Richard P. Matsch, Senior District Judge

Case 1:02-cv-00337-RPM Document 163 Filed 07/14/05 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 32.2


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


The undersigned  hereby certifies in her capacity as Chief Financial  Officer of
Belrose Capital Fund LLC (the "Fund"), that:

(a)  the Annual  Report of the Fund on Form 10K for the year ended  December 31,
     2003 (the "Report")  fully complies with the  requirements of Section 13(a)
     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 the results of operations of the Fund
     for such period.



Date:  March 15, 2004


                                          /s/ Michelle A. Alexander
                                          -------------------------
                                          Michelle A. Alexander
                                          Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 197 (Thursday, October 9, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 59675]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-24056]


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

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

[Notice (08-068)]


Government-Owned Inventions, Available for Licensing

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

ACTION: Notice of Availability of Inventions for Licensing.

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

SUMMARY: Patent applications on the inventions listed below assigned to 
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, have been filed in 
the United States Patent and Trademark Office, and are available for 
licensing.

DATES: October 9, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James J. McGroary, Patent Counsel, 
Marshall Space Flight Center, Mail Code LS01, Huntsville, AL 35812; 
telephone (256) 544-0013; fax (256) 544-0258.
    NASA Case No. MFS-32333-1: Ultra Thin Protective Layer by Chemical 
Conversion for Vacuum Ultra-Violet Optics Applications;
    NASA Case No. MFS-32369-1: Method for Determining Lightning Charges 
Using Electric Field Mill and VHF Channel Mapping Date;
    NASA Case No. MFS-32429-1: Orbital Fabrication of Aluminum Foam and 
Apparatus Therefore;
    NASA Case No. MFS-32280-1: Multi-Functional Layered Structure 
Having Structural and Radiation Shielding Attributes.

    Dated: October 3, 2008.
Michael C. Wholley,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. E8-24056 Filed 10-8-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510-13-P
<PAGE>







                                                                    Exhibit 23.1


               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 Nos. 33-59061 and 33-78694) pertaining to the Immunex Corporation 1993
Stock Option Plan as Amended and Restated on February 13, 1997 and the Immunex
Corporation Stock Option Plan for Nonemployee Directors Amended and Restated on
February 23, 1999 of our report dated January 29, 1999, with respect to the
consolidated financial statements and schedule of Immunex Corporation included
in its Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1998.




                                           ERNST & YOUNG LLP




Seattle, Washington
March 17, 1999



                                      127
#### WILLIAMS v. TROXLER.

Supreme Court of Florida.

January Term 1954.

Dismissed without opinion.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Harold N. BERNSTEIN, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 76-2648

Summary Calendar.*

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Jan. 28, 1977.

Samuel Berman, Pompano Beach, Fla., for defendant-appellant.

Robert W. Rust, U. S. Atty., Charles O. Farrar, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., Miami, Fla., for plaintiff-appellee.

Before WISDOM, GEE and TJOFLAT, Circuit Judges.

*

 Rule 18, 5 Cir., see *Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. of New York, et al.*5 Cir., 1970, 431 F.2d 409, Part 1.

PER CURIAM:

Defendant-appellant Bernstein, a physician, was indicted on seventy-nine counts of *110Medicare fraud. After plea negotiations, he pleaded guilty to fifteen misdemeanor counts. He was sentenced to serve sixty days in jail, followed by three years’ probation. After sentencing, substituted counsel moved pursuant to F.R.Crim.P. 35 for reduction of sentence. From denial of this motion, Bernstein appeals, raising two general grounds of error: (1) substituted coun- • sel was allegedly not allowed to see the presentence report; and (2) the sentencing court failed to consider various factors such as the “miniscule” amount of money involved, the advantages of imposing volunteer service rather than jail time, and defendant’s exposure to extrajudicial punishments from his profession.

Bernstein’s trial counsel was permitted to inspect the presentence report and at the sentencing hearing informed the court that the report was correct in all respects. After sentence was imposed, appellant retained new counsel to file a motion to reduce sentence, Fed.R.Crim.P. 35. The trial court did not allow appellant’s new counsel to see the presentence report and denied the Rule 35 motion. Appellant complains of this failure to disclose his presentence report at the time of the Rule 35 motion. Rule 32(c)(3)(A) states that “[bjefore imposing sentence the court shall upon request permit the defendant, or his counsel if he is so represented, to read the report of the presentence investigation . . . .” Fed.R.Crim.P. 32(c)(3)(A). The Rule requires disclosure of the presentence report *before*sentencing and was complied with by the trial court. It was not error to refuse to disclose the presentencing report to new counsel *after*sentence had been imposed.

As for appellant’s complaints about his punishment, “A sentencing court exercises broad discretion which is not subject to appellate review ‘except when arbitrary or capricious action amounting to a gross abuse of discretion is involved.’ ” *United States v. Gamboa,*543 F.2d 545, 546 (5 Cir. 1976). The sixty-day jail term followed by three years’ probation was well below the maximum sentence Bernstein could have received. The transcript of the sentencing hearing shows that the trial court carefully considered appellant’s lack of a prior record, his previous and probable future service to his community, and the likelihood of extrajudicial sanctions.

Appellant entirely fails to show any such gross or outrageous abuse of sentencing discretion as would warrant a modification or vacation of the sentence by this court.

AFFIRMED.
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 Mobius Management Systems, Inc. (the
      “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending December 31, 2006 as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
      Raymond F. Kunzmann, 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;
                and




(2)
            The
                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
                Company.




A
      signed
      original 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/
      Raymond F. Kunzmann


Raymond
      F. Kunzmann


Chief
      Financial Officer


February
      8, 2007
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

PETER J. HONESTO, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

GAVIN NEWSOM; et al.,*

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 18-16497 

D.C. No. 1:17-cv-00467-LJO-EPG 

MEMORANDUM**

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Lawrence J. O’Neill, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 11, 2019***

Before: CANBY, GRABER, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges. 

California state prisoner Peter J. Honesto appeals pro se from the district 

court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging federal claims. 

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Wilhelm v. 

 

* Gavin Newsom has been substituted for his predecessor, Edmund G. 

Brown, Jr., as Governor of California under Fed. R. App. P. 43(c)(2).

** This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

*** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

JUN 13 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
 2 

Rotman, 680 F.3d 1113, 1118 (9th Cir. 2012) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A)

Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order) (dismissal 

under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Honesto’s conditions-of-confinement

claim against defendants Schwarzenegger, Hartley, and Adams in their individual 

capacities because it would not have been clear to every reasonable official that 

housing Honesto in prisons in the Central Valley, where Valley Fever is endemic, 

was unlawful under the circumstances. See Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731, 735 

(2011) (explaining two-part test for qualified immunity); Hines v. Youseff, 914 

F.3d 1218, 1229-30 (9th Cir. 2019) (existing Valley Fever cases did not clearly 

establish a “right to be free from heightened exposure to Valley Fever spores”).

The district court properly dismissed Honesto’s claim under Title II of the 

Americans with Disabilities Act because Honesto failed to allege facts sufficient to 

state a plausible claim for relief. See Simmons v. Navajo County, Ariz., 609 F.3d 

1011, 1021 (9th Cir. 2010) (elements of a claim under Title II); see also Hebbe v. 

Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 341-42 (9th Cir. 2010) (although pro se pleadings are to be 

construed liberally, a plaintiff must present factual allegations sufficient to state a 

plausible claim for relief). 

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued 

in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
 3 

AFFIRMED.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO 

Senior District Judge Richard P. Matsch

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02594-RPM

DALE GROSS,

Plaintiff,

v.

GUILLERMO SAMUDIO, Community Parole Officer; 

IAN SWEENEY, Community Parole Officer; 

JENNIFER DUNCAN, Community Parole Officer; 

ANTHONY YOUNG, Chairman of the Colorado Parole Board; 

ED THOMAS, Member of the Parole Board; 

DENISE BALAZIC, Member of the Parole Board; 

PATRICIA BAN WAAK, Member of the Parole Board; 

JOHN O’DELL, Member of the Parole Board; 

MICHAEL ANDERSON, Member of the Parole Board; 

REBECCA OAKES, Member of the Parole Board; 

JOHN DAVIS, President of RSA, Inc.; 

JOHN DOES, Numbers 1-2, unknown officers of RSA Inc.; 

WALTER T. SIMON, President of Progressive Therapy Systems PC; 

JOHN DOES, Numbers 3-4, unknown officers of Progressive Therapy Systems PC; 

FREDERICK E. TOLSON, President Sexual Offense Resource Services, LLC; 

JOHN DOES, Number 5-6, unknown officers of Sexual Offense Resource Services, LLC; 

GREIG VEEDER, President and Director, Teaching Humane Existence Treatment Program, Inc.; and 

JOHN DOES, Number 7-8, unknown officers of Teaching Humane Existence Treatment Program, Inc., 

Defendants.

____________________________________________________________________________________

ORDER DISMISSING DEFENDANT JOHN DAVIS

____________________________________________________________________________________

Pursuant to the hearing held today and the conclusion that the plaintiff has failed state a claim for

relief against John Davis, President of RSA, Inc., it is

ORDERED that this civil action is dismissed as to defendant John Davis, President of RSA, Inc.

pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P.12(b)(6).

DATED: July 18th, 2012

BY THE COURT:

s/ Richard P. Matsch

__________________________

Richard P. Matsch, Senior Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02594-RPM Document 26 Filed 07/18/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1