alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)



In connection with the accompanying Annual Report of Syniverse Holdings, LLC
and Syniverse Technologies, Inc. (the Companies) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 (the Report), I, G. Edward Evans, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify that to my knowledge:



(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and



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



|                      |  |                        
|--------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Dated: March 26, 2004 |  | /s/ G. EDWARD EVANS    
|                      |  | G. Edward Evans        
|                      |  | Chief Executive Officer



The above
certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-K or as a separate disclosure document.
Table of Contents
 EXHIBIT 13.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE U.S. SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Annual Report of Companhia de Saneamento Básico do Estado de São Paulo – Sabesp (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Dilma Seli Pena, Chief Executive Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the U.S. Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge: (i)    the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (ii)   the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. Date: June 27, 2011  By:/s/ Dilma Seli Pena Name:    Dilma Seli Pena Title:       Chief Executive Officer


---
#### ELIZABETH JANOCHA v. ELIZABETH NICOLOSI.

October 15, 1985.

Petition for certification denied.
Exhibit 4.9


 


eFleets Corporation


7660 Pebble Drive


Fort Worth, Texas 76118


  


May 19, 2014


 


John Maguire


 


Ladies and Gentlemen:


 


Reference is made to
the following Promissory Note issued by Good Energy Conservation, Inc. (the “Company”) to John Maguire (“Holder”):


 


	Date of Promissory Note	Original Principal Amount of Promissory Note
	 	 
	May 8, 2013	$25,000


 


For good and valuable
consideration the receipt of which is hereby received, the Company and the Holder hereby agree that the maturity date of the May
8, 2013 Note shall be extended from May 8, 2014 to July 31, 2014 and notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the respective
Note all interest and principal due on the Note shall be deferred and payable on the new maturity date of the Note. It is agreed
this agreement is effective on and as of May 8, 2014.


 


Except as set forth
herein, all other terms set forth in the Note shall remain unchanged. This extension agreement shall be governed by the laws of
the State of Texas, excluding its conflict of laws rules. The exclusive jurisdiction and venue of the any legal action instituted
by any party to this extension shall be the Circuit Court of Tarrant County, Texas.


 


	 	 	 	Very truly yours,	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	GOOD EARTH ENERGY CONSERVATION, INC.	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	By:	 	 
	 	 	 	 	James R. Emmons	 
	 	 	 	 	President 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Agreed and Accepted	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	John Maguire	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	By:	 	 	 	 	 
	 	Name:	 	 	 	 
	 	Title:
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      In connection with the Annual Report of Natco International Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), each of the undersigned
certifies, 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.

      Dated: June 29, 2005

                                                      /s/ Raj-Mohinder S. Gurm
                                                      -----------------------
                                                      Raj-Mohinder S. Gurm
                                                      Chief Executive Officer

                                                      /s/ Stephen K. Sleigh
                                                      -----------------------
                                                      Stephen K. Sleigh
                                                      Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 165 (Thursday, August 26, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 52582]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-21287]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 7106]


Notice of Receipt of Cultural Property Request From the 
Government of the Hellenic Republic

    Greece, concerned that its cultural heritage is in jeopardy from 
pillage, made a request to the Government of the United States under 
Article 9 of the 1970 UNESCO Convention. The request was received on 
July 2, 2010, by the United States Department of State. It seeks U.S. 
import restrictions on archaeological and ethnological material from 
Greece dating to the Neolithic Era through the mid-eighteenth century.
    The specific contents of this request are treated as confidential 
government-to-government information.
    Information about the Act and U.S. implementation of the 1970 
UNESCO Convention can be found at http://exchanges.state.gov/heritage/. 
A public summary of the Greek Request will be posted on the Web site.

    Dated: August 18, 2010.
Ann Stock,
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, 
Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2010-21287 Filed 8-25-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-10-P
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-7723

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

PATRICK PRINCE,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Greenville. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., Senior 

District Judge. (6:10-cr-00423-GRA-7)

Submitted: December 13, 2012 Decided: December 19, 2012

Before MOTZ, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Patrick Prince, Appellant Pro Se. Alan Lance Crick, Assistant 

United States Attorney, Andrew Burke Moorman, OFFICE OF THE 

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, South Carolina, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Patrick Prince appeals the district court’s order 

denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for a sentence 

reduction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible 

error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the 

district court. United States v. Prince, No. 6:10-cr-00423-GRA7 (D.S.C. Sept. 11, 2012). 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.

AFFIRMED
----

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

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

| Date:  | March 31, 2015 |   | By:    | /s/ Amílcar Jordán-Pérez |
|--------|----------------|--------|--------|-----------------------------------------|
|   |           |   |   | Amílcar Jordán-Pérez     |
|   |           |   |   | Vice President and                      |
|   |           |   |   | Chief Financial Officer                 |

----
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED July 13, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-40147 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus KATHY TORRES, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:05-CR-674

-------------------- Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Kathy Torres raises arguments that are foreclosed by United States v. Slaughter , 238 F.3d 580, 582-84 (5th Cir. 2000), which held that Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000), did not render 21 U.S.C. § 841 unconstitutional on its face, and by United States v. Riascos-Cuenu , 428 F.3d 1100, 1101-02 (5th Cir. 2005), petition for cert. filed (Jan. 9, 2006) (No. 05-8662). which held that a challenge to the district court’s order requiring theNo. 06-40147 -2- defendant to cooperate in the collection of a DNA sample as a condition of supervised release is not ripe for review on direct appeal. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is
GRANTED. JUDGMENT AFFIRMED; APPEAL DISMISSED IN PART.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                             141
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   141
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     141
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,822
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,049
<OTHER-SE>                                      (8,730)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       141
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,372
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,372)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,372)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,372)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Lucious BLANCHARD, Appellant.

No. 36266.

Missouri Court of Appeals, St. Louis District, Division Four.

Aug. 19, 1975.

*38Hayes & Heisler, Daniel B. Hayes, Clayton, for appellant.

John C. Danforth, Atty. Gen., Preston Dean, Chief Counsel, Crim. Div., Philip M. Koppe, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

NORWIN D. HOUSER, Special Judge.

Lucious Blanchard, convicted of burglary, second degree, § 560.045, RSMo 1969, following a jury trial, and committed to the department of corrections for 10 years under the Second Offender Act, has appealed on the sole ground that the court erred in failing to conduct an evidentiary hearing on the issue of the voluntariness of his confession and in not instructing the jury on voluntariness.

The record shows that no objection was made to the admission of the confession in evidence and no request was made for an independent evidentiary hearing on the issue of voluntariness. In the absence of such an objection or request the trial court is not required to conduct an evidentiary hearing *sua sponte. State v. Jackson,*448 S.W.2d 895 (Mo.1970); *State v. Day,*515 S.W.2d 584 (Mo.App.1974); *State v. Arrington,*529 S.W.2d 368 (Mo.1975); *United States v. Taylor,*374 F.2d 753, 756 (7th Cir. 1967); *Evans v. United States,*377 F.2d 535, 537 (5th Cir. 1967); *Lundberg v. Buchkoe,*389 F.2d 154, 157 (6th Cir. 1968); *Garrison v. Patterson,*405 F.2d 696, 697 (10th Cir. 1969), cert. den., 404 U.S. 880, 92 S.Ct. 212, 30 L.Ed.2d 160; *United States v. Carter,*431 F.2d 1093, 1097 (8th Cir. 1970); *Jacobson v. People of State of California,*431 F.2d 1017, 1019 (9th Cir. 1970); *United States v. Monroe,*141 U.S.App.D.C. 251, 437 F.2d 684, 686 (1970); *Gerberding v. United States,*471 F.2d 55, 61 (8th Cir. 1973). Furthermore, by failing to make proper objection to the admission of his confession, defendant has not preserved for review the court’s failure to conduct an evidentiary hearing. *State v. Price,*422 S.W.2d 286 (Mo.1967).

Nor did the court err in not instructing on the voluntariness of the confession. This is a collateral issue, not required to be instructed upon as a part of *39the law of the ease. *State v. Pughe,*403 S.W.2d 635, 641 (Mo.1966); *State v. Truster,*334 S.W.2d 104, 111 (Mo.1960); *State v. Francies,*295 S.W.2d 8,15 (Mo.1956); *State v. Ramsey,*355 Mo. 720, 197 S.W.2d 949, 957 (banc 1946). This instruction must be given if requested, par. 1., Notes on Use, MAI-CR 3.44, but in the absence of a request or submission by defendant the court is not required to give such an instruction sua *sponte. State v. Pughe,*supra;*State v. Truster,*supra. The record does not show that defendant requested such an instruction or that he submitted an instruction on the subject. Furthermore, the point was not raised in the motion for new trial. No manifest injustice resulted from failure to so instruct, and therefore this case does not fall within the “plain *error1’*exception to the rule that the point is not properly preserved for appellate review.

■Judgment affirmed.

SMITH, C. J., and ALDEN A. STOCK-ARD, Special Judge, concur.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 March 8, 2016

a0229

Order 

Clerk

March 8, 2016

151534

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 151534

COA: 324657

Gladwin CC: 11-005857-FC

DENNIS MICHAEL FYKE,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 12, 2015 order 

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

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
| Skip to Content*Release Date: June 11, 2009*Release dates |  Coded tables |  Historical dataCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB)**F.104 Farm Business1** |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
**Exhibit 32.1****Certification of Chief Executive Officer**     In connection with the Annual Report of Santarus, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for theperiod ended December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the “Report”), I, Gerald T. Proehl, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable,of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and2. That information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.        Dated: March 5, 2007 /s/ GERALD T. PROEHL   Gerald T. Proehl   President and Chief Executive Officer        The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18U.S.C. § 1350, and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company,whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language insuch filing. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been providedto the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.**Certification of Chief Financial Officer**     In connection with the Annual Report of Santarus, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for theperiod ended December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the “Report”), I, Debra P. Crawford, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer ofthe Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable,of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and2. That information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.        Dated: March 5, 2007 /s/ DEBRA P. CRAWFORD   Debra P. Crawford   Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer        The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18U.S.C. § 1350, and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company,whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language insuch filing. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been providedto the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. JOSE SANCHEZ.

December 18, 1985.

Petition for certification granted and the matter is summarily remanded for resentencing before a different judge to be selected by the assignment judge.

Jurisdiction is not retained.
C O U R T O F A P P E A LS EI GHTH D I STRI CT OF TEXAS ELPASO, TEXAS
GRAKOE SYSTEMS, I

NC./GENE GRAY HOMEL ESS US A, Ap pe lla nt,
v.
J OHN H. T RI EN and RAF AEL VI L LA, Ap pe lle e s. § § § § § § No . 0 8- 08 -0 00 52 -C V

Appea l from the 448th J udicial District Court of El Pa so County , T e xas (TC# 2006-2814)

M EM OR

AN DU MOP IN ION This appea l is before the Court for de termination whethe r it should be dismiss ed for lack of jurisdiction. Appellant, Mr. Ge ne Gr ay , filed a notice of appe al on J anuar y 25, 2008. On Marc h 25, 2008, the District Clerk of El Paso County notified this Court that there wa s no final judgme nt or appe alable or der on f ile in this case. B y

letter dated Marc h 25, 2008, the cler k of this Court not ified Mr. Gr ay of the Court’s intent to dismiss t he ca se for lack of jurisdiction unless a par

ty , within ten day s of the dateof the notice , could show grounds for c ontinuing the appea l. We have not re ceive d a re sponse. Appellate c ourts g ener ally have jurisdiction over final judgments, and such inter locutory order s as the L eg islature dee ms appea lable. T EX .C IV .P R AC .&R EM .C ODE ANN . § 51.012 (Ve rnon 19 97 ) a nd § 5 1. 01 4 ( Ve rn on

Sup p. 20 07 ); Ru iz v . R uiz , 9 46 S.W. 2d 12 3, 12 4 ( Te x.Ap p. -- El Pa so 19 97 , n o p e t.) . G ive n th e a bs e nc e of a fi na l ju dgme nt o r o the r a pp e a la ble or de r, we dis mis s th is
case for lac k of jurisdiction.-2-

May 15, 2008 DAVID WEL L I NGTONCHEW, C hief Just ice B e f o r e C h e w , C
. J. , M c C l ur e , a n d C ar r , JJ.