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

#### In the Matter of JOHN H. McCANN, III, an attorney at law.

May 21, 1987.

JOHN H. McCANN, III of YORK, PENNSYLVANIA, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1974, having pleaded guilty to violations of 21 *U.S.C.*341(a)(1), 18 *U.S.C.*2, 21 *U.S.C.*84B, 18 *U.S.C.*371, 26 *U.S.C.*7201, and 26 *U.S.C.*7206(1) and (2), and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that pursuant to *R.*l:20-6(a)(l), JOHN H. McCANN, III is temporarily suspended from the practice of law pending the final resolution of ethics proceedings against him, effective immediately and until the further order of this Court; and it is further

ORDERED that JOHN H. McCANN, III be restrained and enjoined from practicing law during the period of his suspension; and it is further

ORDERED that JOHN H. McCANN, III comply with Administrative Guideline No. 23 of the Office of Attorney Ethics dealing with suspended attorneys.
**Exhibit 32.2**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, 

AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO 

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Newtek Business Services, Inc. (the “Company”), for the period endedDecember 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Seth A. Cohen, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as added by Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of our knowledge: 

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

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

 

March 15, 2010
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Morris Eugene HAYES, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 03-6904.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 28, 2003.

Decided Sept. 10, 2003.

Morris Eugene Hayes, Appellant Pro Se. Laura P. Tayman, Office of the United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Morris Eugene Hayes appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his motion to reconsider his sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *See United States v. Hayes,*No. CR-94-163-2-20 (E.D.Va. Apr. 11, 2003). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
#### WOODROW PAIR v. ALVIN BLAKLY.

July 11, 1978.

Petition for certification denied. (See 160 *N. J. Super.*14),
FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

May 20, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

JERRY MASKE,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

CITY OF AURORA

Defendant - Appellee.

No. 10-1175

ORDER

On April 29, 2010, this court issued an order directing the appellant to file,

within 14 days, a fully compliant petition for leave to proceed pro se in

accordance with the filing restrictions imposed in Maske v. Murphy, No. 09-1536,

2010 WL 529801 (10th Cir. 2010). The April 29, 2010 order also advised the

appellant that his failure to file the required documents would be grounds for

dismissal for failure to prosecute pursuant to 10th Cir. R. 42.1. 

Although appellant has submitted various items of correspondence to this

court, none comply with the filing restrictions imposed in Maske v. Murphy, No.

09-1536, 2010 WL 529801 (10th Cir. 2010). The time to file a compliant petition

for leave to proceed pro se has expired and no attorney has entered an appearance

on the appellant’s behalf. 

Appellate Case: 10-1175 Document: 01018425629 Date Filed: 05/20/2010 Page: 1 
2

Therefore, this appeal is dismissed for failure to prosecute. 10th Cir. R.

42.1. 

A copy of this order shall stand as and for the mandate of this court. 

Entered for the Court

ELISABETH SHUMAKER, Clerk of Court

By:

Christine Van Coney

 Counsel to the Clerk

Appellate Case: 10-1175 Document: 01018425629 Date Filed: 05/20/2010 Page: 2
EXHIBIT 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE 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 HFB Financial Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the three-month period ended September 30, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, David B. Cook, President and Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, to the best of my knowledge, 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.


         November 7, 2003                  /s/ David B. Cook
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           David B. Cook
                                           President and Chief Executive Officer


                                       18
Tracking Number 2010-03-08 (CSC-04) 


Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Licensing 


NASA Advisory Council Recommendation: 

The Council agrees with NASA that Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) licensing of 

Commercial Crew services should be the "eventual state." The Council recommends that NASA 

engage the FAA as soon as possible to discuss FAA licensing ofCommercial Crew with the goal 

ofproviding clarity to potential offerors regarding the regulatory framework for both 

development and operation ofCommercial Crew capabilities. 

NASA Response: 

NASA concurs that FAA licensing ofCommercial Crew services should be the "eventual 

state." 

It is the goal ofthe Commercial Crew to enable a diverse portfolio of commercial transportation 

service capabilities with the intent of allowing for the commercial industry to expand their 

business cases to include NASA's needs, as well as those ofthe public. 

Although FAA licenses are not required for launch or reentry that the Government carries out 

for the Government, NASA has established a close working relationship with the FAA to 

define the requirements, standards, and certification processes for commercial spaceflight 

involving crew and passengers, all which will be used by NASA to certify crew transportation 

systems to transport NASA and NASA-sponsored crews to the ISS. The ultimate goal ofthis 

working relationship is to optimize Government oversight of commercial providers through the 

use of compatible requirements, standards, and processes for certifying or licensing 

commercial crew flights. 

Through COTS and CRS, NASA works closely with the FAA to license launch and reentry 

events of commercial providers. In addition, NASA and the FAA are providing mutual training 

opportunities for key personnel by rotating managers in positions that will promote integration 

between the agencies and through formal training sessions. NASA is also working closely with 

the FAA as it establishes its Commercial Spaceflight Technical Center at KSC. In addition, to 

ensure safety of crew and passengers, NASA will contribute to the FAA and to industry its 

expertise and lessons learned in the inherently risky environment ofspace. 

Enclosure 3
Reply to Attn of:

National Aeronautics and
Space Administration

Mary W. Jackson Building NASA Headquarters
Washington, DC 20546-0001 ?

April 22, 2022
General Law Practice Group
TO: Distribution
FROM: Agency Counsel for Ethics

SUBJECT: Determination Regarding Attendance by NASA Employees at the events in
conjunction with the 2022 Space Launch System/Orion/Exploration Ground
Systems Gateway Suppliers Conference on April 28 — 29, 2022

The Aerojet Rocketdyne, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Jacobs, Northrop Grumman, and
Maxar (the “companies”), will hold the 2022 Gateway Suppliers Conference on April 28
and 29, 2022 at the Capitol Hill Washington Hilton in Washington, DC, from 7:00 a.m. to
7:30 p.m. on April 28 and 7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. on April 29. The companies are jointly in
control of the planning, organizing, and issuing invitations for this event. The invitation
includes two breakfasts, three snacks, one lunch, and an evening reception on the 28",

Approximately 250 people are expected to attend the event. Attendees will have a diversity
of views or interests and will include personnel from other federal agencies, members of
the legislative branch, and representatives from media, and industry. The estimated cost of
the event, including all food and beverages, is approximately $140 per person. Attendance
at this event will allow NASA attendees to exchange information regarding various NASA
programs. I find that the event meets the requirements of a “widely attended gathering” as
defined in 5 C.F.R. § 2635.204(g)(2).

I further determine that there is an Agency interest in having NASA personnel attend the
event because it will provide an opportunity for the invited persons to exchange ideas and
views pertaining to NASA’s policies, programs and operations. NASA employees who do
not have a significant role in a matter affecting the interests of the sponsors may accept an
invitation for free attendance to the event. In those circumstances, I find that the Agency’s
interest in attendance outweighs any concern that the individual may be, or may appear to
be, improperly influenced in the performance of their duties. However, NASA employees
in non-career positions who are required to sign an ethics pledge under Executive Order
13989 may only attend if they reimburse the sponsors the value of the event.!

Additionally, NASA employees who have a significant role in any pending matter affecting
the interests of the sponsors, such as procurement duties, program management, or
negotiating or administering a Space Act Agreement, should seek a separate determination

1 NASA Employees may accept free attendance to the events on the day they are speaking or participating in a
panel discussion pursuant to 5 C.F.R. 2635.203(b)(8)(i).


from their local ethics counselor as to whether they may accept the invitation.. Attendees
are reminded to exercise any COVID-19 precautions appropriate to their individual
situation.

ZW

Adam F, Greenstone
#### MARIE ANDERSON v. HAROLD SOMBERG AND THE LAWTON INSTRUMENT COMPANY, INC.

July 11, 1978.

Petition for certification denied. (See 158 *N. J. Super.*384)
1 The Honorable Joseph F. Bataillon, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 08-1302

___________ Calvin Silva, * * Petitioner-Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the District * of Nebraska. Robert Houston, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Respondent-Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: September 25, 2008 Filed: November 21, 2008

___________ Before BYE, BEAM, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Robert Houston, Director of the Nebras ka Department of Correctional Services, appeals the district court’s 1 decision to grant Calvin Silva’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and to order Silva’s immediate release. Reviewing the district court’s conclusions of law de novo and its factual findings for clear error, Randolph v. Kenna , 276 F.3d 401, 403 (8th Cir. 2002) (standard of review), we affirm, see8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________
EXHIBIT 3.1.3

                      THORNBURG MORTGAGE ASSET CORPORATION
                      ------------------------------------

                              ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT
                              ---------------------


     THORNBURG  MORTGAGE  ASSET  CORPORATION,  a  Maryland  corporation,  hereby
certifies  to the State Department of Assessments and Taxation of Maryland that:

     The  Articles  of  Incorporation  are  hereby  amended  as  follows:

         ARTICLE  SECOND:     Is  hereby  amended  to  read  as  follows:
         ---------------

            "The  name  of  the  corporation  (which  is  hereinafter called the
            "Corporation")  is:

                            THORNBURG MORTGAGE, INC."

This  amendment  of  the  Articles  of  Incorporation  has  been approved by the
directors  and  shareholders  of  the  corporation.

      We,  the  undersigned  President  and  Secretary, swear under penalties of
      perjury that  the  foregoing  is  a  corporate  act.

/S/  Michael B. Jeffers, Secretary             /S/ Larry A. Goldstone, President
----------------------------------             ---------------------------------
By:  Michael B. Jeffers, Secretary             By: Larry A. Goldstone, President

Thornburg  Mortgage,  Inc.
119  E.  Marcy  Street
Santa  Fe,  NM  87501


<PAGE>
No. 87-6594.

#### Wesselman *v.*Seabold, Warden.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council

          - [Docket No. AS10-9]

# AGENCY:

Appraisal Subcommittee of the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

*Description:*                     In accordance with Section 1104(b) of Title XI of the                           ( print page 67969)                        Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989, as amended, notice is hereby given that the Appraisal Subcommittee (ASC) will meet in closed session:                

*Location:*                     FDIC Building, 1776 F Street, NW., Room 4085, Washington, DC 20429.                

*Date:*                     November 10, 2010.                

*Time:*                     Immediately following the ASC open session beginning at 10:30 a.m.                

*Status:*                     Closed.                

## Matters To Be Considered

October 13, 2010 minutes—Closed Session.

Preliminary discussion of State Compliance Reviews.

Dated: October 29, 2010.

Deborah S. Merkle,

Chairman.

[FR Doc. 2010-27909 Filed 11-3-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
<PAGE>

                           BARRY L. FRIEDMAN, P.C.
                         Certified Public Accountant

1582 TULITA DRIVE                                        OFFICE  (702) 361-8414
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89123                                  FAX NO. (702) 896-0278




To Whom It May Concern:                                       February 15, 2000

     The firm of Barry L. Friedman, P.C., Certified Public Accountant consents
to the inclusion of their report of February 15, 2000, on the Financial
Statements of e-commerce group Inc., as of December 31, 1999, in any filing that
are necessary now or in the near future with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission.


Very truly yours,

/s/ Barry L. Friedman
-------------------------
Barry L. Friedman
Certified Public Accountant
MORGAN STANLEY DEAN WITTER
CREDIT CORPORATION

January 7, 2000

As of and for the year ended  December  31,  1999,  Morgan  Stanley  Dean Witter
Credit  Corporation  (the "Company") has complied in all material  respects with
the minimum servicing standards set forth in the Mortgage Bankers Association of
America's Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers. As of and for
this same period, Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co., the Company's parent, had in
effect a fidelity  bond in excess of $25  million  and an errors  and  omissions
policy in excess of $25 million under which the Company was covered.


Nancy S. Donovan
President

Leroy Hodo
Vice President and Controller


2500 Lake Cook Road. 3 West. Riverwoods. Illinois 60015
#### FRANK KOPCZYK v. C. F. & I. STEEL CORPORATION.

July 11, 1978.

Petition for certification denied.
EXHIBIT 32

                                   CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE 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 annual report of Maritime Ventures, Inc.
(the  "Company)  on Form 10-KSB for the year  ended June 30,  2002, Jehu
Hand hereby certifies,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, that to the best of
his knowledge:

            (1)   The annual  report fully complies with the  requirements of
                  Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

/s/ Jehu Hand

Jehu Hand
Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer
(principal executive and financial officer
September 1, 2004





<PAGE>
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

_____________________________

TOM TIBBS; PEGGY TIBBS; HOME 

ADVANTAGE,

 Plaintiffs - Appellees,

v.

RICK KOERBER,

 Defendant - Appellant,

JASON K. VAUGHN; MELANIE F. 

VAUGHN; FREESTYLE HOLDINGS, a 

Utah Limited Liability Company; 

MEDLEY ENTERPRISES, a Utah Limited 

Liability Company; FRANKLIN

SQUIRES, a Utah Limited Liability 

Company; FOUNDERS CAPITAL, a Utah 

Limited Liability Company; FOUNDERS 

CAPITAL INVESTMENTS, a Utah 

Limited Liability Company; FRANKLIN 

SQUIRES INVESTMENTS; ANNUIT 

COEPTIS, a Utah Limited Liability 

Company; GABRIEL S. JOSEPH; 

FINANCIAL INTELLIGENCE, a Utah 

Limited Liability Company; MICHAEL J. 

BALLARD; FIVE PILLARS 

INVESTMENTS, a Utah Limited Liability 

Company; STEPHEN FREESTONE; TSS 

INVESTMENTS, a Utah Limited Liability 

Company; SONNY JENSEN; 

BUTTERFLY PROPERTIES, a Utah 

Limited Liability Company; 

STEVENSBALES, a Utah Limited 

Liability Company; MARK ALLEN 

CRANER; REDLINE INVESTMENTS, a 

No. 10-4120

(D.C. No. 2:08-CV-00787-TC)

(D. of Utah)

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

August 3, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

Appellate Case: 10-4120 Document: 01018469792 Date Filed: 08/03/2010 Page: 1 
2

Utah Limited Liability Company; E. 

PETER HANSEN,

 Defendants. 

_____________________________

ORDER

_____________________________

This matter is before the court on the Appellant’s Voluntary Motion to Dismiss 

and Withdraw Appeal (the “Motion”). Upon consideration the Motion is granted. See

Fed. R. App. P. 42(b). The appeal is dismissed. Each party will bear its own fees and 

costs on appeal. 

A copy of this order will stand as the mandate of this court. The mandate shall 

issue forthwith.

Entered for the Court,

ELIZABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

Appellate Case: 10-4120 Document: 01018469792 Date Filed: 08/03/2010 Page: 2
##### 



Exhibit 99.2

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 on Form 10-Q of Action Performance
Companies, Inc. (the Company) for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, R. David Martin, Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer
of the Company, 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 (15 U.S.C.
78m(a) 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 Company.

/s/ R. David Martin

Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer
August 13, 2002
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

UNIT 82 JOINT VENTURE,

FIVE STAR HOLDING COMPANY, 

INC., FIVE STAR HOLDING

MANAGEMENT, L.L.C., AND

1320/1390 DON HASKINS, LTC.,

 Appellants,

v.

INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL 

BANK OF CHINA, LOS ANGELES 

BRANCH, MAYNARDS INDUSTRIES

(1991) INC. D/B/A MAYNARDS

INDUSTRIES, LTD., AND 

ROBB EVANS, RECEIVER FOR

MEDIACOPY TEXAS, INC.,

 Appellees. 

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-13-00088-CV

Appeal from

327th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC # 2005-1987)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was no error in the 

judgment. We therefore affirm the judgment of the court below. We further order that 

Appellees recover from Appellants and its sureties, if any, see TEX.R.APP.P. 43.5, on the 

judgment and all costs, both in this Court and the court below for which let execution issue. This 

decision shall be certified below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2014.

ANN CRAWFORD McCLURE, Chief Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rivera, and Rodriguez, JJ.

(Rivera, J., not participating)