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

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

  Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.ss.1350)

Pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 (18  U.S.C.ss.1350),
the undersigned,  Amine Selmani, Chief Executive Officer of BioSyntech,  Inc., a
Nevada corporation (the "Company"), does hereby certify, to his knowledge, that:

The Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2003 of the
Company (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 Company.

                                                 /s/Amine Selmani
                                                 -------------------------------
                                                 Amine Selmani, PhD
                                                 Chief Executive Officer
                                                 July 14, 2003
```
FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

February 16, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

STICHTING MAYFLOWER

MOUNTAIN FONDS; STICHTING

MAYFLOWER RECREATIONAL

FONDS, 

Plaintiff-Counter-

 Defendants - Appellants, 

v. 

UNITED PARK CITY MINES, CO., 

Defendant-Counter-

 Claimant - Appellee, 

CITY OF PARK CITY, UTAH, 

 Defendant, 

v. 

ARIE CORNELIS BOGERD, an

individual and citizen of Hei-en

Boeicop, Netherlands;

MAYFINANANCE CV, a Netherlands

commanditaire vennotschap;

STICHTING BEHEER MAYFLOWER

PROJECT, a Netherlands Foundation, 

 Counterclaim-

 Defendants - Appellants.

No. 09-4187

(D.C. No. 2:04-CV-00925-DAK)

(D. of Utah)

ORDER

Appellate Case: 09-4187 Document: 01018367181 Date Filed: 02/16/2010 Page: 1 
2

Before TACHA, BRISCOE, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

This appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. At the time the notice of

appeal was filed, the district court had not entered a final appealable order. See

Nolan v. U.S. Dept. of Justice, 973 F.2d 843, 846 (10th Cir. 1992) (“Merely

submitting a final district court order for the purpose of perfecting a premature

appeal does not automatically effectuate the appeal of every judgment or order

rendered in the entire case.”). 

Therefore, this court lacks jurisdiction over the imposition of sanctions. 

See D & H Marketers, Inc. V. Freedom Oil & Gas, 744 f.2d 1443, 1445-46 (10th

Cir. 1984) (parties may not file interlocutory appeals from the imposition of

sanctions) See also Cunningham v. Hamilton County, 527 U.S. 198, 210 (1999)

(“we conclude that a sanctions order imposed on an attorney is not a ‘final

decision’ under § 1291"); G.J.B. & Associates, Inc. v. Singleton, 913 F.2d 824,

827 (10th Cir. 1990) (“[A] sanction order against an attorney currently of record

is not a final decision for purposes of a [28 U.S.C.] § 1291 appeal where the

underlying controversy remains unresolved.”)

The court also lacks jurisdiction over the district court’s entry of default

judgment as to liability. See Albright v. UNUM Life Insurance Co., 59 F.3d 1089,

1092093 (10th Cir. 1995) (an order which determines liability only and leaves

damages to be calculated is not final).

Appellate Case: 09-4187 Document: 01018367181 Date Filed: 02/16/2010 Page: 2 
3

The parties argue that since judgment has been entered the jurisdictional

issue here is moot. However, if the judgment is final, a new notice of appeal

must be filed. See Nolan, 973 F.2d at 846 (10th Cir. 1992). 

APPEAL DISMISSED.

Entered for the Court

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

Ellen Rich Reiter

Deputy Clerk/Jurisdictional Attorney

Appellate Case: 09-4187 Document: 01018367181 Date Filed: 02/16/2010 Page: 3
#### Commonwealth *v.*H. M. Stell.

Criminal Law — Selling Intoxicating Liquor to Minor — Landlord’s Liability.

The selling of liquor to a minor without the ■written order of his parent, guardian, etc., is a personal offense by the one who actually sells, and does not make the landlord liable unless it can be proven by sufficient evidence that he knew of, or authorized, or assented to it.

APPEAL EROM NICHOLAS CIRCUIT COURT.

June 11, 1867.

Opinion oe the Oourt by

Judge Williams:

The selling of liquor to a minor without the written order of his parent, guardian, etc., is a personal offense by the one who actually sells, and does not make the landlord liable unless it can be presumed from the evidence he knew of, or authorized, or assented to it.

The selling as proved was by the barkeeper and the evidence does not authorize the inference that the defendant authorized, approbated, or knew of it.

Wherefore, the judgment is affirmed.
EXHIBIT 32.2

                    CARGO CONNECTION LOGISTICS HOLDING, INC.
                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

In connection with the Annual Report of Cargo Connection Logistics Holding, Inc.
(the  "Company") on Form 10-KSB/A (No. 1) for the year ending December 31, 2006,
as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the
"Report"),  I, Scott Goodman,  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 of the Company as of the dates presented and
the 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.

Dated:  November 27, 2007


                                                   /s/ Scott Goodman
                                                ------------------------------
                                                Scott Goodman
                                                Chief Financial Officer
                                                (Principal Financial Officer)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       1,667,405
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                       1,480,568
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               100,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                             1,097,738
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 24,864,760
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                      18,587,864
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                        18,559,636
<LOANS>                                    109,100,026
<ALLOWANCE>                                    778,123
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             160,875,696
<DEPOSITS>                                 132,205,551
<SHORT-TERM>                                 8,500,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          1,389,989
<LONG-TERM>                                    706,406
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     4,868,530
<OTHER-SE>                                  12,058,924
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             160,875,696
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              2,394,912
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              738,594
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                35,852
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             3,169,358
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           1,604,149
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,726,704
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        1,442,654
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   67,955
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                             175,446
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                893,484
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                776,979
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     776,979
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   450,450
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .42
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .42
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.71
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                   536,000
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                              1,400,000
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               710,168
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              778,123
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           302,193
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        475,930
        


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            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 WNC  California
Housing Tax Credits III, L.P. (the  "Partnership") for the period ended December
31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"),  and pursuant to 18 U.S.C., section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  I,  Wilfred N.  Cooper,  Jr.,
President and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc., general partner
of the general partner of the Partnership, 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; and

2.     The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
       respects,  the  financial  condition  and result of  operations of the
       Partnership.




/s/WILFRED N. COOPER, JR.
-------------------------
Wilfred N. Cooper, Jr.
President and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.

February 9, 2004
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SERGIO REYES-ALVAREZ, AKA

Sergio Alvarez, AKA Sergio Reyes

Alvarez,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 13-73487

Agency No. A079-375-811

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Argued and Submitted December 10, 2014

San Francisco, California

Before: KOZINSKI, RAWLINSON, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

Petitioner Sergio Reyes-Alvarez (Reyes-Alvarez) petitions for review of a

decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing his appeal. 

Reyes-Alvarez contends that the BIA erred in concluding that his California

FILED

MAR 18 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

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

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
conviction for lewd and lascivious acts upon a child aged 14 or 15 is categorically

a conviction for a “crime of child abuse.” 

Giving Chevron deference to the BIA’s definition of the federal generic

offense of a crime of child abuse, Reyes-Alvarez’s California conviction is a

categorical match. See Ceron v. Holder, 747 F.3d 773, 778 (9th Cir. 2014) (en

banc) (explaining that we defer to the BIA’s definition of a federal generic offense

under “the Chevron framework if the decision is published or directly controlled

by a published decision”).

 The mens rea requirement of California Penal Code § 288(c)(1) fits within

the federal generic definition because section 288(c)(1) punishes only “willful[]”

acts, while the federal generic crime encompasses anything from “criminally

negligent” to “intentional” acts. Matter of Velazquez-Herrera, 24 I. & N. Dec.

503, 512 (BIA 2008) (defining “crime of child abuse broadly” as “any offense

involving an intentional, knowing, reckless, or criminally negligent act or omission

that constitutes maltreatment of a [person under 18 years old] or that impairs [such

a person’s] physical or mental well-being, including sexual abuse or exploitation”). 

Section 288(c)(1) also meets the actus reus requirement in the federal definition

because a “lewd and lascivious act” upon a child necessarily involves

“maltreatment” of the child. Id.; see also People v. Shockley, 314 P.3d 798, 800

2
(Cal. 2013) (noting that § 288 “assumes that young victims suffer profound harm

whenever they are perceived and used as objects of sexual desire”).

As Reyes-Alvarez has not sought a stay of removal from the BIA and has

not shown that a stay of removal is warranted pending a collateral challenge to his

state court conviction, the request for a stay is denied. See Leiva-Perez v. Holder,

640 F.3d 962, 971 (9th Cir. 2011). 

PETITION DENIED.

3
# Monica Aquino-Thieman

Monica Aquino-Thieman is the Director of the NASA Acquisition Integrity Program (Fraud Remedies) and the Agency Counsel for Acquisition Integrity. She serves as the primary Agency authority in the substantive law of acquisition integrity, including procurement fraud and other contracting irregularities, grant and other non-procurement fraud, anti-corruption, and counterfeit parts. She oversees the Agency’s Acquisition Integrity Program (AIP), which supports NASA’s mission by improving the effectiveness of Agency operations by combating fraud and advancing NASA’s core values of safety, integrity, teamwork, and excellence by promoting integrity and accountability in the acquisition process.

In her capacity as Director, she serves as the Coordination of Remedies Official for investigations of fraud and public corruption. She also is Counsel to the NASA Suspending and Debarring Official. She has chaired the NASA Counterfeit Parts Working Group since 2008 and previously co-chaired the Department of Defense Procurement Fraud Working Group for several years. Currently, she is a suspension and debarment instructor for the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. Prior to her current position at NASA, she was the NASA Eastern Region Coordinator and Senior Attorney for procurement fraud matters.

Prior to joining NASA in 2006, Monica specialized in both litigation and government contracts at Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw LLP, one of the ten largest law firms world-wide at the time. She also was a trial and appellate litigation attorney at McKenna & Cuneo LLP, a national law firm based in Washington, DC.

Monica, a Dual Admissions Honors Program in Law graduate, earned her Juris Doctor degree at the University of Miami School of Law and a Bachelor of Arts degree at the University of Miami where she served as the Undergraduate Student Government President.
#### Daniel & Scott *v.*Southern Bank of Kentucky et al.

Execution Sale — Rescission of Contract.

If there are such irregularities in the proceedings out of which an execution sale is made as to render the sale void, the purchaser must tender back the property within a reasonable time after the discovery of the irregularities or offer a good and sufficient reason for not making the tender, before he is entitled to a rescission of the contract.

APPEAL FROM MARSHALL CIRCUIT COURT.

September 28, 1866.

Opinion of the Court by

Judgb Peters :

The sheriff of Galloway county, by virtue of an execution then in his hands against the estate of Bryant Downing and others, sold the slaves of said Downing on a credit of three months, two of whom appellant Daniel purchased and executed his bond for their price, with appellant Scott as his surety. After said bond matured the obligors filed their petition in equity to rescind the contract and properly enjoin the collection of the money, on the ground that they had by the alleged purchase acquired no title to the slaves.

They allege in their petition that Downing, previous to the sale, had died, leaving his .last will, which had been properly proved and admitted to record, by which he had emancipated said slaves, that their parents had threatened to bring suit for their freedom, and they feared they would suffer the loss of the price they had bound themselves in their bond to pay, if its collection was coerced. They also allege that there were irregularities and errors in the proceedings to and at the sale sufficient to render it void, which we need *403not recite *in extemo,*but wbicb are relied upon as additional grounds for setting aside the contract.

The grounds relied upon for the relief asked appellants allege were unknown to them at the time they executed the bond.

The negToes are not made defendants to the action, and there is no allegation that any suit had been instituted by the negroes themselves, or any one for them, to establish their rights of freedom, or that appellants or their vendee (for it is conceded in argument that appellants had sold them before they instituted this action) had in any way been disturbed in the possession of the negroes.

But if the facts alleged exist, and appellants were ignorant of them, in order to entitle them to a rescission they should have tendered the negroes back within a reasonable time after the discovery of those facts, or should have offered a good and sufficient reason for not making the tender, neither of which they have done, and for this reason, if for no other, a rescission could not be adjudged.

Moreover, the evidence shows that appellant Daniel when he purchased was apprised of the existence of the will and of the other irregularities of which complaint is now made, and urged the sale notwithstanding and became the purchaser to speculate on the chance's.

Appellants have failed to show that they are entitled to any relief and the judgment’must, therefore, be affirmed.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

July 15, 2019

No. 04

- 18

- 0025 2

- CR

Benjamin ESCOBEDO

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 227th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2016CR4634 Honorable Kevin M. O'Connell, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

On December 27, 2018, this court issued its opinion in this appeal . Appellant did not file a motion for reconsideration or rehearing en banc . On May 8, 2019, the court of criminal appeals refused appellant’s pro se petition for discretionary review. On June 6, 2019, appellant filed a motion to amend the judgment, which this court denied on June 14, 2019. T he mandate issued on June 17, 2019.

O n July 9, 2019, appellant filed a motion for en banc reconsideration of his motion to amend the judgment . Because the mandate in this cause has issued , we lack jurisdiction to consider appellant’s motion. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 19.3. Accordingly, appellant’s motion is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

_________________________________ Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 15th day of July, 2019

.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HOTTLE

, Clerk of Court
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.3

                            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 Thornburg Mortgage, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Richard
P. Story, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer 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.


/s/ Richard P. Story

Richard P. Story
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
May 14, 2003

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Thornburg Mortgage, Inc. and will be retained by Thornburg Mortgage,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-13-00816-CV

In re Tommy M. Adams

D. K., Sr., Appellant

v.

Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Appellee

FROM THE 35TH DISTRICT COURT OF MILLS COUNTY, 

NO. 12-10-6415, THE HONORABLE STEPHEN ELLIS, JUDGE PRESIDING

O R D E R T O S H O W C A U S E

PER CURIAM

This is a contempt proceeding ancillary to the appeal of D. K., Sr. The subject of 

this proceeding is Tommy M. Adams, appellant’s attorney.

Appellant filed his notice of appeal on November 12, 2013, and his brief was due 

January 22, 2014. On January 31, 2014, we ordered counsel to file appellant’s brief no later than 

February 18, 2014. To date, appellant’s brief has not been filed. 

Therefore, it is hereby ordered that Tommy M. Adams shall appear in person

before this Court on Tuesday, March 18, 2014 at 1:30 p.m., in the Third Court of Appeals 

courtroom, located on the first floor of the Price Daniel, Sr. Building, 209 West 14th Street, in 
Austin, Travis County, Texas, to show cause why he should not be held in contempt and have 

sanctions imposed for his failure to obey our January 31, 2014 order. This order to show cause 

will be withdrawn and Adams will be relieved of his obligation to appear before this Court as 

ordered above if the Clerk of this Court receives appellant’s brief by Friday, March 14, 2014 at

5:00 p.m.

It is ordered on February 25, 2014.

Before Justices Puryear, Goodwin and Field
## U nit edSta tes C ou rt o f A pp eal s For t h e Firs t C ircu it

No. 08-2277 ARIEL MICHAEL PUNZALAN, Petitioner,

v . ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent.

ERRATA SHEET The opinion of this Court issued on August 5, 2009, is amended as follows: On page 9, line 15, "March 17, 2007" should be replaced with "March 17, 2006"
Exhibit 32.1

                           Certifications Pursuant to
                  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
                            (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)

      In connection with the Annual Report of BPK Resources, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "report"), I, Christopher H.
Giordano, Chief Executive Officer and Treasurer of the Company, do hereby
certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.
ss. 1350), 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; 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/ Christopher H. Giordano
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Christopher H. Giordano
                                           Chief Executive Officer and Treasurer


Date:  May 16, 2005