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





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 South Texas Oil Company (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the
period ended December 31, 2008 (the “Report”), I, Sherry L. Spurlock, Chief
Financial 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 Company.





Date:      March
30, 2009





/s/Sherry L.
      SpurlockSherry
      L. SpurlockChief
      Financial Officer
#### Jas. A. Edwards *v.*Jno. B. Carter, etc.

APPEAL PROM GRAVES COURT OP COMMON PLEAS.

March 7, 1872.

Guardian and Ward — Sale of Infants’ land — Failure of Purchaser to Execute Bond.

If the money to which the appellant was entitled, was otherwise secured, the failure of the purchaser to execute hond does not affect the sale.

Same.

A sale of an infant’s land cannot he impeached in a collateral proceeding.

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Lindsay:

Neither the judgment, nor the sale, deed, conveyance made pursuant thereto, in the proceeding by the statutory guardian of appellant for the sale of the land in controversy, were void. The facts set out in the petition gave the court jurisdiction. The' necessary bond was executed to secure to the infants the proceeds of the sale of their lands. The report of the commissioners was in substantial conformity to the law. The failure of the purchaser to execute the bonds required to be given by the judgment did not necessarily render the sale invalid.

If the money to which appellant was entitled could be and was otherwise.secured it is difficult to perceive any valid reason for attaching to the failure of the purchaser to execute those bonds the penalty of having his purchase treated as a nullity.

The conveyance executed in obedience to the order of the court was a sufficient confirmation of the sale.

*60
      *L. Anderson, for appellant.*

*Williams, Tice*& *Miller, for appellees.*

We are not prepared to decide from the facts before us that because the land was purchased by the statutory guardian he held the title in trust for his ward, but even if such be the case, his vendees can not be compelled.to surrender their possession in a proceeding like this.

. The sale as before stated was not void, and it can not be impeached in a collateral proceeding.

Judgment *affirmed.*
#### James A. Polhamus *et al.*plaintiffs and respondents, *vs.*William Moser, impleaded, &c. defendant and appellant.

1. Neither the verdict of a jury, nor the report of a referee, or decision of a single judge without a jury, (which are put on the same footing by the Code of Procedure, §§ 268, 348,) is to be set aside upon a question of fact, where the evidence is conflicting, without a great preponderance of evidence against the conclusions arrived at therein, except possibly in equity cases.

2. The presumption of law is in favor of the good faith, diligence, intelligence, experience and knowledge of mankind, of such tribunal, and every intendment is to be made to support that presumption, so that if any possible view of the evidence, although apparently strained, will justify its finding, that is to be adopted.

3. It is not enough that the appellate court would have decided the other way, if the question were *res integra.*

4. The evidence must be so overwhelming against the finding, that without much aid from counsel the court can discover that it was so manifestly wrong that nothing but fraud, bias, mistake, perhaps inability to weigh the force of the evidence, or possibly oversight of material facts, could account for it.

6. In cases where the evidence is conflicting, and there are questions of credibility involved, a new trial should strictly only bé granted, on the ground that the verdict _is against the weight of evidence, where'the mere orderly statement of the evidence and of the points at issue on which it bears would startle the court by the injustice of the finding, without any elaborate argument, or the assistance of counsel. *Per*Robertson, Ch. J.

6. A court is not absolutely bound to exclude a piece of evidence as irrelevant, if it may be made relevant by a connection with other evidence; and it may rely on the promise of counsel to make it so. If the connecting links are not introduced by the party offering the evidence, the remedy of the opposite party is to move to strike it out; or, if the trial is before a jury, to ask the court to instruct the jury to disregard it.

*t.*Inasmuch as no one can prove at once a mass of facts tending to assist a defense or claim, a party must begin with some one fact; and it is matter of discretion for the court, with which he shall be allowed to begin. *Per*Robertson, Ch. J.

(Before Robertson, Ch. J., and Barbour and Monell, JJ.)

Heard April 13, 1868;

decided May 12, 1868.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT

EverettMcKinley Dirksen United StatesCourthouse

 Room 2722 - 219 S. Dearborn Street

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Office of the Clerk

Phone: (312) 435-5850

www.ca7.uscourts.gov

CIRCUIT RULE 3(b) NOTICE

June 24, 2020

No. 20-2090

IN RE:

 ABDUL AZEEM MOHAMMED, 

 Defendant - Appellant

 Originating Case Information:

District Court No: 1:20-cv-03479

Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division

District Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer

Clerk/Agency Rep Thomas G. Bruton

Circuit Rule 3(b) empowers the clerk to dismiss an appeal if the docket fee is not paid within

fourteen (14) days of the docketing of the appeal. This appeal was docketed on

June 24, 2020. The District Court has indicated that as of June 24, 2020, the docket fee has not

been paid. Depending on your situation, you should:

1. Pay the required $500.00 docketing fee PLUS the $5.00 notice of appeal filing

fee to the District Court Clerk, if you have not already done so. The Court of

Appeals cannot accept this fee. You should keep a copy of the receipt for your

records.

2.

File a motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis with the District Court, if

you have not already done so. An original and three (3) copies of that motion,

with proof of service on your opponent, is required. This motion must be

supported by a sworn affidavit in the form prescribed by Form 4 of the

Appendix of Forms to the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure (as amended

12/01/2013), listing the assets and income of the appellant(s).

3. If the motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis is denied by the district

court, you must either pay the required $500.00 docketing fee PLUS the $5.00

notice of appeal filing fee to the District Court Clerk, within fourteen (14) days

after service of notice of the action to the district court, or within thirty (30)

days of that date, renew your motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis

with this court.

Case: 20-2090 Document: 1-4 Filed: 06/24/2020 Pages: 2

Case: 1:20-cv-03479 Document #: 6 Filed: 06/24/20 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:13
If the motion is renewed in this court, it must comply with the terms of Fed.R.App.P. 24(a).

If one of the above stated actions is not taken, the appeal will be dismissed.

form name: c7_DC_Fee_Notice_Sent(form ID: 158)

Case: 20-2090 Document: 1-4 Filed: 06/24/2020 Pages: 2

Case: 1:20-cv-03479 Document #: 6 Filed: 06/24/20 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:14
EXHIBIT  32.1

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


     In  connection  with  the  Quarterly report of American Fire Retardant Corp
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2002, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report") I,
Raoul  L.  Carroll, Chief Executive 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) 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.

                              Dated:  November  18,  2003

                              By  /s/Raoul  L.  Carroll
                                  -----------------------
                                  Raoul  L.  Carroll,  Chief  Executive  Officer
                                  American  Fire  Retardant  Corp



                                       24
<PAGE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                         190,600
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,575
<PP&E>                                         264,213
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,315
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 455,073
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,927
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           248
<OTHER-SE>                                     352,477
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   455,073
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                11,866
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,701
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 168
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,377
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,377
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,377
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .34
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .34
        

</TABLE>
1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

ANDY HOPE WILLIAMS JR., ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiff, ) No. 20 CV 2549 

 ) 

 vs. ) Honorable Judge John J. Tharp, Jr. 

 ) 

OFFICER MATTHEW HUBER, OFFICER ) 

TIMOTHY YOUNG, OFFICER ANDREW ) 

MARTIN and OFFICER ANTONIO ) Jury Trial Demanded 

PISCOPO, ) 

 ) 

 Defendants. ) 

JOINT STATUS REPORT

 In accordance with this Court’s Order of January 9, 2023 (Doc. # 86), the parties submit 

this report as to the status of Plaintiff’s criminal proceeding: 

1. Plaintiff apologizes to the court for the overdue status report that was due on April 

6, 2023. 

2. Plaintiff reports that the trial has been delayed. 

 3. Specifically, Plaintiff’s next court date is set for April 20, 2023 for a hearing on 

discovery. 

Respectfully Submitted, 

By: /s Andy Hope Williams, Jr. CITY OF AURORA, et al., Defendants 

 Plaintiff 

 By: /s/ John B. Murphey______________

Andy Hope Williams Jr. John B. Murphey

P.O. Box 681 Odelson, Sterk, Murphey, Frazier & McGrath, 

Westmont, IL 60559 Ltd.

630-479-7330 3318 West 95th Street

hope5780@yahoo.com Evergreen Park, Illinois 60805 

 708-424-5678 

 jmurphey@osmfm.com

FILED 4/11/2023

THOMAS G. BRUTON CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT

EW

Case: 1:20-cv-02549 Document #: 88 Filed: 04/11/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:487
2 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 I hereby certify that on April 11, 2023, I electronically filed the foregoing document with 

the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of said filing to all 

parties listed below: 

JOHN B. MURPHEY 

Odelson, Sterk, Murphey, Frazier & McGrath, Ltd. 

3318 West 95th Street 

Evergreen Park, Illinois 60805 

Tel: 708-424-5678 

jmurphey@osmfm.com

 By: /s/ Andy Hope Williams Jr 

Andy Hope Williams Jr.

P.O. Box 681

Westmont, IL 60559

630-479-7330

hope5780@yahoo.com

 

Case: 1:20-cv-02549 Document #: 88 Filed: 04/11/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:488
Exhibit 31.1

SARBANES-OXLEY SECTION 302(a) CERTIFICATION

Principal Executive Officer & Principal Financial Officer

I, Andrei Stytsenko, certify that:

1. 	I have reviewed this annual report of Metalex Resources, Inc.;

2. 	Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. 	Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. 	The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a) 	designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) 	evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) 	disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. 	The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) 	all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) 	any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.



|Date: July 8, 2005 | /s/ Andrei Stytsenko                                       
|------------------ | -----------------------------------------------------------
|                   | Andrei Stytsenko                                           
|                   | Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer



---
EXHIBIT  15.30

 

 

 

May 12, 2008

 

Dollar Thrifty Automotive Group, Inc.

5330 East 31st Street

Tulsa, Oklahoma 74135

 

We have reviewed, in accordance with the standards of thePublic Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the unaudited condensed consolidated interim financial information of Dollar Thrifty Automotive Group,Inc. and subsidiaries for the periods ended March 31, 2008 and 2007, as indicated in our report dated May 12, 2008; because we did not performan audit, we expressed no opinion on that information.

 

We are aware that our report referred to above, whichis included in your Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2008, is incorporated by reference in RegistrationStatements No. 333-79603, No. 333-89189, No. 333-33144, No. 333-33146, No. 333-50800, and No. 333-128714 on Form S-8.

 

We also are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuantto Rule 436(c) under the Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of the Registration Statement prepared or certified by anaccountant or a report prepared or certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.

 

/s/  Deloitte & Touche LLP

Tulsa, Oklahoma
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-22-00409-CV

__________________

GOOD DEAL TRUCKING, INC. AND THEODORE PUTMAN, Appellants

V.

MARY GERAC, Appellee

__________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 60th District Court

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Cause No. B-208,118

__________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On November 4, 2022, Good Deal Trucking, Inc. and Theodore Putman filed 

a notice of appealfrom an order on a motion for sanctions.1 We questioned whether 

the trial court had signed a final judgment for an order that is appealable as an 

accelerated appeal. Neither party responded to this Court’s warning that we would 

1This order was the subject of a separate original proceeding or a writ of 

mandamus. See In re Putman, No. 09-22-00358-CV, 2022 WL 17491736 (Tex. 

App.—Beaumont Dec. 8, 2022, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.).
2

dismiss the appeal unless our jurisdiction over the appeal was established. 

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 

42.3(a), 43.2(f).

APPEAL DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM

Submitted on January 11, 2023

Opinion Delivered January 12, 2023

Before Golemon, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Claire A. O'Shea","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/claireaoshea\/","title":"Next Generation Experimental Aircraft Becomes NASA\u2019s Newest X-Plane","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"oZTeSy7BsX\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/next-generation-experimental-aircraft-becomes-nasas-newest-x-plane\/\">Next Generation Experimental Aircraft Becomes NASA\u2019s Newest X-Plane<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/next-generation-experimental-aircraft-becomes-nasas-newest-x-plane\/embed\/#?secret=oZTeSy7BsX\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Next Generation Experimental Aircraft Becomes NASA\u2019s Newest X-Plane” — NASA\" data-secret=\"oZTeSy7BsX\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/sustainable-aviation-v2-16x9-2-1.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":338}
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"Space Station Crew Members Tour NASA Facility, Talk Earth Science","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"hbJE0o25fC\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/space-station-crew-members-tour-nasa-facility-talk-earth-science\/\">Space Station Crew Members Tour NASA Facility, Talk Earth Science<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/space-station-crew-members-tour-nasa-facility-talk-earth-science\/embed\/#?secret=hbJE0o25fC\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Space Station Crew Members Tour NASA Facility, Talk Earth Science” — NASA\" data-secret=\"hbJE0o25fC\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/09\/m14-149.png?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":366}