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

**CERTIFICATION**

 

 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, the undersigned officer of ING USA Annuity and Life Insurance Company (the “Company”) hereby certifies that, to the officer’s knowledge, the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 

| November 6, 2009 | By: /s/ | David A. Wheat                                                                                                   |
|------------------|--------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (Date)           |         | David A. Wheat

Executive Vice President and

Chief Financial Officer

  |

 

 

 

 

----
Order entered November 2, 2021

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-01137-CR

NICHOLAS RYAN NADEAU, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 296th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 296-83228-2018

ORDER

Before the Court is appellant’s October 13, 2021 motion to abate the appeal 

for a hearing. In the motion, appellant states the appellate record contains 

conflicting rulings on appellant’s August 7, 2019 motion to suppress.

Although the trial court signed an order on August 8, 2019, granting 

appellant’s motion to suppress, the docket sheet shows the trial court held a 

suppression hearing on August 15, 2019 and denied the motion to suppress. The 

reporter’s record of the August 15, 2019 hearing on the motion to suppress
confirms the trial court denied appellant’s motion to suppress in open court. During 

trial, the State offered and the trial court admitted without objection the evidence 

appellant sought to suppress.

Under these circumstances, we DENY appellant’s motion to abate without 

prejudice to raising this issue in his brief.

We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order to the Honorable John 

Roach, Jr., Presiding Judge, 296th Judicial District Court; to Maria Tu; and to the 

Collin County District Attorney.

/s/ LANA MYERS 

JUSTICE
Exhibit 31
                                  ----------


                                 CERTIFICATION
                                 -------------

        I, Steve Bailey, certify that:

        1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all reports on
        Form 8-K containing distribution and servicing reports filed in
        respect of periods included in the year covered by this annual report,
        of CWALT, Inc., Alternative Loan Trust 2004-9T1;

        2. Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a
        whole, 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 as of the last day of the period covered by this annual
        report;

        3. Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information
        required to be provided to the trustee by the master servicer under
        the pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement, for inclusion in
        these reports is included in these reports;

        4. I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
        master servicer under the pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement
        and based upon my knowledge and the annual compliance review required
        under that agreement, and except as disclosed in the reports, the
        master servicer has fulfilled its obligations under that agreement;
        and

        5. The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the
        master servicer's compliance with the minimum servicing standards
        based upon the report provided by an independent public accountant,
        after conducting a review in compliance with the Uniform Single
        Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers or similar procedure, as set
        forth in the pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement, that is
        included in these reports.

        In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on
        information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: The
        Bank of New York, as Trustee, and Litton Loan Servicing LP.

        Date: March 29, 2005

                                  /s/ Steve Bailey
                                  -----------------
                                  Steve Bailey
                                  Senior Managing Director
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 454 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                          June 4, 1998.
    Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to 
consider in the House the resolution (H. Con. Res. 285) expressing the sense of 
the Congress that the President of the United States should reconsider his 
decision to be formally received in Tiananmen Square by the Government of the 
People's Republic of China. The resolution shall be considered as read for 
amendment. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the 
resolution to final adoption without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of 
debate on the resolution equally divided and controlled by the Majority Leader 
or his designee and a Member opposed to the resolution; and (2) one motion to 
recommit.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
HAVANA REPUBLIC, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES FORM 10-QSB FOR THE NINE MONTH PERIOD
ENDED MARCH 31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         871,642
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  6,999
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    774,455
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               2,272,296
<PP&E>                                         458,089
<DEPRECIATION>                                 63,907
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 2,730,022
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          360,077
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    2,583,450
<COMMON>                                       2,201,339
<OTHER-SE>                                     (2,414,844)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   2,730,022
<SALES>                                        480,400
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               480,400
<CGS>                                          268,222
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  268,222
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               799,069
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             19,431
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (592,983)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (592,983)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (592,983)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.13)
        


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3858 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.3858

                       One Hundred Eighth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
           the twentieth day of January, two thousand and four

                                 An Act

 
    To amend the Public Health Service Act to increase the supply of 
     pancreatic islet cells for research, and to provide for better 
     coordination of Federal efforts and information on islet cell 
                            transplantation.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Pancreatic Islet Cell 
Transplantation Act of 2004''.

SEC. 2. ORGAN PROCUREMENT ORGANIZATION CERTIFICATION.

    Section 371 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 273) is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(c) Pancreata procured by an organ procurement organization and 
used for islet cell transplantation or research shall be counted for 
purposes of certification or recertification under subsection (b).''.

SEC. 3. ANNUAL ASSESSMENT ON PANCREATIC ISLET CELL TRANSPLANTATION.

    Section 429 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 285c-3) is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(d) In each annual report prepared by the Diabetes Mellitus 
Interagency Coordinating Committee pursuant to subsection (c), the 
Committee shall include an assessment of the Federal activities and 
programs related to pancreatic islet cell transplantation. Such 
assessment shall, at a minimum, address the following:
        ``(1) The adequacy of Federal funding for taking advantage of 
    scientific opportunities relating to pancreatic islet cell 
    transplantation.
        ``(2) Current policies and regulations affecting the supply of 
    pancreata for islet cell transplantation.
        ``(3) The effect of xenotransplantation on advancing pancreatic 
    islet cell transplantation.
        ``(4) The effect of United Network for Organ Sharing policies 
    regarding pancreas retrieval and islet cell transplantation.
        ``(5) The existing mechanisms to collect and coordinate 
    outcomes data from existing islet cell transplantation trials.
        ``(6) Implementation of multiagency clinical investigations of 
    pancreatic islet cell transplantation.
        ``(7) Recommendations for such legislation and administrative 
    actions as the Committee considers appropriate to increase the 
    supply of pancreata available for islet cell transplantation.''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
EXHIBIT 32.2


CERTIFICATION





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Mercari Communications Group, Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended February 28, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report), Tim F. Holderbaum, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his knowledge, 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/ Tim F. HolderbaumTim F. HolderbaumTitle: Chief Financial OfficerDate: April 5, 2011








This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

October 24, 2012

p1017

Order 

October 24, 2012

145101

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 145101

COA: 305747

Eaton CC: 11-000404-AR

DONALD EBRAHIMI,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 16, 2012 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
#### GRIFFIN v. GRIFFIN

No. 276PA97

Case below: 126 N.C.App. 224

Petition by third party defendants (Michael Griffin, et al) for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 allowed 23 July 1997 as to the issue dealing with the sufficiency of notice given about the hearing on sanctions; as to all other issues denied. Motion by defendants (Jo and David Bullock) to dismiss appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question denied 23 July 1997.
9703.

#### Dove *et al. v.*Alford.

Decided January 14, 1919.

Complaint; from Madison superior court—Judge W. L. Hodges. March 4, 1918.

*Alex. S. Johnson,*for plaintiffs in error.

*C. E. Adams,*contra.

Jenkins, J.

Where the defendant to a suit in the superior court fails to answer at the appearance term, but the judge fails during that term to enter the case as in default, it is the right and privilege of the defendant, so long as the case is pending and not so marked, to file his defense at a subsequent term. But the mere failure of the judge during the first term to mark the case on the docket as in default does not give the defendant the additional right to treat the subsequent term at which his plea is filed as the appearance term, and to require that the case go over to still another term for trial.

*Judgment 'affirmed.*

*Wade, C. J., and Luke, J., concur.*
UNITED STATES
                       SECURITIES and EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             Washington, D.C. 20549

                                    FORM 10-Q/A

         (Mark One)
  X      QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
 ---     EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
         For the quarterly period ended September 30, 1996 OR


         TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
---      EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

         For the transition period from ___________ to ___________

                          Commission File Number 1-9997

                               KOGER EQUITY, INC.
             (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

                FLORIDA                          59-2898045
   (State or other jurisdiction of             (I.R.S. Employer
    incorporation or organizatio              Identification No.)


  3986 BOULEVARD CENTER DRIVE, SUITE 101
           JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA                       32207
  (Address of principal executive offices)          (Zip Code)

       Registrant's telephone number, including area code: (904) 398-3403

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required
to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during
the  preceding 12 months (or for such  shorter  period that the  registrant  was
required  to file  such  reports),  and  (2) has  been  subject  to such  filing
requirements for the past 90 days.

Yes   X    No
     ---
Indicate the number of shares  outstanding  of each of the  issuer's  classes of
common stock, as of the close of the latest practicable date.

       Class                              Outstanding at November 1, 1996
 Common Stock, $.01 par value                     20,886,436 shares


<PAGE>
9594.

#### Lee Brothers *et al. v.*Bewley-Darst Coal Company.

Decided October 16, 1918.

Complaint; from Newton superior court—Judge Smith. January 7, 1918.

*King & Johnson,*for plaintiff in error. *Rogers & Knox,*contra.

Luke, J.

1. Where an executory contract for the sale of goods provides for the- delivery of the goods on order during a certain period, time is of the essence of the contract, and a failure to order delivery during -that period, terminates the right to order shipment of the goods. *Bearden Mercantile Co.*v. *Madison Oil Co.,*128 *Ga.*605. (58 S. E. 200); *Caddick Milling Co.*v. *Moultrie Grocery Co., 22 Ga. App.*524 (96 S. E. 583). See *Gude*v. *Bailey Co.,*4 *Ga. App.*226 (61 S. E. 135).

2. The evidence demanded a verdict in favor of the plaintiff. It was not error, for any reason assigned, to overrule the motion for a new trial.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Wade, O. J., and Jenkins,*J.-, *concur.*
Exhibit 10(el)2

                                 AMENDMENT NO. 2
                                       TO
                      DISTRIBUTION AND MARKETING AGREEMENT

This  Amendment  No.  2  to  Distribution  and  Marketing   Agreement   ("Second
Amendment") is dated as of April 21, 2004 between Artera Group, Inc., a Delaware
corporation ("Artera"), and Avaya Inc., a Delaware corporation ("Avaya").

WHEREAS, Artera and Avaya are parties to that certain Distribution and Marketing
Agreement  dated as of April 21,  2003,  as amended by  Amendment  No. 1 thereto
dated as of October 8, 2003 (as so amended, "Distribution Agreement");

WHEREAS,  the parties wish to extend the term of the  Distribution  Agreement as
described herein.

NOW,  THEREFORE,  in consideration of the mutual covenants  contained herein, as
well as other good and valuable  consideration,  the receipt and  sufficiency of
which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:

TERM

Article  7 of the  Distribution  Agreement  is  hereby  amended  to  read in its
entirety as follows:

     "The term of this Agreement  shall begin on the Effective Date and,  unless
     extended or earlier  terminated by the written  agreement of the parties or
     pursuant to Article 8 below, shall expire on May 21, 2004."

General

Except as expressly amended by this Second Amendment, the Distribution Agreement
will remain in full force and effect.  This Second  Amendment may be executed in
one or more counterparts.  Each counterpart will be deemed an original,  but all
counterparts together will constitute one and the same instrument.

IN WITNESS  WHEREOF,  the parties have caused this Second Amendment to be signed
by their duly authorized representatives.


AVAYA INC.                                    ARTERA GROUP, INC.


By:  /s/  Karen Schnitzer                     By:  /s/  Michael J. Parrella
     ----------------------                        ---------------------------
     Name:  Karen Schnitzer                        Name:  Michael J. Parrella
     Title: Sr. Purch. Specialist                  Title: Chairman & President
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

June 26, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

130137 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 130137 

 COA: 256299 

Monroe CC: 03-033086-FC 

CHARLES EDWARD BENORE,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 1, 2005 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

s0619 

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

June 26, 2006 

Clerk
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21

- 7350

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. MARC PIERRE HALL, a/k/a Marc Valeriano, a/k/a Fella , Defendant

- Appellant

.

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

. Frank D. Whitney, District Judge. ( 3:95

- cr - 00005

- FDW

- 1 ; 3:99

- cv - 00061

- FDW )

Submitted : November 18, 2021 Decided: November 22, 2021

Before MOTZ , THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed as modified by un published per curiam opinion

.

Marc Pierre Hall , Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Mar c Pierre Hall appeals the district court’s order construing his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(d)(1) motion as an unauthorized, successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and dismissing it for lack of jurisdiction. * Our review of the record confirms that the district court properly
construed H a ll’s Rule 60(d)(1) motion as a successive § 225 5 motion over which it lacked jurisdiction because H a ll failed to obtain prefiling authorization from this court. See
28 U.S.C. § § 2244(b)(3)(A) , 2255(h) ; McRae , 793 F.3d at 397

- 400. The dismissal,
however , “must be one without prejudice, because a court that lacks jurisdiction has no power to adjudicate and dispose of a claim on the merits.” S. Walk at Broadlands Homeowner’s Ass’n, Inc. v. OpenBand at Broadlands, LLC , 713 F .3d 175, 185 (4th Cir. 2013). Accordingly, we affirm as modified to reflect that Hall’s motion is dismissed without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. We deny Hall’s motion for appointment of
counsel.
Consistent with our decision in United States v. Wi nestock , 340 F.3d 200, 208 (4th Cir. 2003), we construe Hall’s notice of appeal and informal brief as an application to file a second or successive § 2255 motion. Upon review, we conclude that his claims do
not meet the relevant standard. See 28 U.S.C. § 2255(h). We therefore deny authorization to file a successive § 2255 motion.

* A certificate of appealability is not required to appeal the district court’s jurisdictional categorization of a Rule 60 motion as an unauthorized , successive § 2255 motion. United States v. McRae , 793 F.3d 392, 400 (4th Cir. 2015).3 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 pr ocess.
AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED
Exhibit 13.1

Certification

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

(Subsection (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsection (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the
undersigned officer of LG.Philips LCD Co., Ltd., a corporation organized under the laws of the Republic of Korea (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:

The annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2005 (the Form 20-F) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.

Dated: June 21, 2006



/s/ Bon Joon KooBon Joon KooJoint Representative Director/Vice Chairman and Chief Executive Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 has been provided to LG.Philips LCD Co., Ltd. and will be retained by LG.Philips LCD Co., Ltd. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.