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

**CERTIFICATION**

 

 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, the undersigned officer of ING Life Insurance and Annuity Company (the “Company”) hereby certifies that, to the officer’s knowledge, the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 (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.

 

 

| August 14, 2008

  | By: /s/ | Richard T. Mason                  |
|-------------------------|---------|---------------------------------------------|
| (Date)

           |    | Richard T. Mason

President

 

  |
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 of American Standard Companies Inc. (the Company) on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ending June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Frederic M. Poses, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company hereby 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, and (2) the information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for the periods covered in the Report.



|                       
|-----------------------
|                       
|/s/ Frederic M. Poses  
|Frederic M. Poses      
|Chief Executive Officer

July 25, 2006
February 2 6 , 2013



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

ROBERT SALINAS, JR. , Appellant

NO. 14

- 11

- 00747

- CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

________________________________

This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED , and that this decision be certified below for observance.
1

The Honorable Howard F. Sachs, United States District Judge for the Western

District of Missouri. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 01-2635

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Western

* District of Missouri

Charles R. Henderson, also known as *

Charles E. Black, also known as * [UNPUBLISHED]

Charles Henderson, *

*

Appellant. *

___________

 Submitted: November 6, 2001

 Filed: November 13, 2001

___________

Before McMILLIAN, FAGG, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Charles R. Henderson appeals from the final judgment entered in the District

Court1

 for the Western District of Missouri after he pleaded guilty to being a felon in

possession of ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(e)(1). The

district court sentenced Henderson to 180 months imprisonment and five years

supervised release. Counsel has filed a brief and moved to withdraw under Anders

v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that Henderson should have received a
-2-

lower sentence because he pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of

ammunition, not to being an armed career offender. Henderson has not filed a pro se

supplemental brief. For the reasons discussed below, we affirm the judgment of the

district court. 

To the extent Henderson is arguing that his sentence was too harsh, there is no

jurisdictional basis for review. See 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a) (grounds for appeal of

sentence by defendant). Moreover, the district court did not plainly err in sentencing

him as an armed career criminal, because he did not argue below--nor does he argue

on appeal--that he is not an armed career criminal, and his prior burglary and

aggravated-assault convictions (for which he received multi-year prison sentences)

are qualifying convictions. See id. §§ 922(g)(1) (prohibiting felons from possessing

ammunition or firearms), 924(e)(1) (15-year minimum sentence for person who

violates § 922(g) and has 3 previous convictions for “violent felony” or serious drug

offense), 924(e)(2)(B)(i)-(ii) (“violent felony” means any crime punishable by

imprisonment exceeding 1 year that has as element use, attempted use, or threatened

use of physical force against person of another, or is burglary); U.S.S.G. § 4B1.4(a)

(defendant who is subject to enhanced sentence under § 924(e) is “armed career

criminal”); DeRoo v. United States, 223 F.3d 919, 926 (8th Cir. 2000) (reviewing for

plain error district court’s inclusion of predicate conviction for purposes of Armed

Career Criminal Act where inmate did not raise argument below). 

We have reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S.

75 (1988), and have found no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s

motion to withdraw and affirm the judgment of the district court.

A true copy.

Attest:

 CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
#### HEFTER v. CORNET, INC.

No. 180A97

Case below: 125 N.C.App. 743

Notice of appeal by defendants pursuant to G.S. 7A-30 (substantial constitutional question) dismissed 5 June 1997.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4037 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

  2d Session
                                H. R. 4037

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 21, 2004

  Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental 
                                Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 475 Kell Farm Drive in Cape Girardeau, Missouri, as the ``Richard G. 
             Wilson Processing and Distribution Facility''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 475 
Kell Farm Drive in Cape Girardeau, Missouri, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Richard G. Wilson Processing and Distribution 
Facility''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Richard G. Wilson Processing 
and Distribution Facility''.

            Passed the House of Representatives April 20, 2004.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Cite as 2015 Ark. App. 390



## ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION I No. CR-14-789

MARCUS HARRIS APPELLANT

V.

STATE OF ARKANSAS APPELLEE Opinion Delivered June 17, 2015 APPEAL FROM THE JEFFERSON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. CR-2010-10-1] HONORABLE BERLIN C. JONES, JUDGE SUPPLEMENTAL ADDENDUM ORDERED

M. MICHAEL KINARD, Judge Marcus Harris appeals from the revocation of his previously ordered probation. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4- 3(k), appellant’s attorney has filed a motion to be relieved as counsel, stating that there is no merit to the appeal. The motion is accompanied by an abstract and addendum of the proceedings below and a brief in which counsel asserts that there is nothing in the record that would support an appeal. The clerk of this court mailed copies of counsel’s motion and brief to each of appellant’s last three known addresses, notifying him of his right to file a pro se statement of points for reversal within thirty days. Each time, the package was returned “not deliverable” or “unclaimed.” Appellant has filed no statement. Because the addendum is incomplete, we must first order that it be supplemented before we can decide the case. Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-2(a)(8) requires that anCite as 2015 Ark. App. 390

appellant’s brief contain an addendum that includes true and legible photocopies of nontranscript documents in the record that are essential for the appellate court to confirm its jurisdiction, to understand the case, and to decide the issues on appeal. For obvious reasons, the rule specifically requires that the addendum contain the judgment from which the appeal is taken. Here, however, appellant’s addendum does not include the judgment and sentencing order appealed from. Under these circumstances, we direct counsel for appellant to file within seven days a supplemental addendum correcting this omission. See Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4- 2(b)(4). We strongly encourage counsel, prior to filing the supplement, to review our rules as well as the abstract and addendum to ensure that no additional deficiencies are present. After the supplement is filed, the case will be resubmitted for decision. Supplemental addendum ordered.
H ARRISON and G LOVER , JJ., agree. Gary W. Potts , for appellant. No response.

2
#### Cunningham *&*Campbell *v.*Wm. Simpson.

■pleading — Amendment—Proof of original consideration.

Although the • filing of an amended petition amounts to an abandonment of the original cause of action, it does not preclude the ■plaintiff from showing the Original consideration, since it must constitute a ground of the new promise or acknowledgment of it.

APPEAL FROM MARION CIRCUIT 'COURT.

February 19, 1873.

*Russell &*Averitt, *for appellants.*

*‘W. J.*Lisle, *for appellee.'*

*Opinion*by

Judge Pryor :

The court below erred in instructing the jury to find for the defendant.

There was an express offer made to pay the appellant two hundred dollars, and no objection made to the whole of appellants’ claim except that the order given for the amount and which seems not to have been produced was either lost or mislaid, and therefore the appellee, refused to settle. *

The evidence is of such a character as required that the jury ■ should say whether there was such an acknowledgment of the debt as implied a promise to pay.

The filing of the amended, pleading was an abandonment of the original cause of action. This does not, however, preclude the appellants from showing the original consideration, as it must constitute the basis of the new promise or acknowledgment if any was made.

The judgment of the court below is reversed and cause remanded with directions to award the appellants a new trial and for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. .
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-27-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-29-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-27-1996
<CASH>                                          13,733
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      491
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     18,707
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                34,092
<PP&E>                                          15,315
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,796
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  45,611
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           13,724
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            52
<OTHER-SE>                                      30,713
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    45,611
<SALES>                                         84,602
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                84,602
<CGS>                                           58,015
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   58,015
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,614
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,538
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,076
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,076
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.67
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.60
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 13.4**

 

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

 

In connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 20-F of Inmarsat Group Limited (the “Company”) forthe annual period ended December 31, 2005 (the “Periodic Report”), I, Rick Medlock, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge the Periodic 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 Periodic Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

 

 

Date: April 28, 2006
Exhibit 31.2CERTIFICATIONSI, Pamela G. Boone, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Synergetics USA, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;(b) [Paragraph omitted in accordance with SEC transition instructions contained in SEC Release34-47986];(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee 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 internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.          Date: March 15, 2006           /s/ Pamela G. Boone         Pamela G. Boone    Executive Vice President, Chief Financial    Officer, Treasurer and Secretary
Exhibit 32.1



Certification



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned officer of Mellon Financial Corporation (the Corporation), hereby certifies that the Corporations
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended Dec. 31, 2005 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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 Corporation.



|                      |  |                     |  |                        
|--------------------- |  | ------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Dated:  March 3, 2006 |  | /s/ Robert P. Kelly
|                      |  | Name:               |  | Robert P. Kelly        
|                      |  | Title:              |  | Chief Executive Officer
Continuing Education Units

VERIFICATION OF ATTENDANCE FORM

Certification Number: ________________

 attended the following professional educational activity. 

(NAME)

Title: Federal Information Security Educators (FISSEA) Summer Forum

Date(s): August 23, 2023 CEU Hours Earned: 3 hours 

Sponsor(s): National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) 

Explanation of Event: The FISSEA Forums are quarterly meetings to provide opportunities for policy and programmatic 

updates, the exchange of best practices, and discussion and engagement among members of the Federal Information 

Security Educators (FISSEA) community. Webinar attendees heard presentations from: 

• Anthony Boese, Interagency Programs Manager and Ethics Officer, National Artificial Intelligence Institute

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs

• Julie McEwen, Privacy Capability Area Lead, Principal Cybersecurity & Privacy Engineer, MITRE

• Dr. Shanée Dawkins, Computer Scientist, National Institute of Standards and Technology

• Tushar Rathod, Enterprise Architecture, Social Security Administration

• Morgan Floyd, InfoSec Training & Awareness Coordinator, Cyber Assurance, Texas Health & Human Services

Location: Virtual Webinar; www.nist.gov/fissea

Name of Meeting Host: Marian Merritt, Deputy Director, Lead for Industry Engagement 

 

Contact Information:

nist.gov/nice 

nice@nist.gov

The Continuing Education Units form is provided as a courtesy. It is the responsibility of the 

attendee to complete and submit with their certifying authority.
Exhibit 13.1



CERTIFICATION



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, each of the undersigned officers of Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. (the Company), hereby certifies, to such
officers knowledge, that the Companys annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended March 31, 2003 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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.







Dated:  September 1, 2003







/s/    Kunio
NakamuraName:

Kunio NakamuraTitle:

President and Director(Principal Executive Officer)/s/    Tetsuya
KawakamiName:

Tetsuya KawakamiTitle:

Managing Director(Principal Financial Officer)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                             351
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,148
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (83)
<INVENTORY>                                      7,336
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                13,408
<PP&E>                                           9,633
<DEPRECIATION>                                   (500)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  27,655
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           13,408
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            44
<OTHER-SE>                                       3,584
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    27,655
<SALES>                                         12,920
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                12,934
<CGS>                                           10,334
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   12,715
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    38
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     9
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 446
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (274)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (274)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (274)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.07)
        

</TABLE>