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

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer of Dune Energy, Inc. (the Company), does
hereby certify under the standards set forth and solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended
December 31, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in that Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.



|                      |  |  |  |                           
|--------------------- |  |  |  | --------------------------
|Dated: March 10, 2008 |  |  |  | /S/    FRANK T. SMITH,
JR.
|                      |  |  |  | Frank T. Smith, Jr        
|                      |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer   

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.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Benito ESPIRICUETA-CASANOVA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 06-40244.

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided Oct. 25, 2006.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Philip G. Gallagher, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before JOLLY, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Benito Espiricueta-Casanova appeals his guilty-plea conviction of, and sentence for, violating 8 U.S.C. § 1326 by being found in the United States without permission after deportation. He argues, in light of *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), *654that the 33-month term of imprisonment imposed in his case exceeds the statutory maximum sentence allowed for the § 1326(a) offense charged in his indictment. He challenges the constitutionality of § 1326(b)’s treatment of prior felony and aggravated felony convictions as sentencing factors rather than elements of the offense that must be found by a jury.

Espiricueta-Casanova’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). Although he contends that *AlmendarezTorres*was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule *Almendarez-Torres*in light of *Apprendi,*we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that *Almendarez-Torres*remains binding. *See United States v. Garza-Lopez,*410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), *cert. denied,*— U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 298, 163 L.Ed.2d 260 (2005). Espiricueta-Casanova properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of *Almendarez-Torres*and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review.

AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 3

               State of Utah
           Department of Commerce
Division of Corporations and Commercial Code

I Hereby certify that the foregoing has been filed
and approved on the 16th day of December, 1997
in the office of this Division and hereby issue 
this Certificate thereof.

Examiner      /s/ BS                 Date 12/16/97

[SEAL]        /s/ KORLA T. WOODS
              ----------------------
                  KORLA T. WOODS
                 Division Director

                              ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT
                                       OF
                            INLAND CASINO CORPORATION



To the Division of Corporations and Commercial Code
State of Utah

     Pursuant to the provisions of Section 16-10a-1006 of the Utah Revised
Business Corporation Act, the corporation hereinafter named (the "Corporation")
does hereby adopt the following Articles of Amendment:

     1.   The name of the Corporation is Inland Casino Corporation.

     2.   Article I of the Articles of Incorporation of the Corporation is 
          hereby amended so as henceforth to read as follows:

          "The name of the corporation is Inland Entertainment Corporation."

     3.   The date of adoption of the aforesaid amendment was December 11, 1997.

     4.   The designation, the number of outstanding shares, the number of 
shares entitled to be cast by the voting group entitled to vote on the said 
amendment, and the number of votes of the voting group indisputably represented
at the meeting at which the said amendment was approved are as follows:

          a.   Designation of voting group: Common Stock, par value $.001
               per share

          b.   Number of outstanding shares of voting group: 3,855,048

          c.   Number of shares of voting group entitled to vote on the
               amendment: 3,855,048

          d.   Number of shares of voting group indisputably represented at the
               meeting: 3,250,434

     5.   The total number of votes cast for and against the said amendment by
the voting group entitled to vote on the said amendment is as follows:

          a.   Designation of voting group: Common Stock, par value $.001 per
               share

          b.   Number of votes of voting group cast for the amendment: 3,243,266

          c.   Number of votes of voting group cast against the amendment: 5,713

          d.   Number of votes of voting group abstaining from voting: 1,455






<PAGE>   2

     6.   The said number of votes cast for the said amendment was sufficient
for the approval thereof by the said voting group.

Executed on December 11, 1997

                                      Inland Casino Corporation



                                      By: /S/ ANDREW B. LAUB
                                         --------------------------------------
                                          Andrew B. Laub
                                          Executive Vice President,
                                          Chief Executive Officer and Treasurer
<PAGE>

                                    FORM 6-K
                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             Washington, D.C. 20549


                        Report of Foreign Private Issuer


                        PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-16 OR 15d-16
                     OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

                                 March 15, 2005

                         Commission File Number: 0-22346

                                 HOLLINGER INC.
                 (Translation of registrant's name into English)

                                10 TORONTO STREET
                            TORONTO, ONTARIO M5C 2B7
                                     CANADA
                    (Address of principal executive offices)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant files or will file annual reports
                      under cover Form 20-F or Form 40-F.

                          Form 20-F [X]   Form 40-F [ ]

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is submitting the Form 6-K in paper as
                permitted by Regulation S-T Rule 101(b)(1): ____

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is submitting the Form 6-K in paper as
                permitted by Regulation S-T Rule 101(b)(7): ____

    Indicate by check mark whether by furnishing the information contained in
   this Form, the registrant is also thereby furnishing the information to the
           Commission pursuant to Rule 12g3-2(b) under the Securities
                              Exchange Act of 1934.

                               Yes [ ]     No [X]

If "Yes" is marked, indicate below the file number assigned to the registrant in
                  connection with Rule 12g3-2(b): 82- ________



<PAGE>


                                  EXHIBIT LIST



Exhibit  Description
-------  -----------

99.1     Press Release, dated March 14, 2005 (issued March 15, 2005), regarding
         Hollinger Inc. Dividend Proceeds Set Aside.



<PAGE>



                                   SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

Date:  March 15, 2005

                                        HOLLINGER INC.

                                        By  /s/ Peter G. White
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Name:   Peter G. White
                                            Title:  Vice President, Operations
                                                    and Secretary
In The 

Court of Appeals 

Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo 

 

No. 07-22-00126-CV 

 

SAENGDAVONE SOUVANNASANE, APPELLANT 

V. 

JENNY SISOMBATH, APPELLEE 

On Appeal from the 231st District Court 

 Tarrant County, Texas 

Trial Court No. 231-694444-21, Honorable Jesus Nevarez, Jr., Presiding 

October 31, 2022 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before QUINN, C.J., and PARKER and DOSS, JJ. 

Appellant, Saengdavone Souvannasane, proceeding pro se, appeals from the trial 

court’s Default Protective Order.

1 Appellant’s brief was due September 26, 2022, but 

was not filed. By letter of October 4, 2022, we notified appellant that the appeal was 

subject to dismissal for want of prosecution, without further notice, if a brief was not 

1 Originally appealed to the Second Court of Appeals, this appeal was transferred to this Court by 

the Texas Supreme Court pursuant to its docket equalizations efforts. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 73.001. 
2

received by October 14. To date, appellant has neither filed a brief nor had any further 

communication with this Court.

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 

38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b).

Per Curiam
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

GERALD WILLIAM CLARKE a/k/a G. WILLIAM CLARKE a/k/a BILL 

CLARKE a/k/a GERALD W. CLARKE and KIP CLARKE,

Appellants,

v.

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC, MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC 

REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INCORPORATED AS NOMINEE FOR 

AMERICA’S WHOLESALE LENDER and JANET WARD,

Appellees.

No. 4D16-1886

[ July 13, 2017 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; Susan R. Lubitz, Judge; L.T. Case No. 502011CA011089A.

Kendrick Almaguer and Arthur E. Alves, II of The Ticktin Law Group, 

PLLC, Deerfield Beach, for appellants.

Jennifer M. Chapkin, William L. Grimsley and N. Mark New, II of 

McGlinchey Stafford, Fort Lauderdale, for Appellee Nationstar Mortgage 

LLC.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

TAYLOR, MAY and CONNER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
exhibit_10-1.htm








EXHIBIT 10.1


 


 


 



SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT BETWEEN CONVENTRY ENTERPRISES, LLC AND IHOOKUP SOCIAL, INC.







This side letter agreement is entered into on July 9, 2015







Whereas, the parties have entered into a series of convertible note; and







Whereas, certain of those note have prepayment provisions which allow the Company to prepay those notes prior to maturity; and







Whereas, the parties desire to eliminate those prepayment provisions







NOW THEREFORE THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS:







1.           None of the convertible notes issued from iHookup Social, Inc to Coventry Enterprises, LLC shall be redeemable at the options of iHookup Social, Inc.  Any redemption features are hereby terminated and are null and void.


 




	IHOOKUP SOCIAL, INC.  	 	COVENTRY ENTERPRISES, LLC
	 	 	 	 	 
	By:	
/s/ Robert Rositano

	 	By:	
 


	 	
 

	 	 	
 


	Robert Rositano, CEO  	 	Title:
*District Judge of the Southern District of Texas, sitting by

designation.

 

**Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________________

No. 96-20236

_______________________

ROBERT GANDY,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE,

INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION,

Respondent-Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

(H-94-CV-4294)

_________________________________________________________________

February 4, 1998

Before KING and JONES, Circuit Judges, and WERLEIN*, District

Judge. 

EDITH H. JONES, Circuit Judge:**

Appellant Robert Gandy was convicted in 1990 by a Texas

jury of aggravated robbery and was assessed a punishment of life

imprisonment and a fine. Having exhausted state remedies, he
2

alleged in a federal habeas petition that (1) the evidence was

insufficient to support his conviction; (2) the prosecution used 

the perjured testimony of a co-defendant, Richard; (3) his

constitutional right to a speedy trial was denied; (4) the

prosecution withheld exculpatory evidence in violation of Brady v.

Marilyn, 373 U.S. 83 (1963); and (5) the prosecution failed to

prove that he used a deadly weapon. The district court found no

merit in any of these claims.

Upon reviewing appropriate portions of the record,

together with the district court’s opinion and the parties’ briefs

on appeal, we find no reversible error of law or fact in the

rejection of Gandy’s speedy trial contentions. An examination of

the State Court records and the four factors used to determine

whether the State violated Gandy's right to a speedy trial shows

that (1) Gandy was either responsible for or consented to the

delays in the case; (2) Gandy's assertions of his right to a speedy

trial were inconsistent with his pretrial activities and the Agreed

Resettings he signed; and (3) Gandy failed to adduce evidence or

provide factual allegations which supported his claim that his

trial was prejudiced by the delay. Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514,

92 S. Ct. 2182 (1972).

Notwithstanding this court’s earlier grant of a

certificate of appealability limited to the speedy trial issue, we

have considered all of the issues he raised on appeal, in light of
3

the non-retroactivity of the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death

Penalty Act. See Lindh v. Murphy, ____ S. Ct. _____ (1997).

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 32.1   ForeverGreen Worldwide Corp.  CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 18 U.S.C. Section 1350  The undersigned executive officers of ForeverGreen Worldwide Corp. certify pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:  • the annual report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2009, 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 Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  Date:  April  15, 2010




Date:  April  15, 2010/s/ Ronald K. Williams
Ronald K. Williams
Chief Executive Officer



/s/ Paul T. Frampton
Paul T. Frampton
Chief Financial Officer
#### Charles N. BIRD et al., Plaintiffs, v. William H. FERRY, Jr., Hartzmark & Co., Inc., and The Robinson-Humphrey Company, Inc., Defendants.

Civ. A. No. 14186.

United States District Court, N. D. Georgia, Atlanta Division.

Dec. 31, 1970.

*311Vaughn & Barksdale, Conyers, Ga., for plaintiffs.

Kilpatrick, Cody, Rogers, McClatchey & Regenstein, Atlanta, Ga., for Hartzmark & Co., Inc.

Smith, Cohen, Ringel, Kohler, Martin & Lowe, Atlanta, Ga., for Robinson-Humphrey Co.

Rich, Bass, Kidd & Broome, Decatur, Ga., for Wm. H. Ferry, Jr.

ORDER ON MOTION TO STRIKE OR FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT

MOYE, District Judge.

This is a suit under Sections 22 of the Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C.A. § 77v) and 27 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.A. § 78aa) alleging, in part (Count V, Paragraphs 15 and 16), that the defendant, Hartzmark & Co., used manipulative, deceptive and fraudulent devices in connection with purchases and sales of stock by plaintiffs. Defendant Hartzmark has moved that said paragraphs be struck, or that plaintiffs furnish a more definite statement of their claims with respect to said paragraphs by alleging the time, place, content and effect of each of the misrepresentations or omissions on which plaintiffs intend to rely.

No response to the motion has been filed by the plaintiff pursuant to Local Rule 8 of this Court.

It appears that the defendant, Hartzmark & Co., is entitled to the more definite statement which it requests. Desser v. Ashton, CCH Fed.Sec.Laws Reporter, (1969-70 Transfer Binder) Paragraph 92,546 (S.D.N.Y.1969); Vohs v. Dickson, No. 13727 in this Court (Order of Sidney O. Smith dated October 13, 1970). Therefore, plaintiffs are directed to file the more definite statement setting forth the information requested by the defendant within twenty (20) days of the filing of this order, or Count V, Paragraphs 15 and 16 of the Complaint, shall stand dismissed.
Exhibit 32.2

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

I, Michael
E. Healy, do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my
knowledge:

The Annual
Report on Form 10-K of ShoreTel, Inc. for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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 such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
ShoreTel, Inc.

|                           |        |                                             
|-------------------------- | ------ | --------------------------------------------
|Dated:
 September 10, 2010 | By:    | /s/ MICHAEL
 E. HEALY                       
|                           |        |                                             
|                           | Name:  | Michael E. Healy                            
|                           | Title: | Chief Financial Officer                     
|                           |        | (Principal Accounting and Financial Officer)
|                           |        |                                             
|                          

---
# test
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION

In connection with the Annual Report of Piedmont Community Bank Group, Inc. (the Company)
on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Robert D. Hulsey, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the Company and Julie H.
Simmons, Chief Financial and Accounting Officer of the Company, do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of our 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/ Robert D. Hulsey, Jr.Robert D. Hulsey, Jr.Chief Executive OfficerMarch 27, 2009/s/ Julie H. SimmonsJulie H. SimmonsChief Financial OfficerMarch 27, 2009
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-50438

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

GREGORIO GARCIA, JR.,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:18-CR-485-1

Before KING, GRAVES, and WILLETT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Gregorio Garcia, Jr. appeals his bench-trial conviction for conspiracy to 

transport illegal aliens. On appeal, he contends that the evidence was 

insufficient for conviction because there was no evidence of an agreement 

between himself and any other individual to transport the illegal aliens.

In reviewing a bench-trial conviction, we view the evidence in the light 

most favorable to the Government and defer to reasonable inferences drawn 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 4, 2020

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 19-50438 Document: 00515331477 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/04/2020
No. 19-50438

2

by the district court. United States v. Esparza, 678 F.3d 389, 392 (5th Cir. 

2012). The focus of our review is on “whether the finding of guilt is supported 

by substantial evidence, i.e., evidence sufficient to justify the trial judge, as the 

trier of fact, in concluding beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is 

guilty.” Id. (internal quotations marks and citation omitted).

Here, there was sufficient evidence in the record to establish that Garcia 

came to an agreement with one or more people regarding the transportation of 

illegal aliens. See id. Garcia drove in tandem with the black Camaro driven 

by Monica Benavidez on February 20, 2018; both vehicles were registered to 

“A. Benavidez”; Garcia stated that the white F-150 pickup truck was given to 

him by Benavidez; and the cell phone found in the F-150 appeared to belong to 

Benavidez. Garcia performed several U-turns on Farm-to-Market Road 117 

while driving, as though he were looking for something or someone, and two of 

the illegal aliens were told by relatives or people involved in the smuggling 

operation that they would be picked up on February 20 on FM 117 by an older 

white truck.

AFFIRMED.

 Case: 19-50438 Document: 00515331477 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/04/2020