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



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND 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, George Samenuk certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of McAfee, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-K fairly presents in
all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of McAfee, Inc. By:
    George SamenukName:
    George SamenukTitle:
    Chairman and Chief Executive Officer March 31, 2005 I, Eric F. Brown certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of McAfee, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-K fairly presents in
all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of McAfee, Inc. By:
    Eric F. BrownName:
    Eric F. BrownTitle:
    Chief Financial Officer March 31, 2005
**EXHIBIT 35.1**

**World Omni Financial Corp.**

**Servicer Compliance Statement**

**Pursuant to Item 1123**

**of Regulation AB**

I, Victor A. De Jesus, do hereby certify that I am the Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of World Omni Financial Corp., a Floridacorporation, and further certify on behalf of World Omni Financial Corp. in its capacity as servicer (the "Servicer") under the Sale and Servicing Agreement, dated as of February 21, 2007 (the “Agreement”), among World Omni AutoReceivables Trust 2007-A, as Issuing Entity, World Omni Auto Receivables LLC, as Depositor, and the Servicer, as follows: 

(i)        A review of the activities of the Servicer during the period covered by the issuing entity’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 (the“Reporting Period”), and of its performance under the Agreement, has been made under my supervision. 

(ii)       To the best of my knowledge, based on the review described above, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand as of March 28, 2008.
CHIEF JUSTICE

ROGELIO VALDEZ

JUSTICES

NELDA V. RODRIGUEZ

DORI CONTRERAS GARZA

GINA M. BENAVIDES

GREGORY T. PERKES

NORA L. LONGORIA

CLERK

DORIAN E. RAMIREZ NUECES COUNTY COURTH OUSE

901 LEOPARD, 10TH FL OOR

CORPUS C HRISTI, TEXAS 78401

361

- 888

- 0416 (TEL)

361

- 888

- 0794 (FAX)

HIDALGO COUNTY

ADMINISTRATION BLDG.

100 E. CANO, 5TH FLO OR

EDINBURG, TEXAS 7853 9

956

- 318

- 2405 (TEL)

956

- 318

- 2403 (FAX)

www.txcourts.gov/13thcoa 

# Court of Appeals

Thirteenth District of Texas

November 12, 2015

Hon. Victoria Guerra

Law Office of Victoria Guerra

3219 N. McColl Blvd.

McAllen, TX 78501

* DELIVERED VIA E

- MAIL *

Hon. Ricardo Rodriguez Jr.

District Attorney

100 N. Closner, 3rd Floor

Edinburg, TX 78539

* DELIVERED VIA E

- MAIL * Ho n. Michael W. Morris

Assistant Criminal District Attorney

100 N. Closner

Edinburg, TX 78539

* DELIVERED VIA E

- MAIL *

Re: Cause No. 13

- 15

- 00288

- CR

Tr.Ct.No. CR

- 3054

- 14

- D

Style: The State of Texas v. Reinaldo Sanchez

Appellant ’s motion f or extension of time to file brief in the above cause was this

day GRANTED by this Court. The time has been e xtended to Tuesday, November 17,

2015

.

Very truly yours,

Dorian E. Ramirez, Clerk

DER:ch
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                           6,495
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   16,644
<ALLOWANCES>                                    (1,941)
<INVENTORY>                                      6,962
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                31,456
<PP&E>                                          29,018
<DEPRECIATION>                                  (4,793)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  91,233
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           90,247
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           29,690
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,269
<OTHER-SE>                                     (64,284)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    91,233
<SALES>                                         29,489
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                29,489
<CGS>                                           27,816
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   27,816
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 9,077
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,119
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (7,404)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (419)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (7,270)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (7,270)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (1.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (1.06)
        

</TABLE>
Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Memorandum Opinion filed October 4, 2024.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 24

- 00715

- CV

IN RE WILMA REYNOLDS AND CARL GORDON , Relator s

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

WRIT OF MANDAMUS 152nd District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2017

- 83411



### MEMORANDUM OPINION

On Wednesday, September 25, 2024 , relator s Wilma Reynolds and Carl Gordon filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this c ourt. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221; see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator s ask this c ourt to compel the Honorable Colleen Gaido, presiding judge of the 337th District Court,2 sitting by referral in place of the Honorable Robert Schaffer, presiding judge of the 152nd District Court, to vacate three orders: (1) an August 27, 2024 “Order Compelling Discovery Responses from Plaintiff Wilma Reynolds’ attorney Carl Gordon”; an August 30, 2024 “Order of Civil Contempt and Committing Carl W. Gordon to Harris County Jail, Suspending Commitment and Resetting Hearing”; and (3) a September 9, 2024 “Order Appointing Receiver and Master.”
Relators have not established that they are entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, we deny relators’ petition for writ of mandamus.

PER CURIAM

Panel c onsists of Chief Justice Christopher, Justices Spain and Poissant

. ( J. Spain dissenting with opinion to follow ).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             NOV-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1996
<CASH>                                           4,598
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   24,414
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,471
<INVENTORY>                                      1,829
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                36,547
<PP&E>                                           8,557
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (4,623)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  90,727
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           10,346
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            99
<OTHER-SE>                                      67,126
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    90,727
<SALES>                                         76,304
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                76,304
<CGS>                                           34,680
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   34,680
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                33,552
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,352
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,720
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,702
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,018
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (1,435)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       583
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .07
        

</TABLE>
1

The Honorable James B. Loken became Chief Judge of the United States

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit on April 1, 2003.

2

The Honorable Jean C. Hamilton, United States District Judge for the Eastern

District of Missouri. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 02-3449

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Eastern

* District of Missouri.

Reginald Jones, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

___________

 Submitted: April 2, 2003

 Filed: April 7, 2003

___________

Before LOKEN,1

 Chief Judge, BOWMAN, and WOLLMAN, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Federal inmate Reginald Jones challenges the district court’s2

 denial of his

postjudgment motion seeking to dismiss his indictment. Having reviewed the record,

we conclude that relief is not available at this time under Fed. R. Crim P. 12(b)(2).
-2-

See United States v. Patton, 309 F.3d 1093 (8th Cir. 2002) (per curiam).

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. 

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
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 Cubic Energy, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period  ending  March 31, 2004 as filed with the  Securities
and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof (the  "Report"),  I, CEO and CFO,
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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.

Date: May 11, 2004                          Signature: /s/ Calvin A. Wallen, III
                                                      --------------------------
                                                      Calvin A. Wallen, III
                                                      As CEO and CFO
#### In the Matter of Michael D. Green, M.D., Appellant, v Monroe County Child Support Enforcement Unit, Respondent.

(Appeal No. 2.)

[974 NYS2d 881]

— Appeal from an amended order of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (John J. Ark, J.), entered April 5, 2012. The amended order provided that the prior orders of the Family Court relative to the request of petitioner’s ex-wife for a cost of living adjustment to the amount of petitioner’s child support obligation and petitioner’s objections thereto will not prevent an adjustment of petitioner’s child support.

It is hereby ordered that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs.

Same memorandum as in *Matter of Green v Monroe County Child Support Enforcement Unit*(111 AD3d 1446 [2013]). Fresent — Smith, J.E, Peradotto, Bindley, Valentino and Whalen, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                         428,438
<SECURITIES>                                 1,599,391
<RECEIVABLES>                                  528,669
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  1,441,054
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,085,354
<PP&E>                                       1,200,787
<DEPRECIATION>                                 786,253
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,510,086
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          450,467
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     9,839,043
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,510,086
<SALES>                                      1,527,987
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,527,987
<CGS>                                          843,711
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,942,633
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              13,237
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (427,883)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                122,958
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (304,925)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 32.1****CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,****AS ENACTED PURSUANT TO****SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of HubInternational Limited (the “Company”) datedAugust 9, 2005 containing the financial statements of theCompany for the quarter ended June 30, 2005 (the“Report”) filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof, I, Martin P. Hughes,Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as enacted, pursuant toSection 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 bySection 906 has been provided to the Company and will beretained by the Company and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request. By:     /s/ Martin P. Hughes       Martin P. Hughes     Chairman and Chief Executive OfficerAugust 9, 2005
#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. ROBERT CHRISTOPHER LONG

No. 610P05

ORDER

The Attorney General’s petition for discretionary review is allowed, pursuant to our general supervisory authority under Article IV, Section 12 of the Constitution of North Carolina, for the limited purpose of (1) vacating that portion of the Court of Appeals opinion ordering remand to the trial court for resentencing and (2) remanding to the Court of Appeals for reconsideration in light of *State v. Timothy Earl Blackwell,*361 N.C. 41, -S.E.2d — (2006). The Court of Appeals opinion remains undisturbed in all other respects. Justice Timmons-Goodson recused.

By Order of the Court in Conference, this 19th day of December, 2006.

s/Newbv. J. For the Court
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 89 (Monday, May 11, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 21832]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-10872]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-65,495]


Gerber Technology and Gerber Services, New York, NY; Notice of 
Termination of Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an 
investigation was initiated on March 5, 2009 in response to a petition 
filed by a company official on behalf of workers of Gerber Technology 
and Gerber Services, New York, New York.
    The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. 
Therefore, the investigation under this petition has been terminated.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 14th day of April 2009.
Linda G. Poole,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-10872 Filed 5-8-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**Consent ofIndependent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

MoSys, Inc.Sunnyvale, California

**Wehereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statementson Form S-8 (Nos. 333-64302, 333-104071, 333-118992, 333-123364 and 333-132492)of MoSys, Inc. of our reports dated March 12, 2007, relating to theconsolidated financial statements and the financial statement schedule, and theeffectiveness of MoSys, Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting, whichappear in this Form 10-K.**

/s/BDO Seidman, LLP

San Francisco, California

March 12, 2007

----
EX-31 Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certification.


  I, Kristen Ann Cronin, certify that:

  1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D
     required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on
     Form 10-K of ACE Securities Corp. Home Equity Loan Trust, Series
     2007-ASAP1 (the "Exchange Act periodic reports");

  2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a
     whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing and other
     information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period
     covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

  4. I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
     servicers and based on my knowledge and the compliance reviews
     conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statements required in
     this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed
     in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its
     obligations under the servicing agreements in all material respects; and

  5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria
     for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on
     assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed
     securities required to be included in this report in accordance with
     Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18
     have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise
     disclosed in this report.  Any material instances of noncompliance
     described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form
     10-K.

    In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on
    information provided to me by the following unaffiliated party: Ocwen
    Loan Servicing, LLC as Servicer.

    Dated:   March 31, 2008


    /s/ Kristen Ann Cronin
    Signature

    Vice President
    (senior officer in charge of the servicing function of the master
    servicer)
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Jerome PIGFORD, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 09-6262.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 23, 2009.

Decided: May 5, 2009.

Jerome Pigford, Appellant Pro Se. Anne Margaret Hayes, Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Jerome Pigford appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *United States v. Pig*ford, No. 7:00-cr-00133-F-2 (E.D.N.C. Feb. 5, 2009). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of State

          - [Public Notice 6617]

Based upon a review of the Administrative Record assembled in this matter, and in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of the Treasury, I conclude that there is a sufficient factual basis to find that the relevant circumstances described in section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended (hereinafter “INA”) (8 U.S.C. 1189), exist with respect to Revolutionary Struggle (aka Epanastatikos Aghonas).

Therefore, I hereby designate that organization and its alias as a foreign terrorist organization pursuant to section 219 of the INA.

                    This determination shall be published in the                     **Federal Register.**

Dated: April 29, 2009.

Hillary Rodham Clinton,

Secretary of State,  Department of State.

[FR Doc. E9-11546 Filed 5-15-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-10-P
#### Gary *v.*The State.

1. Where during the term at which a case was tried and a motion for a new trial filed, an order was passed setting the hearing during an adjourned term to be held thereafter, the order further pro*720viding that if the motion was not then heard it should be heard at such time and place as the presiding judge might fix after five days notice to the parties, and the adjourned term not having been held, and no time having been fixed by the judge, it was error at the next regular term of the court to dismiss the motion on the ground “ that it was not sooner heard.”

2. That the rule *nisi*for a new trial in a criminal case calls on the State of Georgia to show cause, etc., instead of calling upon the solicitor-general, is no ground for dismissing the motion. The State is the proper respondent to such a rule.

June 4, 1894.

Motion for a new trial. Before Judge McWhorter. Hart superior court. March term, 1894.

W. L. Hodges and A. G. McCurry, for plaintiff in error.

*Judgment reversed.*