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

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

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 Annual Report of Sterling Financial Corporation (Sterling) on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Daniel G. Byrne, Principal Financial Officer of Sterling, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Sterling.
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                      |  |                                                                                        
|--------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: March 16, 2010 |  | /s/ Daniel G. Byrne                                                                    
|                      |  | Daniel G. Byrne                                                                        
|                      |  | Executive Vice President  Finance, Assistant Secretary and Principal Financial Officer

This certification accompanies each Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by
Sterling for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written statement
required by Section 906 has been provided to Sterling and will be retained by Sterling and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Oscar BROWN, Jr., a/k/a Grip, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 09-6009.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 23, 2009.

Decided: May 5, 2009.

Oscar Brown, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Anne Margaret Hayes, Rudolf A. Renfer, *166Jr., 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:

Oscar Brown, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *See United States v. Brown,*No. 7:02-cr00014-BR-1 (E.D.N.C. Dec. 10, 2008). 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.*
**MP** IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 2 1 - 0510 CODY WAYNE JOHNSTON ,

Petitioner and Appellant , v. STATE OF MONTANA ,

Respondent and Appellee .

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 30 - day extension of time, and good cause appearing therefor, Appellee is gran ted an extension of time to and including July 1 8 , 2022 , within which to prepare, serve, and file its response brief.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 9 2022

06/09/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0510
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporation by reference inRegistration Statements Nos. 333-140617, 333-46345 and 333-86487 of Sterling Bancshares, Inc. on Form S-4 and in Registration Statements Nos. 33-75444, 33-75442, 33-84398, 33-85624, 333-16719, 333-57171, 333-102544, 333-105307 and 333-116132 ofSterling Bancshares, Inc. on Forms S-8 of our reports dated February 26, 2007 relating to the consolidated financial statements of Sterling Bancshares, Inc. and management’s report of the effectiveness of internal control over financialreporting appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Sterling Bancshares, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2006. 

/S/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP 

Houston, Texas 

February 26, 2007
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 Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration 

          - [TA-W-65,703] 

In accordance with Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on March 31, 2009 in response to a worker petition filed on behalf of workers of Viscotec Automotive Products, LLC, Morganton, North Carolina. 

The petitioners have requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated. 

Signed in Washington, DC, this 29th day of April 2009. 

Richard Church, 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. E9-11866 Filed 5-20-09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
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 Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration 

          - [TA-W-65, 615] 

Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on March 17, 2009 in response to a petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers at Temic Automotive of North America, Inc., Northbrook, Illinois. The workers at the subject facility produce automotive electronic components. 

The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated. 

Signed in Washington, DC, this 28th day of April 2009.

Richard Church,

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. E9-11857 Filed 5-20-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
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 Arête Industries, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John Herzog, Interim Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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 result of operations of the Company.







February 2, 2011
By:
/s/ John HerzogJohn Herzog, Interim Chief Financial Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Arête Industries, Inc. and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Sherman Rivers, Appellant.

Submitted September 27, 2010;

decided October 14, 2010

Motion for assignment of counsel granted and Lynn WL. Fa-hey, Esq., Appellate Advocates, 2 Rector Street, 10th Floor, New York, NY 10006 assigned as counsel to the appellant on the appeal herein.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 97 (Thursday, May 21, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 23899]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-11879]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration <greek-i>11707 and <greek-i>11708]


North Dakota Disaster Number ND-00016

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Amendment 2.

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

SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a 
major disaster for the State of North Dakota (FEMA-1829-DR), dated 04/
10/2009.
    Incident: Severe Storms and Flooding.
    Incident Period: 03/13/2009 and continuing.
    Effective Date: 05/13/2009.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 06/09/2009.
    EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date: 01/11/2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the Presidential disaster 
declaration for the State of North Dakota, dated 04/10/2009 is hereby 
amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the 
disaster:

Primary Counties: (Physical Damage and Economic Injury Loans): Ramsey, 
The Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indian Reservation.

    All other counties contiguous to the above named primary counties 
have previously been declared.
    All other information in the original declaration remains 
unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)

James E. Rivera,
Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-11879 Filed 5-20-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
#### Tutt *v.*The Sand Hills Hotel Company *et al.*

The material findings of the jury were warranted by the evidence, and the decree, as an equitable result, was warranted by the findings, in so far as it was rested on them; and in so far as it was rested on the discretionary power of the court, though open to question, involved no manifest abuse of such discretion. No error was committed in the progress of the trial, or in any of the various rulings made by the court, for which a new trial should be ordered. The points made being exceedingly numerous, while they have been separately considered in the light of the whole record, are overruled generally, none of them being sufficient to require another trial of the case or any modification of the decree.

August 29, 1894.

Equitable petition, etc. Before Judge Roney. Richmond superior court. April term, 1893.

Frank H. Miller, William K. Miller and Boykin Wright, for plaintiff. J. R. Lamar, Harper & Brother and W. T. Davidson, for defendants.

*Judgment affirmed.*
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATION**I, J. Lance Franke, certify that:          1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filedin respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of SLM Student Loan Trust 2007-6 (the“Exchange Act periodic reports”);          2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;          3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required tobe provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Actperiodic reports;          4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements required under this reportunder Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, theservicer and administrator have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreement andadministration agreement, as applicable, in all material respects; and          5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backedsecurities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicingcriteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit tothis report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliancedescribed in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K. In giving thecertifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by Deutsche Bank TrustCompany Americas, as indenture trustee.Date: March 26, 2008   /s/ J. LANCE FRANKE J. Lance Franke  Vice President  (Senior Securitization Officer)  SLM Funding LLC
#### In the Matter of Tracy Boucher, Petitioner, v Carriage House Realty Corp., Respondent. David J. Sutton, P.C., Nonparty Appellant; Vincent J. Messina, Jr., Nonparty Respondent.

[962 NYS2d 718]

*952In a corporate dissolution proceeding, the nonparty David J. Sutton, EC., appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Molia, J.), dated September 30, 2011, as denied its motion to direct the nonparty Vincent J. Messina, Jr., as receiver, to pay it the sum of $23,154.71 for legal services purportedly rendered to Carriage House Realty Corp. in defense of the proceeding, and an attorney’s fee in the sum of $1,000 for preparation of its motion.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

This proceeding for dissolution of a corporation pursuant to Business Corporation Law § 1104 was commenced by Tracy Boucher, one of the 50% shareholders of Carriage House Realty Corp. (hereinafter Carriage House). In the early stages of the proceeding, Joan Gorta, the other 50% shareholder of Carriage House, retained David J. Sutton, EC. (hereinafter Sutton), ostensibly to represent Carriage House in the proceeding. After an order was issued directing the dissolution of Carriage House and appointing Vincent J. Messina, Jr., as receiver, Sutton moved to direct the receiver to pay Sutton the sum of $23,154.71 for legal services purportedly rendered to Carriage House in defense of the proceeding, and an attorney’s fee in the sum of $1,000 for preparation of Sutton’s motion. The Supreme Court denied the motion, and we affirm for a reason different from that relied upon by the Supreme Court. Specifically, there is no authority for allowing counsel fees incurred in defending a dissolution proceeding of this type to be paid out of corporate funds *(see Matter of Park Inn Ford,*249 AD2d 307 [1998]; *Matter of Rappoport,*110 AD2d 639, 641 [1985]; *Matter of Reinschreiber [Lipp],*70 AD2d 596 [1979]; *Matter of Cantelmo [BrewerCantelmo Co., Inc.—Daru, Vischi & Winter],*278 App Div 800 [1951]). Accordingly, Sutton’s motion was properly denied.

Skelos, J.E, Balkin, Austin and Sgroi, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 652 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 652

To provide financial assistance for the rehabilitation of the Benjamin 
   Franklin National Memorial in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and the 
 development of an exhibit to commemorate the 300th anniversary of the 
                      birth of Benjamin Franklin.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 17, 2005

  Mr. Specter (for himself and Mr. Santorum) introduced the following 
bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                           Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide financial assistance for the rehabilitation of the Benjamin 
   Franklin National Memorial in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and the 
 development of an exhibit to commemorate the 300th anniversary of the 
                      birth of Benjamin Franklin.

    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 ``Benjamin Franklin National Memorial 
Commemoration Act of 2005''.

SEC. 2. BENJAMIN FRANKLIN NATIONAL MEMORIAL.

    The Secretary of the Interior may provide a grant to the Franklin 
Institute to--
            (1) rehabilitate the Benjamin Franklin National Memorial 
        (including the Franklin statue) in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; 
        and
            (2) develop an interpretive exhibit relating to Benjamin 
        Franklin, to be displayed at a museum adjacent to the Benjamin 
        Franklin National Memorial.

SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    (a) In General.--There is authorized to be appropriated to carry 
out this Act $10,000,000.
    (b) Required Match.--The Secretary of the Interior shall require 
the Franklin Institute to match any amounts provided to the Franklin 
Institute under this Act.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-02-1998
<CASH>                                              23
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   28,504
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     51,940
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                85,110
<PP&E>                                          12,707
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,363
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 147,671
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           35,726
<BONDS>                                         66,667
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             9
<OTHER-SE>                                      45,269
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   147,671
<SALES>                                        189,964
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               189,964
<CGS>                                          143,326
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  178,238
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,773
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,953
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,871
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,082
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,082
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.45
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.45
        


</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, Relators

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

WRIT OF MANDAMUS

152nd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2017-83411

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On Wednesday, September 25, 2024, relators Wilma Reynolds and Carl Gordon

filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 

22.221; see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relators ask this court 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 consists of Chief Justice Christopher, Justices Spain and Poissant. (J. Spain 

dissenting with opinion to follow).