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

The undersigned executive officers of the
registrant hereby certify that this Form 10-Q/A fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained herein fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the registrant.



|                         |  |  |  |                                |  |                                                
|------------------------ |  |  |  | ------------------------------ |  | -----------------------------------------------
|                         |  |  |  | Parkvale Financial Corporation
|Dated: September 9, 2011 |  |  |  |                               
|                         |  |  | 
|                         |  |  |  | By:                            |  | /s/ Robert J. McCarthy, Jr.                    
|                         |  |  |  |                                |  | Robert J. McCarthy, Jr.                        
|                         |  |  |  |                                |  | Director, President and
Chief Executive Officer
|                         |  |  | 
|Dated: September 9, 2011 |  |  |  |                                |  |                                                
|                         |  |  | 
|                         |  |  |  | By:                            |  | /s/ Gilbert A. Riazzi                          
|                         |  |  |  |                                |  | Gilbert A. Riazzi                              
|                         |  |  |  |                                |  | Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer
exhib10-20.htm


    
      

      

    

    EXHIBIT
      10.20
 

    
 

    Current
      account affiliated company

    


    between

    


    Varuna
      AG, Baar

    (hereafter
      referred to as Varuna)

    


    and

    


    DWM
      Petroleum AG, Baar

    (hereafter
      referred to as DWM)

    


    I.
      PREAMBLE

    


    A
      current account-based loan exists between Varuna and DWM, with the possibility
      of an alternating obligation.

    


    Il.
      PAYING OUT / PAYING lN

    


    Withdrawals
      and deposits by Varuna are debited tram or credited to the current account
      on a
      continual basis. Further claims by Varuna or DWM against the other party to
      the
      contract are also debited tram or credited to the current account on a continual
      basis.

    


    III.
      LIMITS

    


    CHF
      1,000,000 on both sides.

    


    IV.
      INTEREST / REPAYMENT OBLIGATION

    


    1.
      Interest

    
      	
               

            	
              a.
                The current account interest is laid down once a year, each year,
                taking
                into account the underlying tax conditions laid down by the Swiss
                tax
                authorities.

            


    

    


    2.
      Repayment obligation

    a.
      For the time being, there is no specified repayment obligation.

    


    V.
      SURETIES

    


    1.
      None

    


    VI.
      TERM OF THE CONTRACT

    


    1.
      None

    


    VII.
      APPLICABLE LAW AND COURT OF JURISDICTION

    


    The
      legal relationship is subject to Swiss law. The court of jurisdiction
      and

    place
      of fulfillment of the contract is that of the head office of DWM.

    


    Date,
      place 05/09/2005, Horgen

    


    Varuna
      AG                                                                                                DWM
      Petroleum AG

    


    /s/
      Varuna
      AG                                                                                                /s/ DWM Petroleum
      AG
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION

I, Alan Campbell, Chief Financial Officer of Freescale Semiconductor Holdings I, Ltd., certify,
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



|(1) | the annual report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2007 (the Annual Report), which this statement accompanies fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) for the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m) and
|--- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(2) | information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Freescale Semiconductor Holdings I, Ltd.
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This certificate is being furnished solely for purposes of Section 906.

Dated: February 5, 2009



/s/ Alan
CampbellAlan Campbell Chief Financial Officer, Freescale Semiconductor Holdings I, Ltd.
Exhibit 32.1

Section 1350 Certification of the Chief Executive Officer

In connection with this Annual
Report of Sterling Bancshares, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, J. Downey Bridgwater,
President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 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.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |     |  |                                                                                               
|-------------------- |  | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: March 2, 2006 |  | By: |  | /s/    J. DOWNEY
BRIDGWATER                                                                   
|                     |  |     |  | J. Downey Bridgwater Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer Sterling Bancshares, Inc.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Howard Wesley COTTERMAN, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 09-10139.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

March 19, 2012.

Carmen F. Corbin, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USTU-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

William J. Kirchner, Nash & Kirchner, P.C., Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellee.

David Miles Porter, Assistant Federal Public Defender, FPDCA-Federal Public Defender’s Office, Sacramento, CA, Christopher Todd Handman, Hogan Lovells *1207U.S. LLP, Washington, DC, for Amicus Curiae.

D.C. No. 4:07-cr-01207-RCC-CRP-1.

ORDER

KOZINSKI, Chief Judge:

Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit.
#### Gus HNARAKIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 06-1478.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Oct. 31, 2006.

Decided: Nov. 2, 2006.

Gus Hnarakis, Appellant Pro Se. James A. Frederick, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Gus Hnarakis appeals the district court’s order substituting the United States as the Defendant and dismissing Hnarakis’s action for return of property, under the Federal Tort Claims Act. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Hnarakis v. United States,*No. 8:06-cv-00557-DKC (D.Md. Apr. 11, 2006). 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.*
#### State v. Apple

Case below: 182 N.C. App. - (3 April 2007)

No. 195P07

Def’s Motion for Temporary Stay (COA06-652)

Denied 04/26/07
## Contact Information

Bethesda MD20892

owen.cooper@nih.gov

October 2022

Back to Top
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 08-7095

ANDRE RAYMOND VINES, 

 Petitioner - Appellant, 

 v. 

BRYAN WATSON, Warden, Wallens Ridge State Prison, 

 Respondent - Appellee. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior 

District Judge (1:07-cv-01280-CMH-BRP) 

Submitted: November 20, 2008 Decided: November 26, 2008 

Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Andre Raymond Vines, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

Andre Raymond Vines seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) 

petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice 

or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not 

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A 

prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that 

reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the 

constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or 

wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district 

court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 

322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); 

Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have 

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Vines has 

not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a 

certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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. 

DISMISSED
#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. JAMES MEYNARDIE

No. 446PA05

(Filed 28 June 2007)

Sentencing— aggravating factors — position of trust or confidence — insufficient evidence — remand for resentencing

A first-degree sexual offense case involving the daughter of defendant’s former girlfriend is remanded for resentencing where the trial court sentenced defendant in the aggravated range based upon a finding that defendant took advantage of a position of trust or confidence but the record includes no description of the relationship among defendant, the victim, and the victim’s mother, and it is unclear what position of trust or confidence may have existed.

On discretionary review pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-31 of a unanimous decision of the Court of Appeals, 172 N.C. App. 127, 616 S.E.2d 21 (2005), affirming a judgment entered 20 May 2002 by Judge William C. Griffin, Jr. in Superior Court, Beaufort County, but remanding the case for resentencing after granting defendant’s Motion for Appropriate Relief. Heard in the Supreme Court 7 May 2007.

*Roy Cooper, Attorney General, by Robert C. Montgomery, Special Deputy Attorney General, for the State-appellant.*

*Daniel F. Read for defendant-appellee.*

PER CURIAM.

Defendant entered *Alford*pleas to one charge of first-degree sexual offense and two charges of indecent liberties with a minor. The trial court consolidated all three charges into one judgment and sentenced based upon the most serious charge, the first-degree sexual offense. This offense involved B.H., the daughter of defendant’s former girlfriend. The trial court sentenced defendant in the aggravated range, finding defendant took advantage of a position of trust or confidence to commit the offense. Because the record fails to include any description of the relationship existing among defendant, B.H., and B.H.’s mother at the time of the offense, it is unclear what position of trust or confidence may have existed. The matter is remanded to the Court of Appeals for further remand to the trial court for resentencing, where evidence of the existence of this and other factors in *417aggravation may be presented to the jury and factors in mitigation may be considered by the court.

AFFIRMED AND REMANDED.
EXHIBIT 32.2

SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION - CFO

In connection with the Annual Report of Plains
Exploration & Production Company (the Company) on Form 10-K/A for the period ending December 31, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Winston M.
Talbert, 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:

To the best of my knowledge, after reasonable investigation:



| | (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.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: February 25, 2013



/s/ Winston M. TalbertWinston M. TalbertChief Financial Officer


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.

A signed original of this written statement required
by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version 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.
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 619 

To amend title II of the Social Security Act to repeal the Government 

pension offset and windfall elimination provisions. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 14, 2005 

Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Ms. COLLINS, Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr. SPECTER, 

Mrs. LINCOLN, Mr. DODD, Mr. DAYTON, and Mr. NELSON of Florida) 

introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 

Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend title II of the Social Security Act to repeal the 

Government pension offset and windfall elimination provisions. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Social Security Fair5 ness Act of 2005’’. 
2 

•S 619 IS

1 SEC. 2. REPEAL OF GOVERNMENT PENSION OFFSET PROVI2 SIONS. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 202(k) of the Social Secu4 rity Act (42 U.S.C. 402(k)) is amended by striking para5 graph (5). 

6 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— 

7 (1) Section 202(b) of the Social Security Act 

8 (42 U.S.C. 402(b)) is amended by striking ‘‘sub9 sections (k)(5) and (q)’’ and inserting ‘‘subsection 

10 (q)’’. 

11 (2) Section 202(c) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 

12 402(c)) is amended by striking ‘‘subsections (k)(5) 

13 and (q)’’ and inserting ‘‘subsection (q)’’. 

14 (3) Section 202(e) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 

15 402(e)) is amended by striking ‘‘subsections (k)(5), 

16 subsection (q),’’ and inserting ‘‘subsection (q)’’. 

17 (4) Section 202(f) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 

18 402(f)) is amended by striking ‘‘subsections (k)(5), 

19 subsection (q)’’ and inserting ‘‘subsection (q)’’. 

20 SEC. 3. REPEAL OF WINDFALL ELIMINATION PROVISIONS. 

21 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 215 of the Social Security 

22 Act (42 U.S.C. 415) is amended— 

23 (1) in subsection (a), by striking paragraph (7); 

24 (2) in subsection (d), by striking paragraph (3); 

25 and 

26 (3) in subsection (f), by striking paragraph (9). 
3 

•S 619 IS

1 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—Subparagraphs 

2 (C) and (D) of section 202(e)(2) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 

3 402(e)(2)(C), (D)) are each amended by striking ‘‘section 

4 215(f)(5), 215(f)(6), or 215(f)(9)(B)’’ and inserting 

5 ‘‘paragraph (5) or (6) of section 215(f)’’. 

6 SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

7 The amendments made by this Act shall apply with 

8 respect to monthly insurance benefits payable under title 

9 II of the Social Security Act for months after December 

10 2005. Notwithstanding section 215(f) of the Social Secu11 rity Act, the Commissioner of Social Security shall adjust 

12 primary insurance amounts to the extent necessary to take 

13 into account the amendments made by this Act. 

Æ
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 Arete Industries, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2006, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Charles L. Gamber, Chief Executive 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.




  Dated:  May 25, 2006            By:  /s/ Charles L. Gamber
                                  ------------------------------------------
                                  Charles L.Gamber, Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                            5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
UNAUDITED  FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS FOR THE NINE MONTH PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 2000,
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                             9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                   JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                        MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                                  878,000
<SECURITIES>                                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                                            19,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                                  0
<INVENTORY>                                             174,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                      1,121,000
<PP&E>                                                  787,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                          215,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                        1,943,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                   574,000
<BONDS>                                               1,515,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                         0
<PREFERRED>                                                   0
<COMMON>                                                 15,000
<OTHER-SE>                                             (155,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                          1,943,000
<SALES>                                                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                      1,225,000
<CGS>                                                         0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                         5,269,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                              0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                      251,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      (4,295,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  (4,295,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                               0
<CHANGES>                                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                                         (4,295,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                               (0.28)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                             (0.28)


</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of H.M., Respondent, v E.T., Appellant.

Submitted September 20, 2010;

decided November 17, 2010

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from, affirming only Family Court’s September 2007 order and leaving the matter pending for further judicial action, does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution.
Order entered July 25, 2022

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-22-00158-CV

KELLY M. LIEBBE AND JONATHAN RUTE, Appellants

V.

STEPHEN COURTNEY, M.D. AND STEPHEN COURTNEY, M.D., P.A.,

Appellees

On Appeal from the 296th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 296-03470-2016

ORDER

A sealed supplemental clerk’s record containing five documents was filed on 

March 14, 2022. Because the record before this Court did not contain a sealing 

order, we directed the parties to provide written verification whether the trial court 

signed a sealing order. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 76a. On July 5, 2022, counsel for each 

appellant filed written verifications that the trial court did not sign a sealing order. 

Accordingly, we STRIKE the sealed supplemental clerk’s record filed on March 

14, 2022. 
We ORDER Collin County District Clerk Lynne Finley to file, within 

seven days of the date of this order, a supplemental clerk’s record without seal

containing the same five documents filed in the March 14 sealed supplemental 

clerk’s record.

We DIRECT the Clerk of this Court to send a copy of this order to Ms. 

Finley and all parties.

/s/ BONNIE LEE GOLDSTEIN

JUSTICE