alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
ESCO, INC. 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 ESCO,  Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-QSB for the period ending  September  30, 2006, as filed with the  Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, William T. Foley,
President and Chief Financial  Officer of the Company,  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.


/s/ William T. Foley
--------------------
William T. Foley
President and Chief Financial Officer

November 14, 2006

A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to ESCO,  Inc. and will be retained by ESCO,  Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 32.1  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of Cleartronic, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  Date: May 14, 2010/s/ Larry ReidByLarry ReidPrincipal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 765 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
H. Res. 765

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                     December 17, 2019.
    Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to take 
from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 1158) to authorize cyber incident 
response teams at the Department of Homeland Security, and for other purposes, 
with the Senate amendment thereto, and to consider in the House, without 
intervention of any point of order, a motion offered by the chair of the 
Committee on Appropriations or her designee that the House concur in the Senate 
amendment with an amendment consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 116-
43. The Senate amendment and the motion shall be considered as read. The motion 
shall be debatable for one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and 
ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. The previous 
question shall be considered as ordered on the motion to its adoption without 
intervening motion.
    Sec. 2.  Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to take from 
the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 1865) to require the Secretary of the 
Treasury to mint a coin in commemoration of the opening of the National Law 
Enforcement Museum in the District of Columbia, and for other purposes, with the 
Senate amendment thereto, and to consider in the House, without intervention of 
any point of order, a motion offered by the chair of the Committee on 
Appropriations or her designee that the House concur in the Senate amendment 
with an amendment consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 116-44 
modified by the amendment printed in the report of the Committee on Rules 
accompanying this resolution. The Senate amendment and the motion shall be 
considered as read. The motion shall be debatable for one hour equally divided 
and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
Appropriations. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the 
motion to its adoption without intervening motion or demand for division of the 
question.
    Sec. 3.  The chair of the Committee on Appropriations may insert in the 
Congressional Record not later than December 17, 2019, such material as she may 
deem explanatory of the Senate amendments and the motions specified in the first 
two sections of this resolution.
    Sec. 4.  House Resolution 761 is hereby adopted.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
Exhibit 23.1

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We
consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No. 33-16059, No. 33-12755, No. 33-55614,
No. 33-80504, No. 33-3327 and No. 333-44180 of Sharper Image Corporation on Form S-8 of our report dated March 28,
2003, on the financial statements (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the restatement described in Note L to the financial
statements), incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Sharper Image Corporation for the year ended January 31, 2003, and of our report on the financial
statement schedule, dated March 28, 2003, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Sharper Image Corporation for the year ended January 31, 2003.

/s/
Deloitte & Touche LLP

San
Francisco, California
April 28, 2003

---

QuickLinks
##### 



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 on Form 10-QSB in accordance with Rule 15(d)-2 of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 of Iowa Renewable Energy, LLC (the Company) for the period ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Mike Bohannan, President and Principal
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, as amended; 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/ Mike Bohannan

Mike Bohannan, President

And Chief Executive Officer Dated: May 15, 2007  3
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Adam Maughan, Appellant.

[977 NYS2d 503]

Garry, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of St. Lawrence County (Richards, J.), rendered September 14, 2012, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of aggravated driving while intoxicated.

Defendant waived indictment and pleaded guilty to a superior court information charging him with aggravated driving while intoxicated. Pursuant to the plea agreement, defendant agreed to complete one year of interim probation, with the understanding that upon his successful completion of the interim probation, probation would be continued and he would receive one year of credit for the time spent on interim probation. However, defendant was advised that if he failed to successfully complete interim probation, he could be sentenced to a prison term of up to four years. Defendant also waived his right to appeal as part of the plea agreement. Thereafter, defendant admitted to violating the terms of his interim probation. Based upon this admission, County Court vacated the interim probation and sentenced defendant to a prison term of 1 to 4 years. Defendant now appeals.

We affirm. Defendant’s valid waiver of the right to appeal, which he does not challenge, precludes his sole contention on appeal that his sentence is harsh and excessive *(see People v Musser,*106 AD3d 1334, 1335 [2013]; *People v Morrison,*106 AD3d 1201, 1202 [2013]). Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

Rose, J.E, Lahtinen and McCarthy, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
# State County ZIP
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6548

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

EDWARD HUGH OKUN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior

District Judge. (3:08-cr-00132-REP-1)

Submitted: July 21, 2015 Decided: July 24, 2015

Before WILKINSON and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Edward Hugh Okun, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Daniel Cooke, Michael 

Steven Dry, Assistant United States Attorneys, Jessica D. Aber, 

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Edward Hugh Okun appeals the district court’s order denying 

his motion for a new trial under Fed. R. Crim. P. 33. We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we 

affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States 

v. Okun, No. 3:08-cr-00132-REP-1 (E.D. Va. Mar. 25, 2015). We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions 

are adequately presented in the materials before this court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### Steven Sands, Appellant, v State of New York et al., Respondents.

[853 NYS2d 555]

Leave to file a late claim cannot be granted with respect to the intentional tort claims as they all accrued more than one year before claimant moved for such leave (CFLR 215 [3]; Court of Claims Act § 10 [6]; *see Roberts v City Univ. of N.Y.,*41 AD3d 825 [2007]). The claim for negligent hiring and supervision against the State of New York lacks merit because it is uncontroverted in the record that defendant Vladimir Mejia, the security guard who allegedly assaulted claimant and caused his malicious prosecution, was an employee not of the State but of City College, part of defendant City University of New York, whose dismissal for failure to timely serve a claim or notice of intention to file a claim is not challenged by claimant on appeal.

To be meritorious, a claim must not be patently groundless, frivolous or legally defective, and the record as a whole must give reasonable cause to believe that a valid cause of action exists *(Matter of Santana v New York State Thruway Auth.,*92 Misc 2d 1, 11 [Ct Cl 1977]). Thus, the motion court did not abuse its discretion in denying claimant’s motion to file a late notice of claim pursuant to Court of Claims Act § 10 (6). Concur—Gonzalez, J.P., Buckley, Moskowitz and Acosta, JJ.
TDCJ Offender Details Page 1 of2 

qJ -:ft7-1-32-

I!) ii•NIU.!M4 Iii New Offender Search 

Offender Information Details 

Return to Search list 

SID Number: 

TDCJ Number: 

Name: 

Race: 

Gender: 

DOB: 

Maximum Sentence Date: 

Current Facility: 

Projected Release Date: 

Parole Eligibility Date: 

Offender Visitation Eligible: 

01394567 

00392834 

HATCHER,CHARLES LEWIS 

B 

M 

1949-07-24 

2016-07-20 

J MIDDLETON 

2016-07-20 

2016-07-20 

NO 

The offender is temporarily ineligible for visitation. Please call the offender's unit for any 

additional information. 

The visitation information is updated once daily during weekdays and multiple times per day 

on visitation days. 

SPECIAL INFORMATION FOR SCHEDULED RELEASE: 

Scheduled Release Date: Offender is not scheduled for release at this time. 

Scheduled Release Type: Will be determined when relea~e date is scheduled. 

Scheduled Release Location: Will be determined when release date is scheduled. 

Offense History: 

Offense 

Date Offense Sentence 

Date County Case 

No. 

1990-12-06 I BURG OF A BUILDING. I 1991-10-18 ITARRANTI 0427582A I 

Sentence (YYMM-DD) 

20-00-00 

http://offender.tdcj.texas.gov/OffenderSearch/offenderDetail.action?sid=01394567 7/23/2015
Exhibit 10.6
 AMENDMENT NO. 2
TO
MANAGEMENT SERVICES AGREEMENT
  WHEREAS
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 NOW, THEREFORE
 1.
    
    Section 12.1 of the Agreement is amended and restated to read as follows:Section 12.1 Redemption, Sale to Substitute Stockholder.Upon the occurrence of any of the following events, the shares held by any
then-current stockholder of the Practice will automatically be redeemed by the
Practice, and the Practice, without the need for any further action by any
Practice stockholder, officer or director, will immediately sell such shares to an
individual who is qualified to hold such shares under Delaware law:




---



##### 



2.
    
    Section 12.2 of the Agreement is amended and restated to read as follows:Section 12.2 Conduct of Business Following Redemption. In the case of
redemption by the Practice as a result of any of the events described in Section
12.1, the Practice agrees that it will conduct its business in the ordinary course
and will comply with all obligations which it is subject to, including, but not
limited to this Management Agreement and all client agreements.




---



##### 



IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
 VIRTUAL RADIOLOGIC
CORPORATIONBy:
    
    /s/ Robert C. KillTitle: President and Chief Executive OfficerVIRTUAL RADIOLOGIC

PROFESSIONALS OF NEW YORK, P.A.By:
    
    /s/
Eduard Michel, M.D.Title: President/s/
Eduard Michel, M.D.Eduard Michel, M.D.
EXHIBIT 31


       CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302(A) OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT


I, Jerome A. Cipponeri, President of Citicorp Mortgage Securities, Inc., certify
that:

1.   I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form
     8-K containing distribution or servicing reports filed in respect of
     periods included in the year covered by this annual report, of Citicorp
     Mortgage Securities, Inc.;

2.   Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a whole,
     does 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 as of
     the last day of the period covered by this annual report;

3.   Based upon my knowledge, the servicing information required to be provided
     to the trustee by the servicer under the pooling and servicing agreement is
     included in these reports;

4.   I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer
     under the pooling and servicing agreement and based upon the review
     required under the pooling and servicing agreement, and except as disclosed
     in the report, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the
     servicing agreement; and

5.   I have disclosed to the registrant's certified public accountants all
     significant deficiencies relating to the servicer's compliance with the
     minimum servicing standards in accordance with a review conducted in
     compliance with the Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers
     or similar standard as set forth in the pooling and servicing agreement.

Date: March 23, 2004


   /s/ Jerome A. Cipponeri
------------------------------
Name:  Jerome A. Cipponeri
Title: President
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 16

- 00377

- CV

L.A., III APPELLANT

V.

D.A. APPELLEE

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

FROM THE 324TH DISTR ICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

TRIAL COURT NO. 324

- 572833

- 15

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



### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1 

### AND JUDGMENT

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

We ha ve considered A ppellant ’ s “Voluntary Dismissal,” in which Appellant

states he “voluntarily dismisses” his appeal because the parties have settled their

dispute. Thus, we dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f).

We tax costs against A ppellant, for which let execution issue. See Tex. R. App.

P. 42.1(d) , 43.4

.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: GABRIEL, J.; LIVINGSTON, C.J.; and SUDDERTH, J.

DELIVERED: November 17, 2016

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS 

Appeal of -- ) 

) 

Amwaj Al-Sahel Company ) 

) 

Under Contract No. W91GF5-09-P-0458 ) 

APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT: 

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: 

ASBCA No. 59679 

Mr. Hatem Rateb 

Owner 

Raymond M. Saunders, Esq. 

Army Chief Trial Attorney 

MAJ Jamal A. Rhinehardt, J A 

Trial Attorney 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE 

Appellant filed this appeal from a contracting officer's decision denying its claim 

on 17 November 2014. After the pleadings were filed, the Board, by Order dated 

12 February 2015, directed the parties to indicate how they wished to proceed with 

respect to whether a hearing was required. By Order dated 3 March 2015, in response to 

appellant's 27 February 2015 letter, the Board clarified that the parties were to elect 

whether they desired to proceed to a hearing, a submission on the record, or alternative 

dispute resolution. In a 15 April 2015 letter, the government requested an oral hearing. 

Appellant did not make an election in response to the 12 February 2015 and 3 March 

2015 Orders. 

By Order dated 17 April 2015, the Board directed the parties to jointly propose 

three hearing dates within 30 days of the date of the Order. In a 9 May 2015 letter, the 

government stated that it had attempted to contact appellant to discuss possible hearing 

dates, but that appellant had not responded. The government therefore requested an 

extension of time to comply with the Board's 17 April 2015 Order. By Order dated 

11May2015, the Board granted the government's extension request and directed the 

parties to respond to the 17 April 2015 Order no later than 16 June 2015. In an 18 June 

2015 letter, the government stated that it had been unable to contact appellant. 

By Order dated 22 June 2015, appellant was directed to show cause why this 

appeal should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. The Order stated that if appellant 

failed to comply within 21 days, the Board may dismiss the appeal with prejudice under 

Board Rule 17 for failure to prosecute without further notice to the parties. To date, no 

response has been received. 
Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed with prejudice under Board Rule 17 for 

failure to prosecute. 

Dated: 23 July 2015 

I concur 

RICHARD SHACKLEFORD 

Administrative Judge 

Vice Chairman 

Armed Services Board 

of Contract Appeals 

.. 

N. STEMPLER 

Administrative Judge 

Acting Chairman 

Armed Services Board 

of Contract Appeals 

I concur 

Administrative Judge 

Armed Services Board 

of Contract Appeals 

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed 

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA No. 59679, Appeal of Amwaj Al-Sahel 

Company, rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. 

Dated: 

2 

JEFFREY D. GARDIN 

Recorder, Armed Services 

Board of Contract Appeals 

•
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0401

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

ROBERT MICHAEL ARELLANO,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including May 30, 2023, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

April 19 2023

04/19/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0401
#### In the Matter of Barry Tessler et al., Appellants, v Board of Education of the City of New York, Respondent.

[854 NYS2d 66]

*429Petitioners alleged that the student was unable to complete the SHSAT on October 27, 2007, due to noise in the exam room. After availing themselves of the procedures provided by the Department of Education, petitioners commenced this proceeding to permit a retake on November 17, 2007, or an opportunity to complete the questions he did not answer in the October test.

The relief sought by petitioners is no longer available, since the November SHSAT has already been administered, thus rendering that aspect of the appeal moot *(see e.g. Matter of Citineighbors Coalition of Historic Carnegie Hill v New York City Landmarks Preser v. Commn.,*2 NY3d 727 [2004]). The decision not to permit the student to retake the October test or to complete the questions he did not answer at that sitting was not arbitrary and capricious or an abuse of discretion.

This dispute is not appropriate for resolution in the judicial arena, since the “responsibility for resolving these questions is vested in a network of officials and boards, on both the local and State level” *(James v Board of Educ. of City of N.Y.,*42 NY2d 357, 368 [1977]).

We have considered the remainder of petitioners’ argument and find it unavailing. Concur—Tom, J.P., Friedman, Nardelli, Catterson and Moskowitz, JJ.
#### B.J. Hoppe, Respondent, v Board of Directors of the 51-78 Owners Corp. et al., Appellants.

[854 NYS2d 689]

The court improperly granted plaintiffs motion to amend the complaint in this dispute between plaintiff shareholder and defendants cooperative corporation and its board of directors in connection with defendants’ denial of plaintiff’s proposed alterations to her two units. Although leave to amend a pleading is freely granted (CPLR 3025 [b]), such leave should “not be granted upon mere request, without appropriate substantiation” *(Brennan v City of New York,*99 AD2d 445, 446 [1984]). Here, the proposed amended complaint seeks to include a breach of fiduciary duty claim against various past and present members of defendant board, yet ascribes no independent tortious conduct to any individual director *(see Messner v 112 E. 83rd St. Tenants Corp.,*42 AD3d 356, 357 [2007], *lv dismissed*9 NY3d 976 [2007]; *DeCastro v Bhokari,*201 AD 2d 382, 383 [1994]). Insofar as plaintiff alleges that one of the board members endeavored to coerce a settlement of the instant action, a review of the allegations contained in the proposed amended complaint reveals that the misconduct alleged was occasioned by the board acting in its corporate capacity, or by the board member acting within the scope of his corporate duties *(see Konrad v 136 E. 64th St. Corp.,*246 AD2d 324, 325-326 [1998]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Buckley and Catterson, JJ.