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

                           Section 1350 Certification

In connection with the Form 10-QSB of DirectView, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-QSB for the quarter ending March 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michele Ralston,
acting 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 and belief:

         (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.

/s/Michele Ralston
---------------------
   Michele Ralston
   Acting Chief Financial Officer

May 22, 2006

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
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.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 530 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

  2d Session
                                H. R. 530

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              July 7, 2004

  Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
                For the relief of Tanya Andrea Goudeau.

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

SECTION 1. IMMEDIATE RELATIVE STATUS FOR TANYA ANDREA GOUDEAU.

    (a) In General.--Tanya Andrea Goudeau shall be classified as a 
child under section 101(b)(1)(E) of the Immigration and Nationality Act 
for purposes of approval of a relative visa petition filed under 
section 204 of such Act by her adoptive parent and the filing of an 
application for an immigrant visa or adjustment of status.
    (b) Adjustment of Status.--If Tanya Andrea Goudeau enters the 
United States before the filing deadline specified in subsection (c), 
she shall be considered to have entered and remained lawfully and 
shall, if otherwise eligible, be eligible for adjustment of status 
under section 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act as of the date 
of the enactment of this Act.
    (c) Deadline for Application and Payment of Fees.--Subsections (a) 
and (b) shall apply only if the petition and the application for 
issuance of an immigrant visa or the application for adjustment of 
status are filed with appropriate fees within 2 years after the date of 
the enactment of this Act.
    (d) Reduction of Immigrant Visa Number.--Upon the granting of an 
immigrant visa or permanent residence to Tanya Andrea Goudeau, the 
Secretary of State shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by 1, 
for the current or next following fiscal year, the worldwide level of 
family-sponsored immigrants under section 201(c)(1)(A) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act.
    (e) Denial of Preferential Immigration Treatment for Certain 
Relatives.--The natural parents, brothers, and sisters of Tanya Andrea 
Goudeau shall not, by virtue of such relationship, be accorded any 
right, privilege, or status under the Immigration and Nationality Act.

SEC. 2. ELIGIBILITY FOR CITIZENSHIP.

    For purposes of section 320 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 
Tanya Andrea Goudeau shall be considered to have satisfied the 
requirements applicable to adopted children under section 101(b)(1) of 
such Act.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 6, 2004.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5                      
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                         38,486
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  304,457
<ALLOWANCES>                                   40,535
<INVENTORY>                                    41,595
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               381,118
<PP&E>                                         289,836
<DEPRECIATION>                                 144,151
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 3,079,583
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          576,186
<BONDS>                                        2,029,711
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          558,200
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       984,477
<OTHER-SE>                                     (1,124,187)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   3,079,583
<SALES>                                        411,136
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               411,136
<CGS>                                          93,193
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  93,193
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               321,267
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             40,418
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (45,994)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (45,994)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (45,994)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (.41)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.41)
        


</TABLE>
## United States Court of Appeals **For the Eighth Circuit**

___________________________
No. 21

- 3919

___________________________
United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Clarence L. Woolsoncroft

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant

____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Western

____________
Submitted: June 22 , 2022 Filed: June 27, 2022 [Unpublished]

____________
Before G RUENDER, BENTON, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Clarence Woolsoncroft received a 120

- month prison sentence after he pleaded guilty to being a felon and unlawful drug user in possession of firearms and
ammunition. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 922(g)(3), 924(a)(2). In an Anders brief, counsel challenges the offense

- level calculation. See Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). A pro se supplemental brief urges us to vacate on the ground that-2- Woolsoncroft be lieved his civil right s had been restored

. See Rehaif v. United States

, 139 S. Ct. 2191, 2200 (2019)

.

We conclude that the district court 1 did not clearly err when it applied the challenged enhancements

, see United States v. Turner , 781 F.3d 374, 393 (8th Cir. 2015), nor when it denied an acceptance

- of

- responsibility reduction, see United
States v. Davis , 875 F.3d 869, 875 (8th Cir. 2017). T here is also no evidence that his past felon y has bee n “expunged,” or that his “civil rights ” have been restored.
See 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(20)(B) ; see also United States v. Crumble , 965 F.3d 642, 645 (8th Cir. 2020).

Finally, we have independently reviewed the record and conclude that no
other non

- frivolous issues exist. See Penson v. Ohio

, 488 U.S. 75, 82

– 83 (1988). We accordingly affirm the judgment of the district court and grant counsel permission to withdraw.

______________________________

1 The Honorable Rebecca Goodgame Ebinger, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

MICHAEL MARQUARDT

, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 19

- 3287

[ February 20, 2020 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for

the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County ; Jeffrey Dana Gillen

, Judge; L.T. Case No. 2009CF005155AMB

.

Michael Marquardt, Avon Park, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

G ERBER

, F ORST a nd K LINGENSMITH

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000884504
<NAME> THEROMENERGY CORPORATION
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          44,672
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   133,651
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               178,323
<PP&E>                                          19,809
<DEPRECIATION>                                (14,553)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 183,579
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,099,605
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    51,553,000
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   183,579
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  211,010
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (13,087)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (221,784)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (221,784)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.00)
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THERMOENERGY CORPORATION FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30,
1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000884504
<NAME> THERMOENERGY CORPORATION
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          50,117
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               176,549
<PP&E>                                          19,809
<DEPRECIATION>                                (15,344)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 422,878
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,817,730
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,241
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   422,878
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  652,398
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              57,573
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (700,610)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (700,610)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.18)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.18)
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-7051

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MARTIR VELASQUEZ ARAGON, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CR-97-18-A, CA-99-879-AM) Submitted: February 10, 2000 Decided: February 15, 2000 Before WIDENER and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Martir Velasquez Aragon, Appellant Pro Se. Katherine Mary Kelly, Bryan Cunningham, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* Although the district court’s judgment or order is marked as “filed” on July 22, 1999, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on July 21, 1999. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the judgment or order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986). 2 PER CURIAM: Martir Velasquez Aragon seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 1999). Aragon also seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion for reconsideration under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate ofappealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Aragon , Nos. CR-97-18-A; CA-99- 879-AM (E.D. Va. July 1, 1999; July 22, 1999). * We dispense withoral 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
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit 

___________________________

No. 21-3919

___________________________

 

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Clarence L. Woolsoncroft

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Southern District of Iowa - Western

____________

Submitted: June 22, 2022

Filed: June 27, 2022

[Unpublished] 

____________

 

Before GRUENDER, BENTON, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.

____________

 

PER CURIAM.

Clarence Woolsoncroft received a 120-month prison sentence after he pleaded 

guilty to being a felon and unlawful drug user in possession of firearms and 

ammunition. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 922(g)(3), 924(a)(2). In an Anders brief, 

counsel challenges the offense-level calculation. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 

738 (1967). A pro se supplemental brief urges us to vacate on the ground that 
-2- 

Woolsoncroft believed his civil rights had been restored. See Rehaif v. United States, 

139 S. Ct. 2191, 2200 (2019). 

We conclude that the district court1 did not clearly err when it applied the 

challenged enhancements, see United States v. Turner, 781 F.3d 374, 393 (8th Cir. 

2015), nor when it denied an acceptance-of-responsibility reduction, see United 

States v. Davis, 875 F.3d 869, 875 (8th Cir. 2017). There is also no evidence that 

his past felony has been “expunged,” or that his “civil rights” have been restored. 

See 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(20)(B); see also United States v. Crumble, 965 F.3d 642, 645 

(8th Cir. 2020).

Finally, we have independently reviewed the record and conclude that no 

other non-frivolous issues exist. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82–83 (1988). 

We accordingly affirm the judgment of the district court and grant counsel 

permission to withdraw.

______________________________

1

The Honorable Rebecca Goodgame Ebinger, United States District Judge for 

the Southern District of Iowa.
Case 2:11-cr-00470-SDW   Document 32   Filed 11/29/11   Page 1 of 1 PageID: 100
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7136

DONZELL L. JACKSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus THE COUNTY OF DINWIDDIE, Virginia; OFFICER MARTIN, County Administrator; SAMUEL SHANDS, Sheriff, Defendants - Appellees.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-97-917) Submitted: April 15, 1999 Decided: April 21, 1999 Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Donzell L. Jackson, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Jackson appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1998) complaint under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915A (West Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find that this appeal fails to state a claimupon which relief may be granted. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Jackson v. County of Dinwiddie , No. CA-97-917 (E.D. Va. July 1, 1998). We dispense withoral 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
#### SECURITIES and EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ONYX CAPITAL ADVISORS, LLC and Michael A. Farr, Defendants, and Roy Dixon, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.

No. 2013-1110.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

April 23, 2013.

Michael O’Connell, Esq., Trial Attorney, Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Roy Dixon, Jr., Atlanta, GA, for Defendant-Appellant.

ORDER

The court having received no objection in response to its order of April 5, 2013,

It Is Ordered That:

(1) The motion for reconsideration is granted.

(2) The court’s March 5, 2013 order is vacated.

(3) The appeal is transferred to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF THE

PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Eric Johnson, the CEO of First Responder Products Inc., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of First Responder Products Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended July 31, 2007 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of First Responder Products Inc.



|                         |                                  
|------------------------ | ---------------------------------
|Date: September 14, 2007 | /s/ Eric Johnson                 
|                         | Eric Johnson                     
|                         | Chief Executive Officer/President
**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 Piedmont Mining Company, Inc. (the
        “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the
        Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the
        undersigned, in the capacities and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies
        pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
        the
        Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:
  1. The
        Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
        the
        Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
  2. The
        information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
        the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.
 Date:
                    May 16, 2007By:
                /s/
                    Robert M. Shields,
                    Jr.Name:
                    Robert M. Shields, Jr.Title:
                    Chief Financial Officer
 A
        signed
        original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
        authentications, 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 Piedmont Mining Company, Inc. and will
        be
        retained by Piedmont Mining Company, Inc. and furnished to the Securities
        and
        Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5283 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5283

         To suspend temporarily the duty on Disperse blue 281.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 7, 2004

 Mr. Wilson of South Carolina introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
         To suspend temporarily the duty on Disperse blue 281.

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

SECTION 1. SUSPENSION OF DUTY ON DISPERSE BLUE 281.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.32.10      Disperse blue 281   Free         No Change        No Change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         (CAS Nos. 53950-                                                   31/2007
                         33-7, 22578-86-5,
                         56548-64-2, and
                         67674-22-0)
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         3204.11.50)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```