alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Luis VAZQUEZ-MEJIA; Angela Martinez Aguirre, Petitioners, v. Michael B. MUKASEY,* Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 06-73823.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 20, 2007.**

Filed Dec. 28, 2007.

Luis Vazquezr-Mejia, Corona, CA, pro se.

Angela Martinez Aguirre, Corona, CA, pro se.

CAC-District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Stacy S. Paddack, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before GOODWIN, WALLACE, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.

*

 Michael B. Mukasey is substituted for his predecessor, Alberto R. Gonzales, as Attorney General of the United States, pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 43(c)(2).

**

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM ***

Luis Vazquez-Mejia and his wife Angela Martinez Aguirre seek review of an order *987of the Board of Immigration Appeals summarily affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) order denying their application for cancellation of removal. We dismiss the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review the IJ’s discretionary determination that petitioners failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a qualifying relative. *See Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft,*327 F.3d 887, 892 (9th Cir.2003).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Exhibit 32.2


        CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) OF THE EXCHANGE ACT AND
         18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ENACTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF
                         THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the filing of Zunicom, Inc. and Subsidiary (the
"Company") Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2008 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"),I, John C. Rudy, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) of the Exchange Act and 18 U.S.C. (SS) 1350, as
enacted 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 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/ John C. Rudy
----------------------
John C. Rudy
Chief Financial Officer
(principal financial officer

May 14, 2009



























                                Exhibit 32.2 - 1
Dismissed and Opinion Filed April 30, 2024

S

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-23-01236-CR

ADRIAN HERNANDEZ, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 363rd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F-19-31962

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Reichek, and Justice Goldstein

Opinion by Chief Justice Burns

Before the Court is appellant’s Motion to Withdraw Appeal. The motion is 

signed by appellant and his counsel. We grant the Motion to Withdraw Appeal, and 

we order the appeal dismissed.

231236f.u05

Do Not Publish

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b)

/Robert D. Burns, III/

ROBERT D. BURNS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE
–2–

Court of Appeals

S

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

ADRIAN HERNANDEZ, Appellant

No. 05-23-01236-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 363rd Judicial 

District Court, Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F-19-31962.

Opinion delivered by Chief Justice 

Burns. Justices Reichek and 

Goldstein participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, appellant’s Motion to Withdraw 

Appeal is GRANTED and the appeal is DISMISSED.

Judgment entered this 30th day of April, 2024.
TRACEY DEWRELL,

Appellant,

v.

TOM DEWRELL, 

INDIVIDUALLY AND AS THE 

PERSONAL 

REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE 

ESTATE OF GEORGE L. 

DEWRELL,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D14-611/1D13-4914

_____________________________/

Opinion filed July 16, 2014.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Okaloosa County.

Michael A. Flowers, Judge.

Tracey Dewrell, pro se, Appellant.

Susan L. Kelsey of Kelsey Appellate Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

VAN NORTWICK, CLARK, and SWANSON, JJ. CONCUR.
**Exhibit 31.2**RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATION  I, Allan E. Mehlow, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Croghan Bancshares, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrolsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usbyothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report isbeingprepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrolsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation;and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, oris reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting;and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho havea significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.     Date: July 26, 2005 /s/ Allan E. Mehlow         Allan E. Mehlow, Treasurer  
20
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 11-1847

___________

Troy J. Daigle, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Eastern

* District of Arkansas.

Hartford Life and *

Accident Insurance Company, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellee. *

___________

Submitted: December 2, 2011

Filed: December 7, 2011

___________

Before LOKEN, BYE, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Troy J. Daigle appeals the district court’s order granting Hartford Life and

1

Accident Insurance Company’s (Hartford’s) cross-motion for judgment on the

administrative record in this Employment Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)

lawsuit. Upon de novo review, see Menz v. Procter & Gamble Health Care Plan, 520

F.3d 865, 869 (8th Cir. 2008), we find no abuse of discretion in the decision to

terminate Daigle’s long-term disability benefits. See Green v. Union Sec. Ins. Co.,

The Honorable Brian S. Miller, United States District Judge for the Eastern 1

District of Arkansas.
646 F.3d 1042, 1050 (8th Cir. 2011) (stating an administrator’s decision should be

affirmed if it is reasonable, i.e., supported by substantial evidence; decision is

reasonable if reasonable person could have—not would have—reached similar

decision, given evidence before him). Contrary to Daigle’s assertions on appeal,

Hartford was not required to conduct an independent medical examination. See

Rutledge v. Liberty Life Assurance Co. of Boston, 481 F.3d 655, 661 (8th Cir. 2007)

(stating an ERISA plan administrator need not order independent medical

examination when insured’s supporting evidence is facially insufficient); see also

Manning v. Am. Republic Ins. Co., 604 F.3d 1030, 1041 (8th Cir. 2010) (concluding

it is not unreasonable for plan administrator to base denial of benefits on lack of

objective evidence). Further, as to Hartford’s reliance on the opinions of two

reviewing orthopedic physicians concerning Daigle’s functionality, Hartford was not

required to accord special weight to the opinions of Daigle’s primary care physicians,

see Midgett v. Washington Group Int’l Long TermDisability Plan, 561 F.3d 887, 897

(8th Cir. 2009), especially where they appeared to be based mostly on his subjective

reports. Finally, it was reasonable for Hartford to use videotape surveillance to

observe Daigle’s condition, see Green, 646 F.3d at 1052 (stating video evidence need

not conclusively establish a claimant can work full time, but it does provide another

form of objective evidence upon which an ERISA plan administrator may base its

claims determination); furthermore, this was only one piece of the evidence Hartford

cited in its decision.

The district court is affirmed.

______________________________

-2-
### The Honorable Richard H. Kyle, United States District Judge 1 

### for the District of Minnesota, sitting by designation. No. 96-3750

Mid-South Road Builders, Inc., * * Appellee, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the Eastern
v. * District of Arkansas * Western Division * Arkansas Contractors Licensing * [UNPUBLISHED] Board, Howard Williams, James * Edwards, Randy McNulty, Roger * Richmond, Ray Nabholz, Silas * Snow, Phil Johnson [sic] and * George McGill, * * Appellants. *

Submitted: May 19, 1997 Filed: July 31, 1997

Before BEAM and LOKEN, Circuit Judges, and KYLE, District Judge. 1

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is remanded to the Distr ict Court for reconsideration of its October 2, 1996 O rder in view of the Arkansas Supreme Court’s May 27, 1996 O pinion in Mid-South Road Builders, Inc. v. Arkansas Contractor s Licensing Board , No. 96-447.

### -2- A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
EXHIBIT
32.1



CERTIFICATION
OF PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18
 U.S.C. ss. 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY

ACT OF 2002



In
connection with the Quarterly Report (the "Report") of Digerati Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-Q for the period ending January 31, 2017, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Arthur
L. Smith, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 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 in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.



|By | /s/
    Arthur L. Smith     | 
|-- | --------------------------- | 
|   | Arthur
    L. Smith         | 
|   | President
    and           | 
|   | Chief
    Executive Officer | 
|   | February
    27, 2017       |
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-Q of Kronos Incorporated (the Company) for the period ended December 30, 2006 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
the undersigned, Paul A. Lacy, President and Principal Executive Officer of the Company, and Mark V. Julien, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, 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: February 8, 2007 |  |  |  | /s/ Paul A. Lacy                         
|                        |  |  |  | Paul A. Lacy                             
|                        |  |  |  | President and Principal Executive Officer
|                        |  | 
|Dated: February 8, 2007 |  |  |  | /s/ Mark V. Julien                       
|                        |  |  |  | Mark V. Julien                           
|                        |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer                  

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Kronos Incorporated and will be retained by Kronos Incorporated and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
III 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 132 

Designating the week of April 5 through April 11, 2015, as ‘‘National 

Association of Junior Auxiliaries Week’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 27 (legislative day, MARCH 26), 2015 

Mr. WICKER (for himself and Mr. COCHRAN) submitted the following 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Designating the week of April 5 through April 11, 2015, 

as ‘‘National Association of Junior Auxiliaries Week’’. 

Whereas the National Association of Junior Auxiliaries and 

the members of the National Association of Junior Auxiliaries provide valuable service and leadership opportunities for women who wish to take an active role in their 

communities; 

Whereas the mission of the National Association of Junior 

Auxiliaries is to encourage member chapters to render 

charitable services that— 

(1) are beneficial to the general public; and 

(2) place a particular emphasis on providing for the 

needs of children; and 

Whereas since the founding of the National Association of 

Junior Auxiliaries in 1941, the organization has provided 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 132 IS 

strength and inspiration to women who want to effect 

positive change in their communities: Now, therefore, be 

it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) designates the week of April 5 through 

3 April 11, 2015, as ‘‘National Association of Junior 

4 Auxiliaries Week’’; 

5 (2) recognizes the great contributions made by 

6 members of the National Association of Junior Aux7 iliaries to their communities and to the people of the 

8 United States; and 

9 (3) especially commends the work of the mem10 bers of the National Association of Junior Auxil11 iaries to better the lives of children in the United 

12 States. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 32.1  CERTIFICATE 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 (the "Report") on the Form 10-K of Oroplata Resources, Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended September 30, 2017, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Douglas D Cole, Chief Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer and Director, 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 and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and  2. The information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  Date: January 16, 2018By:/s/ Douglas D ColeDouglas D ColeChief Executive Officer,
Chief Financial Officer
Chairman   17
**Exhibit 31.2**RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATION     I, Kendall W. Rieman, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2007of Croghan Bancshares, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report isbeing prepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.      Date: July 26, 2007 /s/ Kendall W. Rieman   Kendall W. Rieman, Treasurer   (Principal Financial Officer)   
21
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-40612

Summary Calendar

JASON J. HERNANDEZ,

Plaintiff−Appellant,

versus

GREG ABBOTT, Governor of the State of Texas; 

BRYAN COLLIER, Executive Director, 

 Texas Department of Criminal Justice; 

ROBERT GRANT, Program Supervisor V 

 of the Security Threat Group Management Office; 

TOD HARRIS, Senior Warden,

Defendants−Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

No. 9:17-CV-23

Before SMITH, WIENER, and WILLETT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 

5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

July 31, 2018

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 17-40612 Document: 00514578508 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/31/2018
No. 17-40612

2

Jason Hernandez, Texas prisoner #1655115, challenges the denial of his 

motion for class certification. He filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging civil 

rights violations by state and prison officials against prisoners in solitary 

confinement at Polunksy Security Housing Unit. He contends that the district 

court abused its discretion when it denied class certification, and he questions 

the order of the magistrate judge (“MJ”) severing the claims into separate suits

and the denial of his motion for appointment of counsel. He also moves for a 

preliminary injunction on behalf of the class based on inadequate medical care 

and lack of access to courts; he seeks leave to amend that pleading.

A party wishing to appeal a denial of class certification must petition this 

court for leave to do so. FED. R. CIV. P. 23(f). We pretermit whether Hernandez 

has complied with that requirement because as we deny relief on other 

grounds. This court has wide discretion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 to permit an appeal from an order denying class certification. See 

Microsoft Corp. v. Baker, 137 S. Ct. 1702, 1706 (2017). Hernandez has not 

made a showing that we should exercise that discretion. See id. at 1710. 

Because the parties did not consent to proceed before an MJ under 28 U.S.C. 

§ 636(c)(1), the orders issued by the MJ are not directly appealable to this 

court. See Donaldson v. Ducote, 373 F.3d 622, 624−25 (5th Cir. 2004). Hernandez also has not shown that he is entitled to injunctive relief from this court in 

the first instance. See Byrum v. Landreth, 566 F.3d 442, 445 (5th Cir. 2009); 

Greene v. Fair, 314 F.2d 200, 202 (5th Cir. 1963).

Permission to appeal the denial of class certification is DENIED. The 

appeal of the severance order and of the denial of counsel is DISMISSED for 

want of jurisdiction. Hernandez’s motion for a preliminary injunction is 

DENIED, and his motion to amend is GRANTED. Any other outstanding 

motions are DENIED.

 Case: 17-40612 Document: 00514578508 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/31/2018
Exhibit 32.2


Certification of Chief Financial Officer


Pursuant to


Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)


In connection with the annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2016 (the “Report”) of Fifth Street Senior Floating Rate Corp . (the “Registrant”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Steven M. Noreika , the Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, 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 Registrant.





/s/   Steven M. NoreikaName:    Steven M. NoreikaDate: December 13, 2016