alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit
32.1








CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18
U.S.C.  SECTION 1350)








In
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Aware, Inc. (the “Company”)
for the quarter ended March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of the undersigned Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifies, to the
best knowledge and belief of the signatory, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:





(1)
            The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; 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/   Michael A.
      Tzannes
            
            /s/   Richard P.
      MobergChief
      Executive Officer
            
            Chief
      Financial OfficerDate:  May
      9, 2008
            
            Date:
      May 9, 2008








The certification set forth above is
being furnished as an exhibit solely pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-Q or as
a separate disclosure document of the Company or the certifying
officers.
**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 Braintech, Inc. (the "Company ") on Form 10-QSB for the nine months ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Edward A. White, the Principal Financial and Accounting 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 my 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 result of operations of the Company.

 

/s/ Edward A. White                                  

Edward A. White

Principal Financial Officer and Accounting Officer 

November 14, 2006
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

November 24, 2015

d1116 

# Order

Clerk November 24, 2015

150255(22)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 150255

COA: 321810

Wayne CC: 07

- 006223

- FC

ANTHONY RALPH MATTISON,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s April 28,

2015 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was

entered erroneously.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the cou rt has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4.

1 Although the C ity of Mansfield urges that we lack

jurisdiction to consider the appeal on the basis that the district

court’s order dismissing the claims again st the City was

interlocutory and not certified by the district court under Federal

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-10296

Summary Calendar

RODERICK LADELL BONNER,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

CITY OF MANSFIELD, TEXAS; MONTE ROBERTS, Police Officer;

JESUS VALLES; and DAVID GRIFFIN,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:01-CV-760-A

November 1, 2002

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Roderick Ladell Bonner, Texas prisoner #1057449, proceeding

pro se and in forma pauperis

, appeals the district court’s Rule

54(b) final judgment dismissing his § 1983 claims against the City

of Mansfield for failure to state a claim. 1 Because Bonner failsRule of Civil Procedure 54(b), the district court’s Final Judgment

as to Certain Defendant, entered the same day as its order

dismissing Bonner’s claims against the City, is a Rule 54(b) final

judgment, as the accompanying order dismissing the claims makes “an

express determination that there is no just reason for delay” and

includes “an express direction for the entry of judgment.” F E D

. R.

C IV . P. 54(b).

2 Price v. Roark

, 256 F.3d 364, 368 n.2 (5th Cir. 2001). To

the extent that Bonner is appealing any other order of the district

court, such orders would be interlocutory and thus we have no

jurisdiction to consider such an appeal. B riargrove Shopping Ctr.

Joint Venture v. Pilgrim Enter., Inc.

, 170 F.3d 536, 538 (5th Cir.

1999).

3 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2 (“If upon [review], it appears to the court

that the appeal is frivolous and entirely without merit, the appeal

will be dismissed.”).

2 to present any argument in his opening brief regarding the only

appealable issue–the propriety of the district court’s dismissal of

his cl aims against the City of Mansfield–the issue is abandoned. 2

Bonner’s appeal is without merit and therefore frivolous. On this

basis, the appeal is hereby DISMISSED. 3

We caution Bonner that any additional frivolous appeals filed

by him or on his behalf will invite the imposition of sanctions.

To avoid sanctions, Bonner is cautioned to review any pending

appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that are

frivolous. All outstanding motions are DENIED.
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of
Chief Financial Officer of
Gold Banc Corporation, Inc.

I, Rick J.
Tremblay,  Chief Financial  Officer of Gold Banc  Corporation,  Inc.,  hereby  certify,
in  accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

| | (a.) | The
quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2005, which
accompanies this certification, fully complies with the requirements of  Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;  and
| | ---- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (b.) | The
information contained in the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended
September 30, 2005, which accompanies this certification, fairly presents,  in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations  of Gold Banc
Corporation, Inc.
| | ---- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated:  November 4, 2005.

| | By:                                                          | /s/ Rick J. Tremblay | 
| | ------------------------------------------------------------ | -------------------- | 
| | Rick J. TremblayExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial |
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                              MAXXIM MEDICAL, INC.

                         950 Winter Street, Suite 2900
                          Waltham, Massachusetts 02451

               LETTER TO COMMISSION PURSUANT TO TEMPORARY NOTE 3T

                                 March 29, 2002



Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549-0408

Ladies and Gentlemen:

Pursuant to Temporary Note 3T to Article 3 of Regulation S-X, Maxxim Medical,
Inc. has obtained a letter of representation from Arthur Andersen LLP
("Andersen") stating that the December 30, 2001 audit was subject to their
quality control system for the U.S. accounting and auditing practice to provide
reasonable assurance that the engagement was conducted in compliance with
professional standards, that there was appropriate continuity of Andersen
personnel working on the audit and availability of consultation at their
national office and availability of personnel at foreign affiliates of Andersen.


                                       Very truly yours,


                                       Maxxim Medical, Inc.

                                       /s/ Mark S. Sellers
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Mark S. Sellers
                                       Vice Chairman and Chief Financial Officer
## NO. 12

- 23

- 00150

- CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

PHYLLIS MARTIN

, A P PELLANT

V.

MARVIN STROMBERG, DDS AND LAKE VIEW DENTAL CENTER , APPELLEE S §

§

§ APPEAL FROM THE 402ND

DISTRICT COURT

WOOD COUNTY, TEXAS

ME MORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM

Appella nt , Phyllis Martin, filed a n unopposed motion to di smiss th is appeal

. The m o tion states that the parties reached a mut u al agreement

. Accordingly, the moti on to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is dismissed

. Se e T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42. 1 (a). C osts are taxed ag ainst the party incurring same

.

Opinion delivered June 30, 2023

. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

## COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

JUNE 30 , 202 3

NO. 12

- 23

- 00150

- CV

PHYLLIS MARTIN , Appellant V. MARVI N STROMBERG, DDS AND LAKE VIEW DENTAL CENTER , Appelle e s

Appeal from the 402nd District Court

of Wood County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 2019

- 292 )

THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the unopposed motion of t he Appellant to dismiss the appeal herein, and the same being consider ed, it is hereby ORDER ED, ADJUDGE D and

DEC R EED by this Court that the motion to dismiss b e granted and the appeal be dismissed , and

that the decision be certified to the court below for observance. Costs are taxed against the party incurring same.

By per curiam opinion

.

Panel cons isted of Worthe n , C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         611,534
<SECURITIES>                                 1,231,421
<RECEIVABLES>                                   49,635
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,914,057
<PP&E>                                         946,458
<DEPRECIATION>                                 123,268
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,090,061
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          136,068
<BONDS>                                      3,036,639
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          583,322
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,029,219
<OTHER-SE>                                   (710,206)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,090,061
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               109,243
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  260,826
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             110,753
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (225,051)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (225,051)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (225,051)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (4.41)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (4.41)


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 268 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 268

To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to reduce the limit 
on the amount of certain contributions which may be made to a candidate 
            with respect to an election for Federal office.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 12, 2011

 Mr. Capuano introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                   Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to reduce the limit 
on the amount of certain contributions which may be made to a candidate 
            with respect to an election for Federal office.

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

SECTION 1. REDUCTION IN CONTRIBUTION LIMITS FOR CONTRIBUTIONS TO 
              INDIVIDUAL CANDIDATES.

    (a) Reduction in Limit.--Section 315(a)(1)(A) of the Federal 
Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(1)(A)) is amended by 
striking ``$2,000'' and inserting ``$1,000''.
    (b) Application of Indexing.--
            (1) In general.--Section 315(c)(1)(B) of such Act (2 U.S.C. 
        441a(c)(1)(B)) is amended by striking ``after 2002'' and 
        inserting ``after 2002 (or, in the case of the limitation 
        established under subsection (a)(1)(A), after 2014)''.
            (2) Determination of base period.--Section 315(c)(2)(B) of 
        such Act (2 U.S.C. 441a(c)(2)(B)) is amended--
                    (A) in clause (i), by striking ``and'' at the end;
                    (B) in clause (ii)--
                            (i) by striking ``(a)(1)(A),'', and
                            (ii) by striking the period at the end and 
                        inserting ``; and''; and
                    (C) by adding at the end the following new clause:
                    ``(iii) for purposes of subsection (a)(1)(A), 
                calendar year 2013.''.

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendments made by this Act shall apply with respect to 
elections occurring after December 2012.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 24**

 

## **POWEROF ATTORNEY**

## ** **

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that each of theundersigned directors and/or officers of TEXAS EASTERN PRODUCTS PIPELINECOMPANY, LLC (the “Company”), a Delaware limited liability company, acting inits capacity as general partner of TEPPCO Partners, L.P., and TE ProductsPipeline Company, Limited Partnership, each a Delaware limited partnership(collectively, “Partnership”), does hereby appoint CHARLES H. LEONARD, BARRY R.PEARL, and JAMES C. RUTH, and each of them, his true and lawful attorney andagent to do any and all acts and things, and execute any and all instrumentswhich, with the advice and consent of Counsel, said attorney and agent may deemnecessary or advisable to enable the Company and Partnership to comply with theSecurities Act of 1934, as amended, and any rules, regulations, andrequirements thereof, to sign his name as a director and/or officer of theCompany to the Form 10-K Report for TEPPCO Partners, L.P. and for TE ProductsPipeline Company, Limited Partnership, each for the year ended December 31, 2004,and to any instrument or document filed as a part of, or in accordance with,each said Form 10-K or amendment thereto; and the undersigned do hereby ratifyand confirm all that said attorney and agent shall do or cause to be done byvirtue hereof.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, theundersigned have subscribed these presents this 1st day of March, 2005.

 
| /s/ MARK A. BORER          |                       | /s/ MICHAEL J. BRADLEY     |   |
|----------------------------|----------------------------|----------------------------|--------|
| Mark A. Borer              | Michael J. Bradley         |
| Director                   | Director                   |
|                       |                       |
| /s/ MILTON CARROLL         |                       | /s/ DERRILL CODY           |   |
| Milton Carroll             | Derrill Cody               |
| Director                   | Director                   |
|                       |                       |
| /s/ JOHN P. DESBARRES      |                       | /s/ WILLIAM H. EASTER  III |   |
| John P. DesBarres          | William H. Easter III      |
| Director                   | Director                   |
|                       |                       |
| /s/ PAUL F. FERGUSON,  JR. |                       | /s/ JIM W. MOGG            |   |
| Paul F. Ferguson, Jr.      | Jim W. Mogg                |
| Director                   | Chairman                   |
|                       |                       |
| /s/ BARRY R. PEARL         |                       | /s/ CHARLES H. LEONARD     |   |
| Barry R. Pearl             | Charles H. Leonard         |
| Director                   | Senior Vice President  and |
|                       | Chief Financial Officer    |

 

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. No. 98-4826

ANTHONY LEE CUNNINGHAM,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson.

William B. Traxler, Jr., District Judge.

(CR-98-303)

Submitted: April 20, 1999

Decided: May 3, 1999

Before MURNAGHAN and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and

PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

David W. Plowden, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greenville,

South Carolina, for Appellant. E. Jean Howard, OFFICE OF THE

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, South Carolina, for

Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Anthony Cunningham appeals his convictions for bank robbery, in

violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d) (1994), and use of a firearm

during a crime of violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 924(c) (West

Supp. 1998). Cunningham's attorney has filed a brief in accordance

with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), addressing whether

the district court complied with the requirements of Fed. R. Crim. P.

11 in accepting Cunningham's guilty plea and whether the court erred

by not affording Cunningham the opportunity to object to his presentence report.

Our review of the record discloses that the district court sufficiently

complied with Rule 11 in informing Cunningham of his rights and in

ascertaining the voluntariness of his plea. Because the district court

did not violate any substantial right, Cunningham's conviction must

stand. See United States v. DeFusco, 949 F.2d 114, 117 (4th Cir.

1991). Moreover, the record further discloses that the district court

explicitly inquired whether Cunningham read the presentence report,

reviewed it with his attorney, and fully understood it. Cunningham

had ample opportunity to raise any objections he had to the report

during this discussion, but did not.

In accordance with Anders, we have examined the entire record in

this case and find no reversible error. We therefore affirm the judgment order of the district court. This court requires that counsel

inform his client, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court

of the United States for further review. If the client requests that a

petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be

frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw

from representation. Counsel's motion must state that a copy thereof

was served on the client. 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

 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET AND STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1996 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000858915
<NAME> CALIFORNIA CULINARY ACADEMY, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                            3283
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     3066
<ALLOWANCES>                                       280
<INVENTORY>                                        208
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  6582
<PP&E>                                            8013
<DEPRECIATION>                                    3896
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   12858
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             5647
<BONDS>                                           1400
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                          8741
<OTHER-SE>                                      (4086)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     12858
<SALES>                                           2731
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 14882
<CGS>                                             1692
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    15441
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   359
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   275
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 137
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (999)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (999)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (999)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.32)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.32)
        

</TABLE>