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



EXHIBIT 32 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 R&G Financial Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2004, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the
undersigned hereby 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
undersigneds best knowledge and belief: (a) the Report 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 Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company. Dated this 15th day of November, 2004. R&G Financial Corporation
(Company)/s/ VICTOR J. GALAN
Víctor J. Galán
Chief Executive Officer/s/ JOSEPH R. SANDOVAL
Joseph R. Sandoval
Chief Financial Officer
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### In the Matter of David L. Jr. and Others, Children Alleged to be Abused and/or Neglected. David L., Appellant; Administration for Children’s Services, Respondent.

[988 NYS2d 140]

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Monica Drinane, J.), entered on or about February 11, 2013, which, *469upon a fact-finding determination that respondent sexually abused his daughter and a child for whom he was legally responsible and derivatively neglected the four other subject children, released the children to the custody of their respective mothers, ordered respondent to be in a sex offender program, and issued a one-year order of protection against him on behalf of the children, unanimously affirmed, without costs, insofar as it brings up for review the fact-finding determination, and the appeal therefrom otherwise dismissed as moot. Appeal from order of fact-finding, same court and Judge, entered on or about January 14, 2013, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as superseded by the appeal from the order of disposition.

The determination that respondent sexually abused two of the subject children, and thereby derivatively neglected the four other subject children, is supported by a preponderance of the evidence *(see*Family Ct Act § 1046 [b] [i]). The out-of-court statements of sexual abuse made by respondent’s daughter were corroborated by the medical evidence and testimony of her counselor *(see*Family Ct Act § 1046 [a] [vi]; *Matter of Estefania S. [Orlando S.],*114 AD3d 453, 453 [1st Dept 2014]). In addition, each child’s statement detailing the abuse served to corroborate the other’s *(see e.g. Matter of Nicole V.,*71 NY2d 112, 124 [1987]). We perceive no basis to disturb the court’s credibility determinations *(see Matter of Mia B. [Brandy R.],*100 AD3d 569, 569-570 [1st Dept 2012], *lv denied*20 NY3d 858 [2013]).

The court properly exercised its discretion in striking the testimony of respondent’s daughter after she failed to return to complete it *(Matter of Amilya Jayla S. [Princess Debbie A.],*83 AD3d 582, 583 [1st Dept 2011]) and in declining to admit an alleged CD recording of his daughter *(see Feldsberg v Nitschke,*49 NY2d 636, 643 [1980]).

Respondent’s arguments regarding the terms of the dispositional order are moot, since the terms have expired *(see Matter of Fawaz A. [Franklyn B.C.],*112 AD3d 550, 551 [1st Dept 2013]).

We have considered respondent’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing.

Concur—Gonzalez, EJ., Sweeny, Moskowitz, Freedman and Kapnick, JJ.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Richard Lewis, Appellant.

[987 NYS2d 250]

Peters, PJ.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Hoye, J.), rendered December 6, 2011, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted robbery in the second degree.

In full satisfaction of a 15-count indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to attempted robbery in the second degree and waived his right to appeal. He was sentenced, in accordance with the plea agreement, to three years in prison followed by two years of postrelease supervision. He appeals.

We reject defendant’s contention that his waiver of the right to appeal was not knowing, voluntary and intelligent. County Court separately explained the right to appeal, distinguished that right from those forfeited by pleading guilty, and inquired as to whether defendant understood that he was waiving this particular right as part of the plea bargain. Defendant answered in the affirmative and confirmed his understanding of the consequences of the waiver. He also executed a detailed written waiver in open court acknowledging, among other things, that he had discussed the waiver with counsel and that he was knowingly and voluntarily waiving his right to appeal from all aspects of the conviction and sentence, including any preplea rulings. Accordingly, we conclude that defendant’s appeal waiver was valid *(see People v Brown,*115 AD3d 1115, 1115 [2014]; *People v Torres,*110 AD3d 1119, 1119 [2013], *lv denied*22 NY3d 1044 [2013]; *People v Marshall,*108 AD3d 884, 884 [2013], *lv denied*22 NY3d 957 [2013]), thereby precluding his challenge to County Court’s denial of his suppression motion *(see People v Kemp,*94 NY2d 831, 833 [1999]; *People v Morrison,*106 AD3d 1201, 1202 [2013]; *People v Stone,*105 AD3d 1094, 1094-1095 [2013]).

Defendant asserts that his guilty plea was not knowing, voluntary and intelligent and that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel, yet the record does not indicate that he made an appropriate postallocution motion. As such, these issues have not been preserved for our review *(see People v Trombley,*115 AD3d 1114, 1114 [2014]; *People v Ladieu,*105 AD3d 1265, 1265-1266 [2013], *lv denied*21 NY3d 1017 [2013]; *People v Doe,*95 AD3d 1449, 1449 [2012], *lv denied*19 NY3d 995 [2012]). Further, with respect to the plea, the narrow exception to the preservation requirement was not triggered here inasmuch as defendant did not make any statements during the plea allocution that negated a material element of the crime or *1126otherwise raised any doubt as to his guilt *(see id.).*In any event, were we to consider these contentions, we would find them to be without merit.

Stein, Garry, Egan Jr. and Clark, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Exhibit 32.2



TELETOUCH COMMUNICATIONS, INC.



OFFICERS CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. 1350)



In connection with the Amended Annual Report on Form 10-K/A (Amendment No. 2) for the year ended May 31, 2004 of TELETOUCH COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
(the Company) for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, J. Kernan Crotty, President and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to the best of his knowledge:



1. The Report is in full compliances 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.

|                                                                       
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                       
|/s/    J. Kernan
Crotty                                                
|                                                                       
|J. Kernan Crotty President and Chief Financial Officer November 8, 2005
[Nos. 29168-5-III; 29183-9-III.

Division Three.

October 4, 2012.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Brian Dee Wenz, *Appellant.*

Appeals from a judgment of the Superior Court for Grant County, No. 08-1-00488-3, John M. Antosz, J., entered June I, 2010. *Reversed*by unpublished opinion per

Brown, J.,

concurred in by Korsmo, C.J., and Sweeney, J.
Exhibit
      32.1




**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE**


**SARBANES-OXLEY
      ACT OF 2002**




In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Viva International, Inc. (the “Company”)
      on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), the undersigned certifies, pursuant to
      18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, to the best of the undersigned’s knowledge, 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:
                August 17, 2007
            By:
            /s/
                Calvin HumphreyCalvin
                Humphrey, Chief Executive Officer(Principal
                Executive Officer)






Dated:
                August 17, 2007
            By:
            /s/
                Robert J. ScottRobert
                J. Scott, Chief Financial Officer(Principal
                Financial Officer)
Exhibit 10.30
 
       Non-management employees -
    
    $
    1,635,730.34 @ 7.5% =
    
    
    $
    122,679.78Management employees -
    
    $
    680,785.91 @ 15.0% =
    
    
    $
    102,117.89$
    224,797.66
  *
    
    gross wage = Regular, Overtime, PTO, and Holiday pay**
    
    non-management employees = all employee not defined as management***
    
    management employees = CEO, CFO, Plant Manager, Commodity Manager, Production Manager,
Maintenance Manager, Lab Manager, and EHS Manager
##### 



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 filing of the Annual Report of Paragon Real Estate
Equity and Investment Trust (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the period
ending December 31, 2003 (the Report) with the Securities and Exchange
Commission, I, James C. Mastandrea, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and
President and I, John J. Dee, Chief Financial Officer and Senior Vice
President, of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted
pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: (1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Company. PARAGON REAL ESTATE EQUITY AND INVESTMENT TRUSTBy:
    
    /s/ James C. MastandreaDate: March 24, 2004
    
    
    
    James C. MastandreaChairman, Chief Executive Officer and PresidentPARAGON REAL ESTATE EQUITY AND INVESTMENT TRUSTBy:
    
    /s/ John J. DeeDate: March 24, 2004
    
    
    
    John J. DeeChief Financial Officer and Senior Vice President
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           2,386
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   40,909
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,031
<INVENTORY>                                     13,814
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                62,320
<PP&E>                                          49,779
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 427,357
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           65,338
<BONDS>                                        281,986
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           22,255
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        54,452
<OTHER-SE>                                    (20,780)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   427,357
<SALES>                                        220,133
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                          135,355
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  192,393
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,934
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              18,920
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,886
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,048
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,838
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  (208)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,630
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0001088399
<NAME>                        BILLYWEB CORP.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. Currency

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Feb-29-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 Mar-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   May-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         51,841
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               51,841
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 51,841
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          3,385
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       205
<OTHER-SE>                                     48,456
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   51,841
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               119,362
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (119,362)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (105,309)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0



</TABLE>
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3283 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to allow for reimbursement of certain 

travel at a set rate, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 21, 2009 

Mr. RODRIGUEZ introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to allow for reimbursement of certain travel at a set rate, and for other 

purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENT FOR VETERANS RE4 CEIVING TREATMENT AT FACILITIES OF THE 

5 DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 111 of title 38, United 

7 States Code, is amended— 

8 (1) in subsection (a), by striking ‘‘traveled,’’ 

9 and inserting ‘‘(at a rate of 41.5 cents per mile),’’; 

10 and 


bajohnson on DSK3CLS3C1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3283 IH

1 (2) by amending subsection (g) to read as fol2 lows: 

3 ‘‘(g) Not later than December 1 of each year, the Sec4 retary shall submit to Congress a report on the amount 

5 of travel expenses paid by the Secretary under this section 

6 during the preceding fiscal year.’’. 

7 (b) CLARIFICATION OF RELATION TO PUBLIC

8 TRANSPORTATION IN VETERANS HEALTH ADMINISTRA9 TION HANDBOOK.—Not later than 30 days after the date 

10 of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Veterans 

11 Affairs shall revise the Veterans Health Administration 

12 Handbook to clarify that an allowance for travel based on 

13 mileage paid under section 111(a) of title 38, United 

14 States Code, may exceed the cost of such travel by public 

15 transportation regardless of medical necessity. 

Æ 


bajohnson on DSK3CLS3C1PROD with BILLS
#### Thomas Thoma, Respondent, v Port Authority of New York and New Jersey et al., Appellants.

[988 NYS2d 478]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Manuel J. Mendez, J.), entered April 18, 2013, which denied defendants’ motion to vacate plaintiffs notice of voluntary discontinuance as against defendant Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (Port Authority) as untimely, unanimously affirmed, without costs, insofar as appealed from by the Port Authority. Appeal from the same order by defendants Tishman Construction Corporation of New York and Tishman Construction Corporation (Tishman), unanimously dismissed, without costs.

Plaintiff commenced this action by filing the summons and complaint with the New York County Clerk on April 11, 2012, and serving them on the Port Authority on April 13, 2012 and on Tishman on April 19, 2012. The complaint caption incorrectly named plaintiff, resulting in the parties entering into a stipulation to correct the caption on May 2, 2012. The stipulation further provided that plaintiff would file an amended complaint with the proper caption, that defendants were not required to respond to the original complaint, and that the time for defendants to answer or otherwise act with respect to either the complaint or the amended complaint was extended.

Thereafter, on May 12, 2012—26 days after the summons and complaint were served on Port Authority and 20 days after they were served on Tishman—plaintiff served and filed a notice of discontinuance without prejudice pursuant to CPLR 3217 (a) (1) as against all defendants, without amending the complaint. Two days later, plaintiff commenced an action against the same defendants in Supreme Court, Bronx County, and asserted the same claims.

Defendants moved to vacate the notice of discontinuance as against Port Authority alleging that, because no responsive *644pleading to the complaint was required by the stipulation, plaintiff had to serve any notice of discontinuance within 20 days of service of the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3217.

The motions were properly denied. At this stage of the action, plaintiff has an “absolute and unconditional right” to discontinue without prejudice pursuant to CPLR 3217 (a) (1) (Giam*brone v Giambrone,*140 AD2d 206 [1st Dept 1988]).

The Tishman entities are not aggrieved by the motion court’s denial of the motion to vacate the notice of discontinuance as against the Port Authority. Accordingly, we nostra sponte dismissed their appeal.

Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P, Acosta, Freedman, Richter and Clark, JJ.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-50167 Summary Calendar

RUBY STEEN, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus KENNETH S. APFEL, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. A-97-CV-142

- - - - - - - - - - September 17, 1998 Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, WIENER, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Ruby Steen appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying her claim for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. She argues that the district court and the Commissioner failed to apply the correct legal standards in reviewing her case and that the Commissioner’s decision is not supported by substantial evidence.No. 98-50167 -2- After careful review of the record and the arguments, we hold that the district court’s and the Commissioner’s decisions that Steen was “not disabled” are consistent with applicable legal standards and are supported by substantial evidence. See Bowling v. Shalala , 36 F.3d 431, 436 (5th Cir. 1994); Anthony v. Sullivan , 954 F.2d 289, 292 (5th Cir. 1992). AFFIRMED.
##### 



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 Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended June 30,
2004 of Edelbrock Corporation (the Company) as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, O. Victor Edelbrock,
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 (15 U.S.C. § 78m(a) or § 78o(d));
and (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Company. September 28, 2004
    /s/O. VICTOR EDELBROCKO. Victor EdelbrockChairman, President and Chief
Executive Officer