alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Greystone Logistics, Inc. (the
"Company"), on Form 10-QSB for the period ending August 31, 2007, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Robert H. Nelson, 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:

     (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.


October 15,2007                             /s/ Robert H. Nelson
                                            --------------------------------
                                            Robert H. Nelson
                                            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.

     The foregoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission as an exhibit to the Report and shall not be considered
filed as part of the Report.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the annual report of Newtown Lane Marketing, Incorporated (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the period ending March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Arnold P. Kling, President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

Dated: June 20, 2008

|/s/ Arnold P. Kling          
|-----------------------------
|Arnold P. Kling              
|President                    
|(Principal Executive Officer)

A signed original of this certification 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.

---
#### William WARRIOR and Leatrice Tanner Brown, Plaintiffs-Appellants, and Harvest Institute Freedman Federation and Black Indians Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 2012-5118.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Dec. 11, 2013.

William C. Wilkinson, of Columbus, OH, argued for plaintiffs-appellants.

Elizabeth Ann Peterson, Attorney, Environment & Natural Resources Division, United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for defendant-appellee. With her on the brief was Robert G. Dreher, Acting Assistant Attorney General.

MOORE, SCHALL, and REYNA, Circuit Judges.

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

This Cause having been heard and considered, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

AFFIRMED. *See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Roy Rogelio MARTINEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 07-40931

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

May 9, 2008.

*523James Lee Turner, Assistant US Attorney, US Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before WIENER, GARZA, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Roy Rogelio Martinez appeals his conviction for possession with intent to distribute marijuana. Martinez argues that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction. We review a sufficiency challenge to determine whether a “rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” *Jackson v. Virginia,*443 U.S. 307, 319, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979).

Martinez contends that the evidence was insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he knew that there was marijuana in the trailer that he was pulling. He contends that the circumstantial evidence presented at trial could support equally either guilty knowledge or a lack thereof. Martinez’s contentions are not persuasive.

The evidence adduced at trial showed that Martinez was unusually nervous and talkative in the presence of the trooper who pulled him over. The jury could have rationally inferred that, by being so talkative, Martinez was attempting to distract the trooper away from the inspection of the trailer. Martinez made conflicting statements to the trooper regarding which road he had traveled on. The jury could have rationally inferred guilty knowledge from a transcript of a telephone call Martinez made to his wife from a detention facility. Finally, for it to be plausible that Martinez was innocent because he was unaware of the presence of the marijuana in the trailer, it has to be accepted that persons unknown to him surreptitiously stashed a large amount of drugs in the trailer. For it to be plausible that Martinez was guilty because he agreed to transport the drugs requires no such unusual circumstances. *See United States v. Villarreal,*324 F.3d 319, 324 (5th Cir.2003) (stating that jury can infer that drug smugglers would not likely entrust large quantity of drugs to person with no knowledge of them). In *Villarreal,*the hidden cargo was 600-plus pounds of marijuana valued at more than $300,000. *Id.*The *524352.64 kilograms found in Martinez’s trailer equates to more than 777 pounds of marijuana.

The evidence at trial was sufficient to allow a rational jury to find that Martinez knew of the marijuana in the trailer he was pulling. *See United States v. Ortega Reyna,*148 F.3d 540, 543 (5th Cir.1998). Martinez’s conviction is AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cm. 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.
Exhibit 23.1





April 26, 2011





The Board of Directors


China XD Plastics Company Limited


No. 9 Dalian North Road


Haping Road Centralized Industrial Park


Harbin Development Zone


Heilongjiang Province


People's Republic of China





Dear Sirs,





INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM'S CONSENT








We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-3 (File No. 333-167423) and the Registration Statement on Form S-3 (File No. 333-164027), as amended, of China XD Plastics Company Limited (the “Company”), of our report dated March 31, 2011 relating to the consolidated financial statements of the Company as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 and for the two years ended December 31, 2010, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2010 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 31, 2011.








Yours faithfully,








/s/ Moore Stephens





Certified Public Accountants


Hong Kong
* 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

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 98-10263

Summary Calendar

_____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ISMAEL APOLINAR, also known as The Engineer,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

(3:97-CR-408-19-P)

_________________________________________________________________

April 21, 1998

Before WIENER, BARKSDALE, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Ismael Apolinar appeals the district court’s order both

detaining him without bail and overruling the magistrate judge’s

order setting bail at $100,000 cash bond. Apolinar contends that

the Government failed to prove that he is a flight risk and that,

because the detention hearing was untimely under 18 U.S.C. §

3142(f), the Government could not seek detention without bail.

The record supports the district court’s determinations that

the Government proved by a preponderance of the evidence that
- 2 -

Apolinar has strong ties to Mexico and is a flight risk; and that

there is no condition, or combination of conditions, which would

reasonably assure Apolinar’s appearance at trial. See 18 U.S.C. §

3142(e); United States v. Rueben, 974 F.2d 580, 585-86 (5th Cir.

1992), cert. denied, 507 U.S. 940 (1993). Apolinar’s contention

that the Government waived the right to request detention without

bail due to the untimeliness of the detention hearing is without

merit. See United States v. Montalvo-Murillo, 495 U.S. 711, 716-21

(1990).

AFFIRMED
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03
- 14
- 00411
- CR

Manuel Ruiz Constancio, Appellant

v. The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE 51ST DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY NO. A
- 11
- 0535
- S, HONORABLE JAY K. WEATHERBY, JUDGE PRE SIDING

O R D E R F O R C L E R K T O P R O V I D E A P P E L L A T E R E C O R D TO A P P E L L A N T PER CURIAM

Appellant’s court

- appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a brief concluding that the instant appeal is frivol ous and without merit. See Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967). Appellant’s counsel has certified to the Court that s he provided copies of the motion and brief to appellant, advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record and
fi le a pro se response, and supplied appellant with a form motion for pro se access to the appellate
record. See Kelly v. State , 436 S.W.3d 313, 319

- 20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). Appellant has timely filed the motion requesting access to the appellate record with this Court.

Appellant’s pro se motion is granted. We hereby direct the clerk of the trial court to provide a copy of the reporter’s record and clerk’s record to appellant, and to provide written
verification to this Court of the date and manner in which the appellate record was provided, on or before September 14 , 2015

. See id. at 321.It is ordered on September 2, 2015

.

Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Pemberton and Field
Do Not Publish
|                                                                                         |   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Date:           November      9, 2009 |   | /s/      MICHAEL J. MCCONNELL                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               |
|                                                                                         |   | Michael      J. McConnell                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   |
|                                                                                         |   | Chief      Executive Officer                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                |
|                                                                                         |   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        |
|                                                                                         |   | A      signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been      provided to Collectors Universe, Inc. and will be retained by Collectors      Universe, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or      its staff upon request. |
Exhibit 99.2





Certification of Chief Financial Officer 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 Agile Software Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending October 31, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Carolyn V. Aver, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:





(1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements
of section 13(a) 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.





December 13, 2002





/s/ CAROLYN V. AVERCarolyn V. Aver Chief Financial Officer
#### Rose Bokeng NKWANYUO, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 07-1787.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 14, 2008.

Decided: May 6, 2008.

Oti W. Nwosu, The Law office of Oti W. Nwosu, Arlington, Virginia,, for Petitioner. Jeffrey S. Bucholtz, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Francis W. Fraser, Senior Litigation Counsel, Gary J. Newkirk, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

*300Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Rose Bokeng Nkwanyuo, a native and citizen of Cameroon, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals adopting and affirming the Immigration Judge’s denial of her applications for relief from removal.

Nkwanyuo first challenges the determination that she failed to establish eligibility for asylum. To obtain reversal of a determination denying eligibility for relief, an alien “must show that the evidence he presented was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.” *INS v. Elias-Zacarias,*502 U.S. 478, 483-84, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). We have reviewed the evidence of record and conclude that Nkwanyuo fails to show that the evidence compels a contrary result. Having failed to qualify for asylum, Nkwanyuo cannot meet the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. *Chen v. INS,*195 F.3d 198, 205 (4th Cir.1999); *INS v. Cardozar-Fonseca,*480 U.S. 421, 430, 107 S.Ct. 1207, 94 L.Ed.2d 434 (1987). Finally, we uphold the finding below that Nkwanyuo failed to demonstrate that it is more likely than not that she would be tortured if removed to Cameroon. 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2) (2007).

Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. 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.

*PETITION DENIED.*
Order entered July 1 5 , 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 13
- 00066
- CR
JAMES BENNETT RUCKER , Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law Rockwall County, Texas Trial Court Caus e No. CR10
- 1011



### O RDER
The Court GRANTS appellant’s June 24, 2013 motion to withdraw appellant’s motion to abate the appeal and motion to extend the time to file appellant’s brief. Appellant’s June19, 2013 motion to abate the appeal is withdrawn. M. Mic hael Mowla is substituted for Patrick K. Short as appellant’s lead counsel of record. We DIRECT the Clerk to send all correspondence to M. Michael Mowla, 603 N. Cedar Ridge, Suite 100, Duncanville, Texas 75116; telephone: (972) 282

- 2600; facsimile: (972) 692

- 6636. The time to file appellant’s brief is EXTENDED to THIRTY DAYS from the date of
this order.
/s/ LANA MYERS JUSTICE
An official website of the United States governmentHere’s how you knowHere’s how you know**Official websites use .gov**A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
				**Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**A **lock**(Locked padlock icon) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.Federal Maritime Commission



Affilite Info for Search FMC.gov
        Search FMC.gov
        SearchFederal Maritime Commission



Menu
				Close
							AboutComplaints and AssistanceLicensing and CertificationProceedingsDatabases and PublicationsNews and Advisories



Affilite Info for Search FMC.gov
        Search FMC.gov
        Search Home
 Databases and Publications
 Controlled Carrier List
 On this page
About
Current Controlled Carriers



About


Ocean common carriers operating in the U.S./foreign oceanborne trades that are owned or controlled by governments are listed below. These controlled carriers are subject to rate review standards to ensure that they do not unfairly use their government-supported positions against their competitors. (46 CFR §565).



**For questions regarding the controlled carriers, please contact the Commission’s Office of the General Counsel.**



Controlled Carriers Under the Shipping Act of 1984, 7/18/24



Controlled Carriers Under the Shipping Act of 1984, 7/1/24



Controlled Carriers Under the Shipping Act of 1984, 2/27/24Controlled Carriers Under the Shipping Act of 1984, 4/30/19Controlled Carriers Under the Shipping Act of 1984, 8/2/17Controlled Carriers Under the Shipping Act of 1984, 7/22/15Controlled Carriers Under the Shipping Act of 1984, 8/22/12Controlled Carriers Under the Shipping Act of 1984, 5/3/05Controlled Carriers Under the Shipping Act of 1984, 6/3/03Controlled Carriers under the Shipping Act of 1984, 9/12/00







Current Controlled Carriers


COSCO SHIPPING Lines Co., Ltd. (RPI No. 015614)—People’s Republic of China;



Orient Overseas Container Line Limited (RPI No. 011398)—People’s Republic of China;



OOCL (Europe) Limited (RPI No. 024786)—People’s Republic of China;



Hede (HONGKONG) International Shipping Limited (RPI No. 033332)—People’s Republic of China;



HMM (RPI No. 001452)—Republic of Korea;



Anji Shipping Co., Ltd. (RPI No. 033604) – People’s Republic of China. Return to top
    
    
    
    **FMC Information**
    
    
    
    About the FMC
    
    
    
    Employment Opportunities
    
    
    
    Site Policies
    
    
    
    FOIA
    
    
    
    **Government Information**
    
    
    
    Inspector General
    
    
    
    U.S. Office of Special Counsel
    
    
    
    Open Government at the FMC
    
    
    
    USA.gov
    
    
    
    Federal Maritime Commission
    
    
    Our mission is to **ensure a competitive and reliable** **international ocean transportation supply system** that supports the U.S. economy and protects the public from unfair and deceptive practices.
    
    
    
    X
    
    YouTube
    
    LinkedIn800 North Capitol Street, N.W.Washington, D.C. 20573inquiries@fmc.gov
111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3542 

AN ACT 

To direct the Architect of the Capitol to fly the flag of 

a State over the Capitol each year on the anniversary 

of the date of the State’s admission to the Union. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 3542 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘State Admission Day 

3 Recognition Act of 2010’’. 

4 SEC. 2. FLYING STATE FLAG OVER CAPITOL ON ANNIVER5 SARY OF STATE’S ADMISSION TO UNION. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—To honor the anniversary of each 

7 State’s admission to the Union, the Architect of the Cap8 itol shall fly the flag of the State over the Capitol each 

9 year on the anniversary of the date of the State’s admis10 sion to the Union. 

11 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The Architect of the Capitol 

12 shall fly the first flag of a State over the Capitol under 

13 this section on the first December 7 which occurs after 

14 the date of the enactment of this Act, in honor of the anni15 versary of the admission of Delaware, the first State ad16 mitted to the Union. 

17 SEC. 3. REGULATIONS. 

18 The Committee on House Administration of the 

19 House of Representatives and the Committee on Rules 

20 and Administration of the Senate may promulgate jointly 

21 such regulations as may be appropriate to carry out this 

22 Act, including regulations permitting the Architect of the 

23 Capitol to honor the District of Columbia, the Common24 wealth of Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam, the 

25 United States Virgin Islands, and the Northern Mariana 

26 Islands by flying the flag of each such jurisdiction over 
3 

•HR 3542 EH

1 the Capitol each year on an appropriate date for that ju2 risdiction. 

Passed the House of Representatives March 18, 

2010. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 
111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3542 

AN ACT 

To direct the Architect of the Capitol to fly the flag 

the Union. versary of the date of the State’s admission to of a State over the Capitol each year on the anni-
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of CurrencySharesSMAustralian Dollar Trust (the Trust) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Nick Bonos, Chief Financial Officer of Rydex Specialized Products LLC, the Sponsor of the Trust, 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, 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 Trust.



|                             
|-----------------------------
|Date: January 14, 2009       
|                             
|/s/ NICK BONOS               
|Nick Bonos*                  
|Chief Financial Officer      
|(principal financial officer)



|* | The Registrant is a trust and Nick Bonos is signing in his
capacity as the principal financial officer of Rydex Specialized Products LLC, the Sponsor of the Registrant.
|- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------