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

**CERTIFICATION**

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, I, Tucker I. Marr, Chief Financial Officer of Pruco Life Insurance Company of New Jersey, hereby certify that the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, containing the financialstatements of Pruco Life of New Jersey Variable Contract Real Property Account (a separate account of Pruco Life Insurance Company of New Jersey) and The Prudential Variable Contract Real Property Partnership (the “Report”), fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Pruco Life of New Jersey Variable ContractReal Property Account and The Prudential Variable Contract Real Property Partnership.

|   | Date: November 10, 2006      /s/ Tucker I. Marr                                                                |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                                                                |
|   | Name: Tucker I. Marr      Title: Chief Financial OfficerPruco Life Insurance Company of New Jersey        |

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.

----
2013- 1905.

#### Jacobs v. FirstMerit Corp.

Lake App. No. 2013-L-012, 2013-Ohio-4308. Reported in 138 Ohio St.3d 1468, 2014-Ohio-1674, 6 N.E.3d 1204. On mtion for reconsideration. Motion denied.

French, J.,

dissents and would grant the motion for reconsideration as to Proposition of Law Nos. IV and Y.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, I, Scott D. Kaplan, Chief
Executive Officer of Pruco Life Insurance Company of New Jersey, hereby certify that the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2011, containing the financial statements of Pruco Life of New Jersey Variable
Contract Real Property Account (a separate account of Pruco Life Insurance Company of New Jersey) and The Prudential Variable Contract Real Property Partnership (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13
(a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Pruco Life of New Jersey Variable
Contract Real Property Account and The Prudential Variable Contract Real Property Partnership.

Date: May 13, 2011



/s/ Scott D. KaplanScott D. KaplanChief Executive OfficerPruco Life Insurance Company of New Jersey


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 197

To amend title II of the Social Security Act to eliminate the earnings

test for individuals who have attained age 67 and to accelerate benefit

increases under the delayed retirement credit over a period capped at

attainment of age 67.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 5, 1993

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

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend title II of the Social Security Act to eliminate

the earnings test for individuals who have attained age

67 and to accelerate benefit increases under the delayed

retirement credit over a period capped at attainment

of age 67.

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

3 SECTION 1. ELIMINATION OF EARNINGS TEST FOR INDI4 VIDUALS WHO HAVE ATTAINED AGE 67.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 203 of the Social Security

6 Act (42 U.S.C. 403) is amended—
2

•HR 197 IH

1 (1) in paragraph (1) of subsection (c) and para2 graphs (1)(A) and (2) of subsection (d), by striking

3 ‘‘the age of seventy’’ and inserting ‘‘age 67’’;

4 (2) in subsection (f)(1)(B), by striking ‘‘was

5 age seventy or over’’ and inserting ‘‘was at or above

6 age 67’’;

7 (3) in subsection (h)(1)(A), by striking ‘‘age

8 70’’ each place it appears and inserting ‘‘age 67’’;

9 and

10 (4) in subsection (j), by striking ‘‘Age Seventy’’

11 in the heading and inserting ‘‘Age 67’’, and by strik12 ing ‘‘seventy years of age’’ and inserting ‘‘having at13 tained age 67’’.

14 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

15 this section shall apply with respect to taxable years begin16 ning after December 31, 1991.

17 SEC. 2. ACCELERATION OF BENEFIT INCREASES UNDER

18 DELAYED RETIREMENT CREDIT OVER A PE19 RIOD CAPPED AT AGE 65 IN LIEU OF AGE 70.

20 (a) RESTRICTION OF PERIOD OF BENEFIT INCRE21 MENTS TO MONTHS AFTER ATTAINING RETIREMENT AGE

22 AND BEFORE ATTAINING AGE 67.—Section 202(w) of the

23 Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 402(w)) is amended—

24 (1) in paragraph (2)(A), by striking ‘‘age 70’’

25 and inserting ‘‘age 67’’; and
3

•HR 197 IH

1 (2) in paragraph (3), by striking ‘‘age 70 after

2 1972’’ and inserting ‘‘age 67’’.

3 (b) ACCELERATION OF BENEFIT INCREASES.—Sec4 tion 202(w) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 402(w)) is further

5 amended—

6 (1) in paragraph (1)(A), by striking ‘‘the appli7 cable percentage (as determined under paragraph

8 (6))’’ and inserting ‘‘2/3 of 1 percent’’; and

9 (2) by striking paragraph (6).

10 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

11 this section shall apply with respect to benefits for months

12 after December 1991.

Æ
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
AS REQUIRED BY
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In
connection with the Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-K/A of Steinway Musical Instruments, Inc. (the "Company") for the fiscal period ended December 31, 2010 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Dana D. Messina, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify that to the best of my
knowledge:



/s/ Dana D. Messina President and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)


April 28,
2011

---



QuickLinks
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1854

Making appropriations for the House of Representatives Botanic Gardens

for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1994, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 26, 1993

Mr. INGLIS of South Carolina introduced the following bill; which was referred

to the Committee on Appropriations

A BILL

Making appropriations for the House of Representatives Botanic Gardens for the fiscal year ending September 30,

1994, 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 That the following sums are appropriated, out of any

4 money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the

5 Legislative Branch for the fiscal year ending September

6 30, 1994, and for other purposes, namely.

7 BOTANIC GARDENS

8 For all necessary expenses for maintenance, care, and

9 operation of the Botanic Gardens and the nurseries, build-
2

HR 1854 IH

1 ing, grounds and collections, $2,862,000, as authorized by

2 law.

Æ
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 of Smith Barney Diversified Futures Fund L.P. (the ‘‘Partnership’’) on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the ‘‘Report’’), I, Jerry Pascucci, President and Director of Citigroup Managed Futures LLC, 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 results of operations of the Partnership.

/s/ Jerry Pascucci

|
|
|
|

Jerry Pascucci
Citigroup Managed Futures LLC
President and Director

March 31, 2008

|
|
|
|

Date

---
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families
 Proposed Projects *Title:*
                     Required Data Elements for Paternity Establishment Affidavits. *OMB No.*
                     0970-0171. *Description:*
                     The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 required the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services to specify the minimum data elements of an affidavit to be used for the voluntary acknowledgment of paternity. States must enact laws requiring the development and use of the affidavit and to give full faith and credit to affidavits signed in any other State according to its procedures. *Respondents:*
                     State birth record agencies and State Child Support Offices. Annual Burden Estimates
Instrument
Number of 
                             respondents
Number of responses per respondent
Average burden hours per response
Total burden hoursAffidavit
2,000,000
.2243
.166
74,468Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours



74,468
 In compliance with the requirements of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Administration for Children and Families is soliciting public comment on the specific aspects of the information collection described above. Copies of the proposed collection of information can be obtained and comments may be forwarded by writing to the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Information Services, 370 L'Enfant Promenade, SW., Washington, DC 20447. Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Officer. All requests should be identified by the title of the information collection. The Department specifically requests comments on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted within 60 days of this publication. Dated: February 12, 2001. Bob Sargis, Reports Clearance Officer.


[FR Doc. 01-3890  Filed 2-15-01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-01-M
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED AUGUST 22, 2013

NO. 03-13-00304-CV

Jaime Mendez Cuellar, Appellant

v.

Brad Livingston et al., Appellees

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS, AMARILLO DIVISION

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, ROSE AND GOODWIN

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION -- OPINION BY JUSTICE PURYEAR

THIS CAUSE having this day come on to be considered, and the Court being of the opinion that 

it is without jurisdiction of the cause and that the appeal should therefore be dismissed for want 

of jurisdiction: IT IS ACCORDINGLY considered, adjudged and ordered that the appeal is 

dismissed for want of jurisdiction; and it appearing that the appellant is indigent and unable to 

pay costs, that no adjudication as to costs is made; and that this decision be certified below for 

observance.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2030 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2030

 To designate Homestead Air Force Base, Florida, and the county within 
 which the military installation is located, as an enterprise zone for 
 purposes of title VII of the Housing and Community Development Act of 
                                 1987.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 6, 1993

  Mrs. Meek introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
            Committee on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate Homestead Air Force Base, Florida, and the county within 
 which the military installation is located, as an enterprise zone for 
 purposes of title VII of the Housing and Community Development Act of 
                                 1987.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF HOMESTEAD AIR FORCE BASE AS AN ENTERPRISE 
              ZONE.

    (a) Designation.--Notwithstanding the designation process specified 
in section 701 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1987 (42 
U.S.C. 11501), the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall 
designate as an enterprise zone for purposes of title VII of such Act--
            (1) Homestead Air Force Base, Florida; and
            (2) the portion of Dade County, Florida, that is located 
        south of the roadway identified as Kendall Drive as of the date 
        of the enactment of this Act.
    (b) Treatment of Designated Installations.--The enterprise zone 
designated under subsection (a) shall be in addition to the 100 
enterprise zones authorized to be designated under section 701(a)(2)(A) 
of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1987 (42 U.S.C. 
11501(a)(2)(A)).
    (c) Course of Action.--The course of action that is required to be 
prepared and implemented under section 701(d) of the Housing and 
Community Development Act of 1987 (42 U.S.C. 11501(d)) for the 
enterprise zone designated under subsection (a) may be funded by the 
Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Commerce using amounts 
available to the Secretaries to carry out programs to provide economic 
adjustment assistance and community planning assistance in connection 
with the closure or realignment of military installations.
    (d) Time for Designations.--The designation required to be made 
under subsection (a) shall be made by the Secretary of Housing and 
Urban Development not later than 60 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act.

                                 <all>
```
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1914

To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to reduce the influence

of multicandidate political committees in elections for Federal office.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 28, 1993

Mr. SMITH of Michigan (for himself, Mr. BALLENGER, Mr. GRAMS, Mr.

HOEKSTRA, Mr. HOKE, Mr. HORN, Mr. HUFFINGTON, Mr. LAZIO, Mr.

SHAYS, Mr. SENSENBRENNER, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. MCCRERY,

Mr. TORKILDSEN, and Mr. WALKER) 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 influence of multicandidate political committees in elections for Federal office.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘PAC Limitation Act

5 of 1993’’.
2

•HR 1914 IH

1 SEC. 2. REDUCTION IN CEILING ON MULTICANDIDATE PO2 LITICAL COMMITTEE CONTRIBUTIONS TO

3 CANDIDATES IN ELECTIONS FOR FEDERAL

4 OFFICE.

5 Section 315(a)(2)(A) of the Federal Election Cam6 paign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(2)(A)) is amended

7 by striking out ‘‘$5,000’’ and inserting in lieu thereof

8 ‘‘$1,000’’.

9 SEC. 3. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ELECTION LIMITA10 TION ON CONTRIBUTIONS FROM

11 MULTICANDIDATE POLITICAL COMMITTEES.

12 Section 315 of the Federal Election Campaign Act

13 of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a), is amended by adding at the

14 end the following new subsection:

15 ‘‘(i) A candidate for the office of Representative in,

16 or Delegate or Resident Commissioner to, the Congress

17 may not, with respect to a reporting period for an election,

18 accept contributions from multicandidate political commit19 tees totaling in excess of the total of contributions ac20 cepted from individual residents of the congressional dis21 trict involved.’’.

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE MARCH
31, 1999 UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000827230
<NAME> MICROFINANCIAL INCORPORATED
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          11,373
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  216,612
<ALLOWANCES>                                    25,394
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                          13,975
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,516
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 224,631
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        116,788
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           133
<OTHER-SE>                                      79,537
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   224,631
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                22,455
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    6,004
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 5,399
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,620
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,745
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,776
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,969
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.33
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.33
        

</TABLE>
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

 FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

TRACEY MACKEY,

Appellant,

v. Case No. 5D17-3760

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

________________________________/

Opinion filed February 9, 2018

3.850 Appeal from the Circuit 

Court for Lake County,

Lawrence J. Semento, Judge.

Tracey Mackey, Wewahitchka, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, and Marjorie Vincent-Tripp, 

Assistant Attorney General, Daytona 

Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Tracey Mackey, appeals the summary denial of his amended motion for 

postconviction relief filed pursuant to rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. In 

his amended motion, he raised four claims, one of which was that his trial counsel was 

ineffective for failing to call a witness who would have offered key testimony supporting 

his defense at trial. The trial court denied this claim, reasoning that it was successive.
2

On appeal, Appellant argues this was error. We agree and reverse as to that claim only. 

We otherwise affirm.

The record reflects that the trial court summarily denied Appellant’s original rule 

3.850 motion (the “original motion”) on the merits, after addressing this same claim that 

trial counsel was ineffective for failing to call the key witness. Appellant appealed that 

denial, and this court reversed, finding that his original motion was facially insufficient, 

and that Appellant was entitled to an opportunity to amend. Mackey v. State, 219 So. 3d 

1009, 1009 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017). On remand, Appellant filed the instant amended motion 

for postconviction relief. 

Although the trial court denied Appellant’s original motion on the merits, this court 

reversed that order based on the facial insufficiency of Appellant’s motion, providing 

Appellant the opportunity to file an amended motion. Thus, the original motion was not 

decided on the merits, and therefore Appellant’s key witness claim in the amended motion 

cannot be considered. See Crescenzo v. State, 987 So. 2d 150, 151 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)

(“[A] successive motion that raises the same grounds as a prior motion may not be 

dismissed if those grounds were not previously adjudicated on their merits.” (citation 

omitted)); see also Rosenkrantz v. Hall, 172 So. 2d 518, 519 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965) (“[A]n 

order which is reversed must be treated as though the order had never been rendered.”

(citing, inter alia, S. Fla. Lumber & Supply Co. v. Read, 61 So. 125 (Fla. 1913))). Further, 

we find that the amended motion is facially sufficient as to this claim. We therefore 

reverse the summary denial and remand for the trial court to either attach records 

conclusively refuting Appellant’s key witness claim, or to hold an evidentiary hearing. We 

affirm as to Appellant’s other claims.
3

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED.

TORPY, LAMBERT and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.