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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 08-1118

MARIA C. FERNANDEZ, 

 Plaintiff – Appellant, 

 v. 

MICHAEL V. HAYDEN, Lt. General, Director of National 

Security Agency, 

 Defendant – Appellee. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. 

(1:04-cv-03009-JFM) 

Submitted: December 31, 2008 Decided: January 12, 2009 

Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. 

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Terry B. Blair, Baltimore, Maryland; William T. Glasgow, 

Columbia, Maryland, for Appellant. Rod J. Rosenstein, United 

States Attorney, Allen F. Loucks, Assistant United States 

Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
PER CURIAM: 

Maria C. Fernandez appeals the district court’s orders 

granting summary judgment to the Defendant in Fernandez’s civil 

action and denying her motions to alter or amend judgment, for a 

protective order, and to compel. On appeal, Fernandez contends 

the district court abused its discretion in refusing to allow 

her to conduct discovery as to count one of her complaint prior 

to summary judgment, and the district court erred in concluding 

that there was insufficient evidence of disparate treatment, of 

retaliatory action, and that Fernandez’s alleged harassment was 

based on her gender to survive summary judgment. We affirm. 

We review a district court’s grant of summary judgment 

de novo, construing the facts in the light most favorable to the 

nonmoving party. Holland v. Washington Homes, Inc., 487 F.3d 

208, 213 (4th Cir. 2007), cert. denied, 128 S. Ct. 955 (2008). 

We review for abuse of discretion the district court’s refusal 

to allow discovery prior to granting summary judgment. Harrods 

Ltd. v. Sixty Internet Domain Names, 302 F.3d 214, 244 (4th Cir. 

2002); Nguyen v. CNA Corp., 44 F.3d 234, 242 (4th Cir. 1995). 

Summary judgment “should be rendered if the pleadings, 

the discovery and disclosure materials on file, and any 

affidavits show that there is no genuine issue as to any 

material fact and that the movant is entitled to judgment as a 

matter of law.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c). “[T]here is no issue 

2 
3 

for trial unless there is sufficient evidence favoring the 

nonmoving party for a jury to return a verdict for that party. 

If the evidence is merely colorable, or is not significantly 

probative, summary judgment may be granted.” Anderson v. 

Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 249-50 (1986). 

With these standards in mind, we have reviewed the 

parties’ briefs and the record and find no abuse of discretion 

or reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons 

stated by the district court. See Fernandez v. Hayden, No. 

1:04-cv-03009-JFM (D. Md. Oct. 23, 2007; Aug. 27, 2007; 

Apr. 2, 2007; Aug. 25, 2006; Aug. 24, 2006; Sept. 26, 2005). 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
Exhibit 31.1****

 

SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION 

 

I, Howard W. Sharp, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of BSB Bancorp, Inc.; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report; 

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report; 

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the registrant and we have: 

 

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is beingprepared; 

 

b) evaluated the effectiveness ofthe registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

 

c) disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; 

 

5. The registrant’s other certifyingofficer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): 

 

a) all significant deficienciesand material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

 

b) any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting.
<PAGE>


                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



Board of Directors and Stockholders
Strategic Diagnostics Inc.



We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos.
33-20421, 333-21211 and 333-68107) on Form S-8 of Strategic Diagnostics Inc. of
our report dated January 27, 1999, except for Note 20 which is as of February
26, 1999, relating to the consolidated balance sheet of Strategic Diagnostics
Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 1998, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, changes in stockholders' equity (deficit) and
comprehensive income (loss), and cash flows for the year ended December 31,
1998, which report appears in the December 31, 1998 annual report on Form 10-K
of Strategic Diagnostics Inc.



KPMG LLP




Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
March 30, 1999
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Darwin Dwayne HUTCHINS, a/k/a Dee, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 14-6125.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 17, 2014.

Decided: April 22, 2014.

Darwin Dwayne Hutchins, Appellant Pro Se. John Castle Parr, Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Darwin Dwayne Hutchins seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a *202debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Hutchins has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
# FY20_Q4

# Percent Positives - User Notes
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**




STATEMENT
      REQUIRED BY 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT


TO
      SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In
      connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Dark Dynamite Inc (the
      "Company") for the three months ended March 31, 2006, as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Lei,
      Ming, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify that:




*
      the
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




*
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.






/s/
      Lei, Ming


Lei,
      Ming


Director,
      President and Chief Executive Officer





May
      19,
      2006







This
      certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by
      the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
      Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
      amended.
<PAGE>

April 15, 2002                                                   EXHIBIT 99


Securities and Exchange Commission
450 5/th/ Street, N.W. Washington D.C. 20549

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Arthur Andersen LLP (Andersen), our independent public accountant, has
represented to us that its audit of our consolidated financial statements as of
December 31, 2001 and its audit of our financial statements of Mikohn Nevada as
of December 31, 2001, were subject to Andersen's quality control system for its
U.S. accounting and auditing practice to provide reasonable assurance that the
engagements were conducted in compliance with professional standards and that
there was appropriate continuity of Andersen personnel working on the audits,
availability of national office consultation, and availability of personnel at
foreign affiliates of Andersen to conduct the relevant portions of the audits.

Very truly yours,

/s/ Donald S. Stevens
Executive Vice President, Treasurer
and Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 12.1





CERTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 906  SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Todd Bruce, the President and Chief Executive Officer of Crystallex  International Corporation (the registrant), certify that:





1. Based on my knowledge, the Annual Report on Form 20-F/A  No. 1 for  the year ended December 31, 2002 (Form 20-F), of the registrant fully  complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act  of 1934;





2. Based on my knowledge, the information contained in Form 20-F fairly  presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of  operations of the registrant for the year ended December 31, 2002.





|Date: October 14, 2004 |                                      
|---------------------- | -------------------------------------
|                       |                                      
|                       | /s/ TODD BRUCE                       
|                       |                                      
|                       | Todd Bruce                           
|                       | President and Chief Executive Officer




A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has  been provided to Crystallex International Corporation and will be retained by  such corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its  staff upon request.
Exhibit 10.9
 FIRST AMENDMENT TO
AMENDED AND RESTATED
AGREEMENT OF LIMITED PARTNERSHIP OF
PACIFIC OFFICE PROPERTIES, L.P.
 Partnership Partnership
Agreement
  1. Additional
Limited Partners Schedule 1 Schedule 1
 2. Schedule
of Partners. Exhibit A Exhibit A
 3. Ratification.
 [REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK;
 SIGNATURE PAGE IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWS]




---



##### 



IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
 PACIFIC OFFICE PROPERTIES TRUST,
INC.,
as sole general partner of the PartnershipBy:
    /s/ Dallas E. LucasDallas E. LucasPresident and Chief Executive Officer 2




---



##### 



Schedule 1
 Additional Limited Partners
    
    Number of Common UnitsRobert M. Irish
    
    
    35,020116 Spinnaker Court
Del Mar, CA 92014James M. Saivar
    
    
    19,83311260 El Camino Real #200
San Diego, CA 92130Robert F. Buie and Pamela I. Buie
    
    
    143,410Family Trust
P.O. Box 8365
Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067John B. Campbell and Elvina
    
    
    198,263Campbell, Husband and Wife
P.O. Box 9064
Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067
 3




---



##### 



Exhibit A
 Common Units
    
    Preferred UnitsName and Address
    
    (Percentage)
    
    (Percentage)GENERAL PARTNER:Pacific Office Properties Trust, Inc.
    
    
    3,031,125
    
    
    
    0233 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 830
Santa Monica, CA 90401
    
    
    17.8261
    %
    
    
    0
    %LIMITED PARTNERS:POP Venture, LLC
    
    
    13,576,165
    
    
    
    4,545,300841 Bishop Street
Honolulu, HI 96813
    
    
    79.8419
    %
    
    
    100
    %POPTLP, LLC
841 Bishop Street
    
    
    0
    
    
    
    0Honolulu, HI 96813
    
    
    0
    %
    
    
    0
    %Robert M, Irish
    
    
    35,020
    
    
    
    0116 Spinnaker Court
Del Mar, CA 92014
    
    
    0.2060
    %
    
    
    0
    %James M. Saivar
    
    
    19,833
    
    
    
    011260 El Camino Real #200
San Diego, CA 92130
    
    
    0.1166
    %
    
    
    0
    %Robert F. Buie and Pamela I. Buie Family
    
    
    143,410
    
    
    
    0Trust
P.O. Box 8365
    
    
    0.8434
    %
    
    
    0
    %Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067John B. Campbell and Elvina Campbell,
    
    
    198,263
    
    
    
    0Husband and Wife
P.O. Box 9064
    
    
    1.1660
    %
    
    
    0
    %Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067
 4
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

LENIST KEY

, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 18

- 3213

[ January 17, 2019 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Martin S. Fein , Judge;

L.T. Case No. 11

- 2654 CF10A

.

Lenist Key, Okeechobee, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

D AMOORGIAN

, C IKLIN and K LINGENSMITH

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Exhibit 8.1  List of Main Subsidiaries
 Subsidiaries
    
    Jurisdiction
    
    Usual NameAmpla Energía e Serviços S.A.
    
    Brasil
    
    AmplaCentrais Elétricas Cachoeira Dourada S.A.
    
    Brasil
    
    Cachoeira DouradaCGTF  Central Geradora Termelétrica Fortaleza
S.A.
    
    Brasil
    
    Endesa FortalezaChilectra S.A.
    
    Chile
    
    ChilectraCodensa S.A. E.S.P.
    
    Colombia
    
    CodensaCompañía Americana de Multiservicios Ltda.
    
    Chile
    
    CAMCompañía de Inteconexión Energética
    
    Brasil
    
    CIENCompañía Eléctrica Cono Sur S.A.
    
    Panama
    
    Cono SurCompañía Eléctrica Tarapacá S.A.
    
    Chile
    
    CeltaCompanhía Energética de Ceará
    
    Brasil
    
    CoelceEdegel S.A.A.
    
    Peru
    
    EdegelEmgesa S.A. E.S.P.
    
    Colombia
    
    EmgesaEmpresa Distribuidora Sur S.A.
    
    Argentina
    
    EdesurEmpresa Eléctrica Pangue S.A.
    
    Chile
    
    PangueEmpresa Eléctrica Pehuenche S.A.
    
    Chile
    
    PehuencheEmpresa Nacional de Electricidad S.A.
    
    Chile
    
    Endesa ChileEndesa Brasil S.A.
    
    Brasil
    
    Endesa BrasilEndesa Costanera S.A.
    
    Argentina
    
    Endesa CostaneraHidroeléctrica El Chocón S.A.
    
    Argentina
    
    El ChocónInmobiliaria Manso de Velasco S.A.
    
    Chile
    
    IMVEmpresa de Distribución Eléctrica de Lima Norte
    
    Peru
    
    EdelnorSynapsis Soluciones y Servicios IT Ltda.
    
    Chile
    
    Synapsis
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, as Chief
Financial Officer of Brookstone, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify that to the undersigneds knowledge:



| | 1) | the Companys Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended October 30, 2004 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 Companys Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended October 30, 2004 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Philip W. RoizinPhilip W. RoizinExecutive Vice President, Finance and Administration, Treasurer and Secretary and Chief Financial Officer




Dated: December 9, 2004
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                         887,153
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  283,150
<ALLOWANCES>                                    39,982
<INVENTORY>                                  2,417,224
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,608,850
<PP&E>                                       5,662,485
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,593,314
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,639,921
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,100,363
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  4,000,000
<COMMON>                                        68,963
<OTHER-SE>                                   (372,710)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,639,921
<SALES>                                     10,491,447
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            10,491,447
<CGS>                                        5,647,989
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               11,272,047
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (73,894)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             297,692
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (4,402,947)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,407,600
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,995,347)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,995,347)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.51)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.51)


</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CertificationPursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title18, United States Code)**

 

In connectionwith the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Pressure BioSciences, Inc.,a Massachusetts corporation (the “Company”) for the period ended March 31,2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the  “Report”),  I, Richard T. Schumacher, President and ChiefExecutive Officer of Pressure BioSciences, Inc., a Massachusettscorporation (the “Company”), do hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 ofthe Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350,Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) that:

 

(1)                                  The  Report of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
| Dated: May 16, 2005 | */s/ Richard T. Schumacher*           |   |
|--------------------------|---------------------------------------|--------|
|                     | Richard T. Schumacher                 |
|                     | President and Chief Executive Officer |
|                     | (Principal Executive Officer)         |

 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906has been provided to Pressure BioSciences, Inc.  and will be retainedby Pressure BioSciences, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

 

----