alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
| Loans RE        Mtges.InvestmentsOwned        AssetsSecuritiesOA/Judgments50.0%    18.2%9.1%4.5%4.5%13.6%
                      Source: Reports from FDIC Division of Finance

Back to Chart
 1979198019811982Other626640606597Liquidation423460429778    Supervision    2,5402,5442,3592,129Total3,5983,6443,3943,504

                      Source: FDIC, 2001 Annual Report

Back          to Chart |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

215 

KAH 12-00747 

PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., FAHEY, CARNI, SCONIERS, AND VALENTINO, JJ. 

 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK EX REL. 

ALAN DALE, PETITIONER-APPELLANT, 

V ORDER

DAVID STALLONE, CAYUGA CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, 

ET AL., RESPONDENTS-RESPONDENTS. 

 

ALAN DALE, PETITIONER-APPELLANT PRO SE. 

ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (FRANK BRADY OF

COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENTS-RESPONDENTS. 

 

Appeal from a judgment (denominated order) of the Supreme Court,

Cayuga County (Mark H. Fandrich, A.J.), entered November 2, 2011 in a

habeas corpus proceeding. The judgment dismissed the petition. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in the decision

at Supreme Court.

Entered: March 21, 2014 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
<PAGE>

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 GBC Bancorp, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Larry D. Key,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and I, John Hopkins, Chief Financial
Officer 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; 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/  Larry D. Key
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                         Larry D. Key, President and C.E.O.
                                         (Principal Executive Officer)

                                         /s/ John Hopkins
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                         John Hopkins, C.F.O.
                                         (Principal Financial and Accounting
                                         Officer)

August 10, 2004
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

STEVEN RYAN DOCK,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 14-10146

D.C. No. 2:97-cr-00410-ROS

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Roslyn O. Silver, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 9, 2014** 

Before: WALLACE, LEAVY, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

Steven Ryan Dock appeals from the 35-month sentence imposed upon

revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291,

and we affirm.

Dock contends that the district court erred by imposing sentence on the basis

FILED

DEC 12 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
of the need to punish him for his original crime of conviction and his alcoholism. 

We review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103,

1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and find none. Although the court did discuss Dock’s

original crime and alcohol problem, it did so in the context of the section 3583(e)

sentencing factors, particularly the need to protect the public, and did not impose

sentence for punitive purposes. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 3553(a)(2)(C), 3583(e); United

States v. Simtob, 485 F.3d 1058, 1062-63 (9th Cir. 2007) (at a revocation

sentencing, district court may consider the history of the violator because section

3583(e) specifically directs courts to consider the history and characteristics of the

defendant). Further, because this was Dock’s third revocation offense, the 35-

month sentence is substantively reasonable. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e); United

States v. Miqbel, 444 F.3d 1173, 1182 (9th Cir. 2006) (at a revocation sentencing,

the court may sanction a violator for his breach of the court’s trust).

AFFIRMED.

2 14-10146
#### Lynnwood Anthony VRBA, Claimant-Appellant, v. Robert A. McDONALD, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 2014-7100.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Aug. 5, 2014.

Mark Ryan Lippman, Attorney, The Veterans Law Group, La Jolla, CA, for Claimant-Appellant.

Michael D. Snyder, Trial Attorney, Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent-Appellee.

ON MOTION

ORDER

Lynnwood Anthony Vrba moves to withdraw his appeal.

Upon consideration thereof,

*892It Is Ordered That:

(1) The motion is granted. The appeal is dismissed.

(2) Each side shall bear its own costs.
DENY and Opinion Filed May 12, 2022 

# S

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-21-00969-CV IN RE BARBARA JOHNSON, Relator Original Proceeding from the 254th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF-10-14794 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Osborne, Pe dersen, III, and Goldstein Opinion by Justice Goldstein Before the Court is relator’s petition fo r writ of mandamus. In the petition, relator challenges the trial c ourt’s order dismissing as un timely relator’s appeal of the associate judge’s temporary orders in the underlying family court proceeding. Entitlement to mandamus relief requires re lator to show that the trial court clearly abused its discretion and that th ey lack an adequate appellate remedy. In re Copart, Inc ., 619 S.W.3d 710, 713 (Tex. 2021) (orig. proceeding) (citing In re Prudential Ins. Co ., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding)). As the party seeking relief, relators have the burden of providing the Court with a certified or sworn copy of every document that is material to establishing their right to mandamus relief. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 52.3(k), 52.7(a); In re Butler , 270 S.W.3d–2– 757, 759 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, orig. pro ceeding) (requiring relator to submit a record containing certified or sworn copi es). Because not all of the documents included in the record are certified by a tria l court clerk or adequately sworn copies, we conclude relato r has failed to meet this burden. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus without prejudice to refiling a petition with a record that co mplies with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 52.7(a).

210969F.P05 /Bonnie Lee Golds t ein / BONNIE LEE GOLDSTEIN JUSTICE
2009-1343.

#### Faivre v. DEX Corp. Northeast.

Franklin App. No. 08AP-729, 182 Ohio App.3d 563, 2009-Ohio-2660.
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER  PURSUANT TO  18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
OF 2002

I, R Steve Creamer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of EnergySolutions,Inc. on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-K fairly presents in all
material respects the financial condition and results of operations of EnergySolutions, Inc.

February 27, 2009

By:

/s/ R STEVE CREAMER R Steve Creamer


I,
Philip O. Strawbridge, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of
EnergySolutions, Inc. on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008 fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial
condition and results of operations of EnergySolutions, Inc.

February 27, 2009

By:

/s/ PHILIP O. STRAWBRIDGE Philip O. Strawbridge


A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to EnergySolutions, Inc. and will be
retained by EnergySolutions, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---



QuickLinks
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-23-00058-CV

In re Victor J. Tapia

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM COMAL COUNTY

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

The petition for writ of mandamus is denied. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).

__________________________________________

Rosa Lopez Theofanis, Justice

Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Triana and Theofanis

Filed: March 3, 2023
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF PRESIDENT AND CHIEFFINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

In connection with this Annual Report of KabeExploration, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the periodending December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Erik Ulsteen, President, ChiefFinancial Officer and Secretary of the Company, certifies to the best of myknowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 ofthe Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1                 Such Annual Report on Form 10-K for the yearending December 31, 2008, fully complies with the requirements ofsection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2                 The information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-Kfor the year ending December 31, 2008, fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

 
| Date: April 15, 2009 |   |
|---------------------------|--------|
| /s/  Erik Ulsteen         |   |
| Erik Ulsteen              |   |
| President                 |   |
| Chief Financial Officer   |   |
| Secretary                 |   |

 

----
|   | Date:  | November 29, 2011                                                       |
|--------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                                                    |
|   | By:    |  /s/ Behzad Shayanfar                                              |
|   |   | Name:  Behzad Shayanfar                                       |
|   |   | Title:  Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) |

|   | Date:  | November 29, 2011                                                                                               |
|--------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                                                                                            |
|   | By:    | /s/ Behzad Shayanfar                                                                                            |
|   |   | Name:  Behzad Shayanfar                                                                               |
|   |   | Title:  Interim Chief Financial Officer (Principal FinancialOfficer and Principal Accounting Officer) |

----
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

This certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) and accompanies the quarterly report
on Form 10-QSB (the "Form 10-QSB") for the period ended March 31, 2006 of Chase
Packaging Corporation (the "Company"). I, Ann W. Green Secretary/Treasurer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)

(1) The Form 10-QSB fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

                                      /s/ Ann W. Green
                                      -----------------------------------
                                      Ann W. Green
                                      Secretary/Treasurer (Principal Financial
                                      and Accounting Officer)

May 10, 2006
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. James HARDIN, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 06-10808

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

March 14, 2007.

J. Michael Worley, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Patrick J. McLain, Law Office of Patrick J. McLain, Cedar Hill, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

James Hardin pleaded guilty to stealing explosive materials in interstate commerce in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 844(k) and was sentenced to 27 months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release. Hardin argues that the district court improperly relied on information he provided in his proffer interview to justify an upward departure. The district court specifically found that the probation officer did not rely on Hardin’s proffer-related information to recommend an upward departure. Based on the probation officer’s assertions that the information obtained from Hardin’s co-defendants was independently obtained, the district court’s finding was not clearly erroneous. *See United States v. Gibson,*48 F.3d 876, 879 (5th Cir.1995).

Hardin states that the upward departure was unreasonably severe, but he does not brief the unreasonability of the upward departure in his argument. He also argues that his sentence was not in keeping with the actual conduct surrounding the commission of his offense. Hardin’s actual offense conduct was addressed in the calculation of his base offense level. The upward departure was based on his other uncharged criminal conduct which the district court concluded was not represented in his criminal history score. Hardin has not made any arguments suggesting that the district court abused its discretion in either its decision to depart or the extent of departure. *United States v. Smith,*440 F.3d 704, 707 (5th Cir.2006).

AFFIRMED.

*

 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.
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                          OF CORPORATE GENERAL PARTNER

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

The undersigned, James M. Seneff, Jr., the Chief Executive Officer of CNL Realty
Corporation,  the  corporate  general  partner of CNL Income Fund XVI, Ltd. (the
"Partnership"),  has executed this  certification  in connection with the filing
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission of the Partnership's  Annual Report
on Form  10-K for the  period  ending  December  31,  2002 (the  "Report").  The
undersigned hereby certifies 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.

Date:    March 24, 2003                  /s/ James M. Seneff, Jr.
      -------------------------          -----------------------------------
                                         Name:  James M. Seneff, Jr.
                                         Title: Chief Executive Officer
* District Judge of the Southern District of Texas, sitting

by designation.

** Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________ No. 96-50033

_____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee

v. MIGUEL OMAR VILLALOZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas

(EP-95-CR-137-1)

_________________________________________________________________ October 2, 1996 Before KING and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges, and LAKE * , District Judge.
PER CURIAM: ** Defendant-appellant Miguel Omar Villaloz appeals the denial of his motion to suppress a firearm and subsequent statements to police officers. Villaloz argues that the police officer who detained and frisked him did so without reasonable suspicion.2

Following an evidentiary hearing, the district court denied the motion. We affirm. The district court concluded that the initial stop of Villaloz was an investigative detention within the meaning of Terry v. Ohio , 392 U.S. 1 (1968). The district court found that the facts known to the police officer gave rise to a reasonable suspicion justifying the stop:

The hunched walk and the unusual placement of the hands coupled with the officer’s knowledge that a shooting had just occurred two blocks away added to the facts that the Defendant was headed away from that location to the nearest busy intersection, at a quicker pace after the officer passed, give rise to reasonable suspicion which would warrant a check of the Defendant.

The district court further concluded that the officer’s observations gave him reasonable suspicion to believe that Villaloz might be armed and pose a danger to the officer.
In Terry , the Court held that an officer may detain an individual on the street for a brief investigation if the facts known to the officer give rise to a reasonable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot or that the person has been involved in criminal activity. Terry , 392 U.S. at 20-23. Reasonable suspicion exists when, based on the totality of the circumstances, “the detaining officers . . . have a particularized and objective basis for suspecting the particular person stopped of criminal activity.” United States v. Cortez ,3

449 U.S. 411, 417-18 (1981). We think that the district court’s fact findings, which are not clearly erroneous, support the conclusion that the required minimum level of objective justification for the officer’s decision to stop Villaloz and to pat him down was reached. We agree with that conclusion, and accordingly, we affirm the decision of the district court denying Villaloz’s motion to suppress.
AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 USC, SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In connection with the Annual Report of United Mines, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert Leitzman, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





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





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








Dated:  March 31, 2010
/s/ Robert LeitzmanBy:  Robert LeitzmanIts:  Chief Financial Officer








A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to United Mines, Inc. and will be retained by United Mines, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Victor NAVA-GARCIA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 06-20527

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

March 7, 2007.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.

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

Before KING, WIENER, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Victor Nava-Garcia has filed an unopposed motion to summarily affirm his conviction and summarily vacate his sentence and remand for resentencing in light of *Lopez v. Gonzales,*— U.S.-, 127 S.Ct. 625, 166 L.Ed.2d 462 (2006), and *United States v. Estrada-Mendoza,*475 F.3d 258 (5th Cir.2007). The motion is GRANTED, the conviction is AFFIRMED, the sentence is VACATED, and the case is REMANDED.

*

 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.