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

- 1 -

EXHIBIT 13CERTIFICATIONS UNDER SECTION 906 OF
SARBANES-OXLEY

In connection with the annual report of TAG Oil Ltd. (the
Company) on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Drew Cadenhead, Chief Executive 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.

|Drew Cadenhead               | 
|------------------------------ | 
|Name: Drew Cadenhead           | 
|Title: Chief Executive Officer | 
|September 30, 2005             | 

CERTIFICATIONS UNDER SECTION 906 OF SARBANES-OXLEY

In connection with the annual report of TAG Oil Ltd. (the
Company) on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Garth Johnson, 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.

|Garth Johnson                | 
|------------------------------ | 
|Name: Garth Johnson            | 
|Title: Chief Financial Officer | 
|September 30, 2005             | 

---
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19
- 7033

JOSHUA ALLEN BOLEN , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v. SECRETARY OF PUBLIC SAFETY , Respondent

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina , at Greensboro , Loretta C. Biggs , District Judge. ( 1:18

- cv
- 00513

- LCB

- JEP )

Submitted : November 19 , 2019 Decided: November 22, 2019

Before WILKINSON and RICHARDSON , Circuit Judges , and TRAXLER , Senior Circuit Judge

.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Joshua Bolen , Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Joshua Allen Bolen seeks to a ppeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (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 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (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 petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Bolen has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, 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
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           6,154
<SECURITIES>                                    46,076
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,798
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                           3,941
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  69,522
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,909
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           139
<OTHER-SE>                                      59,474
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    69,522
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                14,318
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   11,655
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,313
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (635)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,015)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (678)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (337)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (337)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.03)


</TABLE>
Exhibit
10.2


 


VOTING
AGREEMENT


 


To
induce the parties to the Stock Purchase Agreement, dated as of May 22, 2020 (the “Purchase Agreement”), among
Resolate Blends, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Seller”), and the buyers named therein (the “Buyers”),
to enter into and perform the Purchase Agreement, the undersigned stockholder of the Seller whose name, address and signature
appear below (the “Undersigned”), hereby agrees to vote all voting securities of the Seller owned beneficially
and of record thereby (the “Subject Securities”) in favor of the Purchase Agreement and the transactions contemplated
thereby.


 


If
the Seller shall in any manner split, subdivide or combine its any of its voting securities, the definition of Subject Securities
for purposes of this Voting Agreement shall be deemed amended such that this Voting Agreement be deemed to be an agreement to
vote the number of voting securities of the Seller owned beneficially and of record by the Undersigned following such stock split,
subdivision or combination that relate back to the original Subject Securities.


 


The
Undersigned hereby revokes any proxy heretofore given to vote with respect of the Subject Securities.


 


This
Voting Agreement shall be effective until June 30, 2020.


 


	 	 	 
	 	Name:
    	Geoffrey
    Selzer
	 	Address:	


 


 


Dated:
May 22, 2020
CASE ANNOUNCEMENTS

*December*17, *2009*

[Cite as *12/17/2009 Case Announcements,*2009-Ohio-6629.]

MERIT DECISIONS WITHOUT OPINIONS

2009-2183.

#### State ex rel. Polaris Innkeepers, L.L.C. v. Westerville.

In Mandamus. On S.Ct.Prac.R. X(5) determination and respondent’s motion for judgment on the pleadings. Motion for judgment on the pleadings granted. Cause dismissed.

Moyer, C.J., and Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, and Cupp, JJ., concur.

Pfeifer, J., dissents.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard L. FULTON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 06-6652.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: March 22, 2007.

Decided: March 28, 2007.

Richard L. Fulton, Appellant Pro Se. William Frederick Gould, Office of The *284United States Attorney, Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Richard L. Fulton seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appeal-ability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). 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) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. *Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Fulton 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                         233,408
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  499,443
<ALLOWANCES>                                    76,468
<INVENTORY>                                    555,167
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,341,018
<PP&E>                                       3,222,239
<DEPRECIATION>                                 904,293
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,904,281
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,300,700
<BONDS>                                        314,771
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          100,000
<PREFERRED>                                     64,216
<COMMON>                                    13,291,539
<OTHER-SE>                                (12,235,158)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,904,281
<SALES>                                      3,143,112
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,143,112
<CGS>                                        2,417,623
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,417,623
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,022,761
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                60,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (53,601)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,297,272)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,297,272)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,297,272)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.35)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.35)


</TABLE>
#### UNITED SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee. and Selpa Construction & Rental Equipment Corporation (doing business as Selpa Construction Corporation), Third-Party Defendant.

No. 2010-5083.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Nov. 15, 2010.

Rehearing En Banc Denied Feb. 3, 2011.

Antonio Borres-Otero, Saldana & Salda-na-Egozcure, PSC, of San Juan, PR, for plaintiff-appellant. With him on the brief was Carlos Lugo-Fiol.

*509Jeffrey A. Regner, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, for defendant-appellee. With him on the brief were Tony West, Assistant Attorney General, Jeanne E. Davidson, Director, and Donald E. Kinner, Assistant Director. Of counsel on the brief was Michael J. Elston, United States Postal Service, of Washington, DC.

NEWMAN, PLAGER, and PROST, Circuit Judges.

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

This Cause having been heard and considered, it is

ORDERED and Adjudged:

AFFIRMED. *See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER>   1
       
<S>                                 <C>       
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   Sep-27-1996
<PERIOD-START>                      Dec-28-1996
<PERIOD-END>                        Mar-28-1997                     
<CASH>                              153,222                                     
<SECURITIES>                              0         
<RECEIVABLES>                       577,416      
<ALLOWANCES>                              0
<INVENTORY>                           3,754      
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                    741,789      
<PP&E>                              168,688           
<DEPRECIATION>                       67,135
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                      881,998     
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>               523,380
<BONDS>                             103,652            
<COMMON>                            251,640       
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                     0
<PREFERRED>                               0   
<OTHER-SE>                              400  
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>        881,998
<SALES>                             176,839           
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                    176,839
<CGS>                                     0     
<TOTAL-COSTS>                       144,446   
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                     16,252
<LOSS-PROVISION>                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                    8,025
<INCOME-PRETAX>                      16,141         
<INCOME-TAX>                          5,624             
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                            0      
<EXTRAORDINARY>                           0   
<CHANGES>                                 0        
<NET-INCOME>                         10,517          
<EPS-PRIMARY>                          .003       
<EPS-DILUTED>                          .003        
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-2064

BARRY P. GRASS,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 and

KAREN L. GRASS; JAMES L. GRASS; JENNIFER L.

GRASS; MICHAEL R. GRASS,

 Plaintiffs,

 versus

EASTERN ASSOCIATED COAL COMPANY,

 Defendant - Appellee,

 and

NOHL A. BRAUN,

Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern

District of West Virginia, at Charleston. John T. Copenhaver, Jr.,

District Judge. (2:05-cv-00496)

Submitted: March 22, 2007 Decided: March 27, 2007
- 2 -

Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Barry P. Grass, Appellant Pro Se. Sara Ellen Hauptfuehrer, STEPTOE

& JOHNSON, Clarksburg, West Virginia; Thomas John Hurney, Jr.,

Erin R. Stankewicz, JACKSON & KELLY, PLLC, Charleston, West

Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 3 -

PER CURIAM:

Barry P. Grass appeals the district court’s orders

accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendations and denying relief

in his civil action alleging claims against his former employer and

physician. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the

district court. Grass v. Eastern Assoc. Coal. Co., No.

2:05-cv-00496 (S.D.W. Va. Mar. 23, 2006; filed Aug. 28, 2006 &

entered Aug. 30, 2006). 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 32(b)
 CORE MOLDING TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (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/ Herman F. Dick, Jr.Herman F. Dick, Jr.Vice President, Secretary, Treasurer and
Chief Financial Officer May 14, 2009
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                         729,334
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  608,761
<ALLOWANCES>                                   39,982
<INVENTORY>                                    1,176,356
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               3,365,944
<PP&E>                                         4,931,217
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (1,786,016)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 8,569,821
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          4,693,397
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    6,152,261
<COMMON>                                       81,613
<OTHER-SE>                                     (4,710,439)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   8,569,821
<SALES>                                        11,126,516
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               11,126,516
<CGS>                                          5,987,383
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  14,144,230
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (42,989)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             818,849
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (9,250,489)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,407,600)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (10,658,089)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (10,658,089)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (1.47)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (1.47)
        


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

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                             904
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,944
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 9,615
<PP&E>                                           2,130
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  11,745
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,064
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            65
<OTHER-SE>                                       4,464
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    11,745
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                14,180
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    8,329
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,763
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  60
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,036
<INCOME-TAX>                                        39
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,997
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,997
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>