alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF

THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

Pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Theodore R. Maloney,certify that:

 

1.  The Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for theyear ended June 30, 2005 (the “Report”) of MediCor Ltd. (the “Company”),fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.  The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of MediCor.

 
| Date:  September 28, 2005 |
|--------------------------------|
|                           |
|                           | /s/  Theodore R. Maloney |   |
|                           | Theodore  R. Maloney |
|                           | Chief  Executive Officer |

 

----
#### James A. Murphy, as President of Local Union No. 1 of the United Association of Plumbers and Gas Fitters, Steam Fitters, Steam Fitters’ Helpers of the United States and Canada, Sprinklers and Sprinkler Fitters’ Helpers, Respondent, v. Edward W. Leonard and Others, Appellants.

— The parties hereto having stipulated in open court that this case may be disposed of by a court of four, the decision is as follows: Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. No opinion. Jenks, P. J., Thomas, Stapleton and Rich, JJ., concurred.
## Subtitle K—Group Health Plan Requirements

Chapter
Sec. 1
100.
Group health plan requirements
9801

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**1997**—Pub. L. 105–34, title XV, §1531(a)(1), Aug. 5, 1997, 111 Stat. 1080, struck out "Portability, Access, and Renewability" before "Requirements" in subtitle heading and made similar change in item for chapter 100.

1  Section number editorially supplied.
- Skip to global NPS navigation
    - Skip to the main content
    - Skip to the footer section

National Park Service**Search

# **OpenMenu**CloseMenu

## Explore This Park

## Explore the National Park Service

## Exiting nps.gov

Science of the American Southwest
§ 423.20 General rules. ( a ) You must obey all applicable Federal, State, and local laws whenever you are at or on any Reclamation facilities, lands, or waterbodies.
( b ) You must comply with all provisions of this subpart C whenever you are at or on any Reclamation facilities, lands, or waterbodies, except as specifically provided by: ( 1 ) A permit issued by an authorized official under subpart D of this part 423;
( 2 ) A contract with Reclamation or agency managing Reclamation facilities, lands, and waterbodies;
( 3 ) The rules established by an authorized official in a special use area under subpart E of this part 423; or
( 4 ) A right-of-use issued under 43 CFR part 429.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsLearning to read aloud: A neural network approach using sparse distributed memoryAn attempt to solve a problem of text-to-phoneme mapping is described which does not appear amenable to solution by use of standard algorithmic procedures. Experiments based on a model of distributed processing are also described. This model (sparse distributed memory (SDM)) can be used in an iterative supervised learning mode to solve the problem. Additional improvements aimed at obtaining better performance are suggested.Document ID19920002493Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsJoglekar, Umesh Dwarkanath*(Research Inst. for Advanced Computer Science Moffett Field, CA, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateJuly 1, 1989Subject CategoryCyberneticsReport/Patent NumberRIACS-TR-89-27NASA-CR-188846NAS 1.26:188846Accession Number92N11711Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NCC2-408CONTRACT_GRANT: NCC2-387Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19920002493.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 August 12, 2004 VIA EDGAR
Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549  Re:
    Segue Software, Inc. Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 Ladies and Gentlemen: In connection with the quarterly report of Segue Software, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ending June 30, 2004, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
I, Joseph K. Krivickas, Chief Executive Officer of the Company hereby certify
that: 1. the Companys 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 results of operations of the
Company. This certification is provided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall
not be deemed a part of the Report or filed for any purpose whatsoever nor
shall it be deemed incorporated by reference into any filing under the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended.  Sincerely,/s/ JOSEPH K. KRIVICKAS
Joseph K. KrivickasChief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>         5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
COMPANY'S CONDENSED  CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN THE COMPANY'S
QUARTERLY  REPORT ON FORM 10-QSB FOR THE QUARTERLY  PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1997,
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                             3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                      JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                        MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                        8
<SECURITIES>                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 0
<ALLOWANCES>                                  0
<INVENTORY>                                   0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                          3,450
<PP&E>                                        0
<DEPRECIATION>                                0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           38,450
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                   652,888
<BONDS>                                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         0
<PREFERRED>                                   0
<COMMON>                                 13,958
<OTHER-SE>                                    0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             38,450
<SALES>                                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              0
<CGS>                                         0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          585
<INCOME-PRETAX>                         (59,460)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           0
<DISCONTINUED>                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               0
<CHANGES>                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                            (59,460)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                             (.004)
<EPS-DILUTED>                             (.004)
        

</TABLE>
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 E Med Future, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2005 (the Report) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof, the undersigned, being the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer, respectively, of the Company, 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 § 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/ D. Dane Donohue                   |  |  |  | /s/ Donald Sullivan    
|D. Dane Donohue                       |  |  |  | Donald Sullivan        
|PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER |  |  |  | CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER



Date: August 15, 2005
#### Means *v.*Means.

February 22, 1911.

Atkinson, J.

1. In a suit for specific performance of a contract for the sale of land and to have title decreed to vest in the plaintiff, the petition substantially alleged: In September, 1901, plaintiff bought a tract of land' containing 40.2 acres, more or less, from defendant, which the latter caused to be surveyed and to be delivered into the possession of the former. The purchaser “greatly improved” the property, and remained continuously in possession from the date of purchase until the filing of the suit in March, 1908. The purchase-price was $10 per acre, which, at the time of the purchase, was partly paid by delivery of certain cattle at an agreed price. The balance was to be paid in “certain debts which plaintiff held against defendant and her son.” The debts were particularly described in separate items, and amounted to more than the balance of the purchase-price. At various times plaintiff proposed to defendant to have a settlement, and made continuous tenders of the “evidences of indebtedness,” and demanded a deed, But always some excuse would be offered and promises made to execute the deed at a later time, until recently, when most of the debts had become barred by the statute of limitations, at which time defendant denied the existence of the contract and refused to make the deed. *Held,*that the petition was not subject to demurrer on the grounds that: *(a)*The allegations were not sufficient to authorize the suit or proceedings in equity. (6) That the petition failed to allege facts which would authorize the court to confirm a sale of land not in writing, or to decree the.title in the plaintiff upon a verbal contract of sale, (e) The petition does not disclose such facts as are necessary to take a verbal contract for the sale of land out of the statute of frauds, or to give a court of equity jurisdiction. *(d)*There is no allegation of payment of the purchase-money, no copy or exhibit of the items of debts which were to be surrendered as part payment of the purchase-price, but it affirmatively appeared from the allegations that each item of debt was barred by the statute of limitiations, and that the suit was also barred by the statute of limitations, and equity has no jurisdiction to revive the debts.

2. Except as indicated in the preceding headnote, there was no assignment of error upon any ruling of the court made during the trial. There was sufficient evidence to authorize the verdict, and the court did not err in refusing to grant a new trial.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*

*802Specific performance. Before Judge Brand. Franklin superior court. December *22,*1909.

*James H. Shelton*and *Samuel B. Swilling,*for plaintiff in error.
#### Walter Case et al., on Behalf of Themselves and All Other Former Employees of R. B. Rogers Companies, Inc., Similarly Situated, Respondents, v. Indian Motocycle Company, Appellant, et al., Defendants. Walter Case et al., on Behalf of Themselves and All Other Former Employees of R. B. Rogers Companies, Inc., Similarly Situated, Respondents, v. John B. Chertok, Appellant, et al., Defendants. Walter Case et al., on Behalf of Themselves and All Other Former Employees of R. B. Rogers Companies, Inc., Similarly Situated, Respondents, v. Indian Motocycle Company et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants.

No opinion. Present — Peck, P. J., Glennon, Callahan, Yan Yoorhis and Shientag, JJ.; Callahan, J., dissents and votes to reverse the orders appealed from and grant the motion to strike from the complaint all reference to the representative character of the action and to require the plaintiffs to servé an amended complaint separately stating and numbering each individual cause of action upon the ground that the plaintiffs do not show sufficient unity of interest to warrant the maintenance of a representative action. [See *post,*p. 768.]
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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-40794

Summary Calendar

PATRICK ALEXANDER JONES,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

JOHN B. FOX,

Respondent-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

No. 1:08-CV-167

Before SMITH, STEWART, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Patrick Jones, federal prisoner # 60763-080, was convicted of three charges

related to the possession and distribution of crack cocaine, and the district court

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

June 15, 2009

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 08-40794

2

sentenced him to life in prison. This court affirmed his conviction and sentence,

and his first 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion was unsuccessful. Jones then filed a purported 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition in which he raised claims related to his indictment, trial, and sentence. The district court determined that Jones’s alleged

§ 2241 petition was actually a § 2255 motion over which it lacked jurisdiction.

The court thus dismissed the suit.

Jones appeals that dismissal. He argues that the court abused its discretion by denying his motion to amend. He also contends that he is entitled to

bring a § 2241 petition pursuant to the savings clause of § 2255, that the district

court misinterpreted Reyes-Requena v. United States, 243 F.3d 893, 904 (5th Cir.

2001), and that the merits of his claims should be considered because he is actually innocent.

Jones has shown no abuse of discretion in the denial of his motion to

amend. See United States v. Saenz, 282 F.3d 354, 356 (5th Cir. 2002). He also

has not shown that the district court erred by determining that his alleged

§ 2241 petition was best construed as a § 2255 motion. See Kinder v. Purdy, 222

F.3d 209, 213 (5th Cir. 2000); Tolliver v. Dobre, 211 F.3d 876, 877 (5th Cir.

2000); Cox v. Warden, Fed. Detention Ctr., 911 F.2d 1111, 1113 (5th Cir. 1990);

Solsona v. Warden, F.C.I., 821 F.2d 1129, 1132 (5th Cir. 1987). Finally, Jones

has shown no error in connection with the district court’s interpretation of binding caselaw, nor has he shown that he should be permitted to proceed under the

savings clause of § 2255. See Reyes-Requena, 243 F.3d at 904.

The judgment is AFFIRMED.
### §6514. Credits or refunds after period of limitation

#### (a) Credits or refunds after period of limitation

A refund of any portion of an internal revenue tax shall be considered erroneous and a credit of any such portion shall be considered void—

#### (1) Expiration of period for filing claim

If made after the expiration of the period of limitation for filing claim therefor, unless within such period claim was filed; or

#### (2) Disallowance of claim and expiration of period for filing suit

In the case of a claim filed within the proper time and disallowed by the Secretary, if the credit or refund was made after the expiration of the period of limitation for filing suit, unless within such period suit was begun by the taxpayer.

#### (3) Recovery of erroneous refunds

**For procedure by the United States to recover erroneous refunds, see sections 6532(b) and 7405.**

#### (b) Credit after period of limitation

Any credit against a liability in respect of any taxable year shall be void if any payment in respect of such liability would be considered an overpayment under section 6401(a).

(Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 812; Pub. L. 94–455, title XIX, §1906(b)(13)(A), Oct. 4, 1976, 90 Stat. 1834.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1976—Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 94–455 struck out "or his delegate" after "Secretary".
Order issued February 27, 2014

S

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

________________________________________

No. 05-13-00452-CR

No. 05-13-00453-CR

No. 05-13-00454-CR

________________________________________

FABIAN FEDRICE GARZA, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

O R D E R

Before Justices FitzGerald, Fillmore, and Evans

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we GRANT the October 2, 2013 motion of 

Valencia Bush for leave to withdraw as appointed counsel on appeal. We DIRECT the Clerk of 

the Court to remove Valencia Bush as counsel of record for appellant. We DIRECT the Clerk 

of the Court to send a copy of this order and all future correspondence to Fabian Fedrice Garza, 

TDCJ No. 1840430, Estelle Unit, 264 FM 3478, Huntsville, Texas, 77320-3320.

/ David Evans/

DAVID EVANS

JUSTICE
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 Certification of the Chief Executive 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 Annual Report of Accenture SCA (the Company) on
Form 10-K for the period ended August 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, William D. Green,
Chief Executive Officer of Accenture Ltd, the general partner of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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. /s/ William D. GreenWilliam D. GreenChief Executive Officer of Accenture LtdNovember 4, 2004
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature
that appears in typed form within the electronic version 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.
Document Headings

                    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.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Declaration of Disaster #3620] 

In accordance with a notice received from the Department of Homeland Security—Federal Emergency Management Agency—effective September 25, 2004, the above numbered declaration is hereby amended to include Manatee, Sarasota, and Suwannee as disaster areas due to damages caused by Hurricane Frances occurring on September 3, 2004, and continuing. 

In addition, applications for economic injury loans from small businesses located in the contiguous county of Madison in the State of Florida may be filed until the specified date at the previously designated location. All other counties contiguous to the above named primary counties have previously been declared. 

                    All other information remains the same,                     *i.e.*, the deadline for filing applications for physical damage is November 3, 2004 and for economic injury the deadline is June 6, 2005.                

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 59002 and 59008)

Dated: September 30, 2004. 

Cheri L. Cannon, 

Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance. 

[FR Doc. 04-22490 Filed 10-5-04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
#### § 4150.4-4 Redemption.

Any owner or his agent, or both, or lien-holder of record of the impounded livestock may redeem them under these regulations or, if a suitable agreement is in effect, in accordance with State law, prior to the time of sale upon settlement with the United States under § 4150.3 or adequate showing that there has been no violation.

[43 FR 29067, July 5, 1978. Redesignated at 47 FR 41712, Sept. 21, 1982]
#### § 5.18 What wages must I pay to Indian employees?

Any motion picture or television producer who obtains a lease or permit for the use of Indian land under 25 CFR part 162 must pay a fair and reasonable wage to any Indian employed in connection with the production.