alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Quarterly Report of Median Group Inc., a Texas corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for
    the nine months period ending September 30, 2015, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
    (the "Report"), Andrew Hwan Lee, I, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifies to the best of his knowledge,
    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 result of operations
    of the Company.  A
    signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Median Group Inc, and will be retained
    by Median Group Inc and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.  /s/
    Andrew Hwan Lee---------------------------------Andrew
    Hwan LeeChief
    Executive OfficerMarch
    25, 2016
Order entered September 17, 2020

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-20-00611-CV

THE CITY OF DALLAS, Appellant/Cross-Appellee

V.

MILLWEE-JACKSON JOINT VENTURE AND STEPHEN M. MILLWEE,

Appellees/Cross-Appellants

On Appeal from the 95th District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-04-07287-D

ORDER

Before the Court is appellant’s September 15, 2020 unopposed motion for 

second extension of time to file its brief. We GRANT the motion and ORDER

the brief be filed no later than October 21, 2020.

/s/ ERIN A. NOWELL 

JUSTICE
#### § 734.304 Candidacy for public office.

An employee may not run for the nomination or as a candidate for election to partisan political office, except as specified in § 734.207.
### §110302. Purposes

The purposes of the corporation are—

(1) to maintain and conduct a national memorial and museum dedicated to and commemorating the service and sacrifice by Americans of the Jewish faith in the Armed Forces of the United States during the period of war;

(2) to gather, collate, edit, publish, and exhibit memorabilia, information, records, military awards, decorations, citations, and similar items, to preserve the memories and records of patriotic service performed by men and women of the Jewish faith while in the Armed Forces of the United States in time of war; and

(3) to stimulate patriotism in the minds of all Americans by encouraging the study of the military and naval history of the United States.

(Pub. L. 105–225, Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1369.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 110302 | 36:913. | Sept. 2, 1958, Pub. L. 85–903, §3, 72 Stat. 1738. |

Section

Before clause (1), the word "purposes" is substituted for "principles and objects" for consistency in the revised title.
### **CHAPTERS 2403 THROUGH 2499—RESERVED**

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2014—Pub. L. 113–237, §3(b)(21), Dec. 18, 2014, 128 Stat. 2839, substituted "CHAPTERS 2403 THROUGH 2499—RESERVED" for "CHAPTER 2501—[RESERVED]".
#### § 724.401 Purpose and scope.

This subpart implements Title II of the Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 concerning the obligation of the President or his designee (OPM) to conduct a comprehensive study of best practices in the executive branch for taking disciplinary actions against employees for conduct that is inconsistent with Federal Antidiscrimination and Whistleblower Protection Laws and the obligation to issue advisory guidelines for agencies to follow in taking appropriate disciplinary actions in such circumstances.
#### French American Banking Corporation, Respondent, v. Isbrandtsen Company, Inc., Appellant.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present — Peek, P. J., Dore, Cohn, Breitel and Bastow, JJ. Dore, J., dissents and votes to reverse and deny the motion on the ground that issues of fact are raised which should not be disposed of without a plenary trial.
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. 

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

JAPAN CASH MACHINE CO., LTD. and 

JCM AMERICAN CORP., 

Plaintiffs-Appellants, 

v. 

MEI, INC., 

Defendant-Cross Appellant. 

____________________ 

2010-1069,-1070 

______________________

 

 Appeal from the United States District Court for the 

District of Nevada in No. 05-CV-1433, Judge Robert C. 

Jones. 

______________________ 

JUDGMENT 

______________________ 

DAVID B. ABEL, DLA Piper US LLP, of Los Angeles, 

California, argued for plaintiffs-appellants. Of counsel on 

the brief was MICHAEL D. ROUNDS, Watson Rounds, of 

Reno, Nevada. 

MICHAEL T. RENAUD, Pepper Hamilton LLP, of 

Boston, Massachusetts, argued for defendant-cross 

appellant. With him on the brief were RUSSELL J. BARRON 

and LANA A. GLADSTEIN. 

______________________ 
THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is 

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

 PER CURIAM (GAJARSA, LINN, and MOORE, Circuit 

Judges). 

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36. 

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

November 8, 2010 _/s/ Jan Horbaly _ 

Date Jan Horbaly 

 Clerk
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


     In connection with this quarterly  report on Form 10-QSB of CFB Bancshares,
Inc., I, Wendell S. Langley,  Chief Financial  Officer of CFB Bancshares,  Inc.,
certify, 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 this report  fairly  presents,  in all
          material respects,  the financial  condition and results of operations
          of CFB Bancshares, Inc.



Date:  November 12, 2004                /s/ Wendell S. Langley
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Wendell S. Langley
                                       Chief Financial Officer
115 STAT. 206 PUBLIC LAW 107–26—AUG. 17, 2001

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 2131 (S. 1021):

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 107–119 (Comm. on International Relations).

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 147 (2001):

July 10, considered and passed House.

July 23, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

Public Law 107–26

107th Congress

An Act

To reauthorize the Tropical Forest Conservation Act of 1998 through fiscal year

2004, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. ELIGIBILITY FOR BENEFITS.

Section 805(a)(2) of the Tropical Forest Conservation Act of

1998 (22 U.S.C. 2431c(a)(2)) is amended by striking ‘‘major’’.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS TO SUPPORT REDUCTION OF DEBT UNDER THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT

OF 1961 AND TITLE I OF THE AGRICULTURAL TRADE

DEVELOPMENT AND ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1954.

(a) REAUTHORIZATION.—Section 806 of the Tropical Forest Conservation Act of 1998 (22 U.S.C. 2431d) is amended by adding

at the end the following new subsection:

‘‘(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEARS

AFTER FISCAL YEAR 2001.—For the cost (as defined in section

502(5) of the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990) for the reduction

of any debt pursuant to this section or section 807, there are

authorized to be appropriated to the President the following:

‘‘(1) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2002.

‘‘(2) $75,000,000 for fiscal year 2003.

‘‘(3) $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2004.’’.

(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 808(a)(1)(D) of the

Tropical Forest Conservation Act of 1998 (22 U.S.C. 2431f(a)(1)(D))

is amended by striking ‘‘to appropriated under sections 806(a)(2)

and 807(a)(2)’’ and inserting ‘‘to be appropriated under sections

806(a)(2), 807(a)(2), and 806(d)’’.

SEC. 3. CHAIRPERSON OF THE ENTERPRISE FOR THE AMERICAS

BOARD.

Section 811(b)(2) of the Tropical Forest Conservation Act of

1998 (22 U.S.C. 2431i(b)(2)) is amended by striking ‘‘from among

the representatives appointed under section 610(b)(1)(A) of such

Act or paragraph (1)(A) of this subsection’’ and inserting ‘‘and

shall be the representative from the Department of State appointed

under section 610(b)(1)(A) of such Act’’.

Approved August 17, 2001.

Aug. 17, 2001

[H.R. 2131]
Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

December 29, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
131877 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STAT E OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 131877 COA: 260421 Jackson CC: 04-000543-FC RODERICK ANDRE McGUIRE, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, th e application for leave to appeal the Ju ly 25, 2006 judgment of the Court of Appeals is cons idered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

K ELLY , J., dissents and states as follows:

I would grant defendant’s application fo r leave to appeal to consider whether defendant was denied a fair tria l because of prearrest delay.

In 1981, defendant’s brot her was acquitted of felony murd er charges that arose out of a shooting death that occurred in 1980. No charges were filed against defendant until 2004. Defendant contends that the p rearrest delay denied him a fair trial.

Michigan applies a balancin g test to determine if such a delay requi res reversing a defendant’s conviction. People v Cain , 238 Mich App 95 (1999) . “A defendant has the burden of coming forward with evidence of prejud ice resulting from the delay while the prosecutor has the burden of persuading th e reviewing court that the delay was not deliberate and did not prej udice the defendant.” Id. , p 108.

In this case, 24 years el apsed between the shooting de ath and defendant’s arrest. During that time, defendant’s brother and defendant’s brot her’s wife died. Both had provided alibi testimony at de fendant’s brother’s trial, but they could not testify at defendant’s trial. It is also unclear whether t ranscripts of the brother’s trial exist and, if they do, whether they would be helpful to defendant in his defense. This is especially_______________________________________ __ 2

true because the focus of defendant’s br other’s trial was on d efendant’s brother’s innocence, and not defendant’s innocence. Accordingly, I woul d grant defendant’s application for leave to appeal to further explore these ques tions in order to determine whether the prearrest delay prejud iced defendant.

l1219 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

December 29, 2006

Clerk
# L_2018199EN.01000101.xml

| 7.8.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 199/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.8.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 199/1

---

Information on the entry into force of the the Agreement between the European Union and the Kingdom of Norway on administrative cooperation, combating fraud and recovery of claims in the field of value added tax

Following signature on 6 February 2018, the European Union and the Kingdom of Norway notified each other (on 9 July 2018 and 26 June 2018 respectively) of the completion of their internal legal procedures referred to in Article 44(1) of the Agreement (1).

1

The Agreement enters into force on 1 September 2018 pursuant to Article 44(2) thereof.

---

(1)  Agreement between the European Union and the Kingdom of Norway on administrative cooperation, combating fraud and recovery of claims in the field of value added tax (OJ L 195, 1.8.2018, p. 3).

1

---
### Part D—Coordinating, Training, Research, and Other Activities
#### § 532.213 Industries included in regular appropriated fund wage surveys.

(a) The lead agency must include the industries in the following North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes in all regular appropriated fund wage surveys:

| 2022 NAICS codes | 2022 NAICS industry titles |
| --- | --- |
| 311 through 339 (except 323) | All manufacturing classes except printing and related support activities (NAICS 323). |
| 221 | Utilities. |
| 481 | Air transportation. |
| 482 | Rail transportation. |
| 484 | Truck transportation. |
| 485 (except 4853) | Transit and ground passenger transportation except taxi and limousine service (NAICS 4853). |
| 487 (except 4872) | Scenic and sightseeing transportation except scenic and sightseeing transportation, water (NAICS 4872). |
| 488 (except 4883 and 4884) | Support activities for transportation except support activities for water transportation (NAICS 4883) and support activities for road transportation (NAICS 4884). |
| 492 | Couriers and messengers. |
| 493 | Warehousing and storage. |
| 516 | * Broadcasting and content providers. |
| 517 | Telecommunications. |
| 5621 | Waste collection. |
| 5622 | Waste Treatment and Disposal. |
| 423 | Merchant wholesalers, durable goods. |
| 424 | Merchant wholesalers, nondurable goods. |

(b) A lead agency may add other industry classes to a regular survey in an area where these industries account for significant proportions of local private employment of the kinds and levels found in local Federal employment.

(c) Specifically excluded from all wage surveys for regular wage schedules are food service and laundry establishments and industries having peculiar employment conditions that directly affect the wage rates paid and that are the basis for special wage surveys.

[55 FR 46142, Nov. 1, 1990, as amended at 71 FR 35373, June 20, 2006; 73 FR 45853, Aug. 7, 2008; 78 FR 58153, Sept. 23, 2013; 84 FR 36813, July 30, 2019; 89 FR 4540, Jan. 24, 2024]
#### Emma Fleming et al., Appellants, v. George Sickles Realty Corp., Respondent.

Plaintiffs’ proof established a prima facie case and it was error for the trial court to dismiss at the close of plaintiffs’ case. Judgment dismissing the complaint unanimously reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event. Present — Peck, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Cohn and Van Voorhis, JJ.
**Exhibit
      32.1**





CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF
      EXECUTIVE OFFICER





I,
      Mark
      A. Emalfarb, Chief Executive Officer of Dyadic International Inc. (the
“Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:





1.
            The
                Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the period
                ended June 30, 2006 (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 operation of the
                Company.








IN
      WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
      11 th day of
      August 2006.





//s/
      Mark A.
      Emalfarb


________________________


Name:
      Mark A. Emalfarb


Title:
      Chief Executive Officer








This
      certification accompanies the Quarterly 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 Dyadic International, Inc. for
      purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
      amended.





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      Dyadic International, Inc. and will be retained by Dyadic International, Inc.
      and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
      request.
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Hotel Paramount Corp., Respondent, against Harry B. Chambers et al., Constituting the Tax Commission of the City of New York, Appellants [235-245 W. 46th St., Borough of Manhattan.]

Dore, J.

(dissenting). On the prior appeal for the tax year 1945-46 the evidence showed a sale in August, 1945, of the hotel for $3,000,000. That was the sale of a transient hotel as a going business, one of the assets of which was the subject land and building. The city contended that the sale warranted its total assessment of $1,825,000. The relator argued that because the sale was of a going business and not of realty alone, the price paid did not reflect the value of the realty. This court rejected the city’s contention and found the total value to be $1,765,000: land, $340,000; building, $1,425,000.

Nevertheless, for the tax year 1946-47, the year now in issue, the city assessors increased the assessment to $430,000 for the land, $2,070,000 for the building, a total of $2,500,000, an increase of $735,000 over this court’s value for the previous year, and of $675,000 over their own total assessment for the prior year.

On the trial of the 1946-47 assessment, the city introduced in evidence a sale of the hotel corporation stock in March, 1946, for $3,600,000, and relies mainly on that sale and the income of the hotel *business*to justify its increased assessment. Sales of *realty*as such offered in evidence by both city and relator are substantially the same as those in the 1945-46 proceeding. Both building experts testified that reconstruction costs had increased between 6% and 7% since the preceding year.

This court in the 1945-46 proceeding *(People ex rel. Chase Nat. Bank*v. Chambers, 272 App. Div. 877) correctly regarded the sale of the going hotel business and the income from such business as not constituting conclusive evidence of the value of the realty which is but one of the assets of the going business. *(People ex rel. Hotel Astor*v. *Sexton,*159 Misc. 280, 285, affd. 256 App. Div. 912, motion for leave to appeal denied 280 N. Y. 853; *People ex rel. Hotel St. George Corp.*v. *Lilly,*293 N. Y. 898, revg. 268 App. Div. 830.) We should be consistent with our own sound ruling in the prior year which doubtless influenced the learned Special Term.

The land value of $340,000 found by Special Term should be affirmed. The building value of $1,425,000 should be increased to $1,500,000 to reflect increased reconstruction costs after allowance for depreciation. Accordingly in the extent indicated I dissent and vote so to modify the order appealed from.

Peek, P. J., Glennon, Cohn and Yan Voorhis, JJ., concur in decision; Dore, J., dissents in opinion.

Order modified by fixing the values for the year 1946-47 as follows: land, $400,000; building, $1,750,000; total, $2,150,000, and as so modified affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the appellants. Settle order on notice.
Exhibit No. 11.1



ARMSTRONG HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES



COMPUTATION FOR BASIC EARNINGS (LOSS) PER SHARE

FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31

(AMOUNTS IN MILLIONS EXCEPT FOR PER-SHARE DATA)



|                                            |  |      |       |      |   |       |      |  |   |       |  
|------------------------------------------- |  | ---- | ----- | ---- | - | ----- | ---- |  | - | ----- | -
|Basic earnings (loss) per share             |  | 2005 |       | 2004 |   |       | 2003 | 
|Net earnings (loss)                         |  | $    | 112.1 |      | $ | (80.8 | )    |  | $ | (39.3 | )
|Average number of common shares outstanding |  |      | 40.5  |      |   | 40.5  |      |  |   | 40.5  |  
|Basic earnings (loss) per share             |  | $    | 2.77  |      | $ | (2.00 | )    |  | $ | (0.97 | )



Exhibit No. 11.2



COMPUTATION FOR DILUTED EARNINGS (LOSS) PER SHARE

FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31

(AMOUNTS IN
MILLIONS EXCEPT FOR PER-SHARE DATA)



|                                                                                        |  |      |       |      |   |       |      |  |   |       |  
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ---- | ----- | ---- | - | ----- | ---- |  | - | ----- | -
|Diluted earnings (loss) per share                                                       |  | 2005 |       | 2004 |   |       | 2003 | 
|Net earnings (loss)                                                                     |  | $    | 112.1 |      | $ | (80.8 | )    |  | $ | (39.3 | )
|Average number of common shares outstanding                                             |  |      | 40.5  |      |   | 40.5  |      |  |   | 40.5  |  
|Average number of common shares issuable under stock options or restricted stock grants |  |      | 0.2   |      |   | 0.2   |      |  |   | 0.2   |  
|                                                                                        |  |      |       |      |   |       |      |  |   |       |  
|Average number of common and common stock equivalents Outstanding                       |  |      | 40.7  |      |   | 40.7  |      |  |   | 40.7  |  
|Diluted earnings (loss) per share                                                       |  | $    | 2.75  |      | $ | (2.00 | )    |  | $ | (0.97 | )
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<meta name="pdf:PDFVersion" content="1.2">
<meta name="xmp:CreatorTool" content="Acrobat Capture Server 2.0">
<meta name="pdf:hasXFA" content="false">
<meta name="access_permission:modify_annotations" content="true">
<meta name="dc:creator" content="capture">
<meta name="dcterms:created" content="1998-09-11T16:02:58Z">
<meta name="dcterms:modified" content="1998-09-11T16:02:59Z">
<meta name="dc:format" content="application/pdf; version=1.2">
<meta name="pdf:docinfo:creator_tool" content="Acrobat Capture Server 2.0">
<meta name="access_permission:fill_in_form" content="true">
<meta name="pdf:docinfo:modified" content="1998-09-11T16:02:59Z">
<meta name="pdf:hasCollection" content="false">
<meta name="pdf:encrypted" content="false">
<meta name="Content-Length" content="17942">
<meta name="pdf:hasMarkedContent" content="false">
<meta name="Content-Type" content="application/pdf">
<meta name="access_permission:can_print_faithful" content="true">
<meta name="pdf:docinfo:creator" content="capture">
<meta name="pdf:producer" content="Acrobat PDFWriter 3.02 for Windows NT">
<meta name="access_permission:extract_for_accessibility" content="true">
<meta name="access_permission:assemble_document" content="true">
<meta name="xmpTPg:NPages" content="1">
<meta name="pdf:hasXMP" content="false">
<meta name="access_permission:extract_content" content="true">
<meta name="access_permission:can_print" content="true">
<meta name="X-TIKA:Parsed-By" content="org.apache.tika.parser.DefaultParser">
<meta name="X-TIKA:Parsed-By" content="org.apache.tika.parser.pdf.PDFParser">
<meta name="access_permission:can_modify" content="true">
<meta name="pdf:docinfo:producer" content="Acrobat PDFWriter 3.02 for Windows NT">
<meta name="pdf:docinfo:created" content="1998-09-11T16:02:58Z">
<title></title>
</head>
<body><div class="page"><p></p>
<p>THE ATTORXEY GENER,II. 
OF TESAS 
</p>
<p>OPINION I- _ O-6570 WAS NEVER ISSUED OK 
</p>
<p>WAS WITHDRAWN. </p>
<p></p>
</div>
</body></html>