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

(a) Certification of Quarterly Report by Chief Executive Officer.

                            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 GraphOn Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert
Dilworth, Chief Executive 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/ Robert Dilworth
                                             -------------------
                                             Robert Dilworth
                                             Chief Executive Officer
                                             May 15, 2009



<PAGE>


(b) Certification of Quarterly Report by Chief Financial Officer.


                            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 GraphOn Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, William
Swain, 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/ William Swain
                                             -----------------
                                             William Swain
                                             Chief Financial Officer
                                             May 15, 2009
### §496. Cancellation of entry or water right for nonpayment of operation charge

If any water-right applicant or entryman shall be one year in arrears in the payment of any charge for operation and maintenance and penalties, or any part thereof, his water-right application, and if he be a homestead entryman his entry also, shall be subject to cancellation, and all payments made by him forfeited to the reclamation fund, but no homestead entry shall be subject to contest because of such arrears.

(Aug. 13, 1914, ch. 247, §6, 38 Stat. 688.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section is comprised of second sentence of section 6 of act Aug. 13, 1914. First and third sentences of such section 6 are classified to sections 479, 493, 494, 495, 497 of this title, respectively.
### §§71 to 74. Repealed. Pub. L. 103–272, §7(b), July 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 1379

Section 71, act June 29, 1906, ch. 3594, §1, 34 Stat. 607, related to transportation of animals, provided maximum time for their confinement while in transit, unloading for rest and feeding, and included special provision for unloading sheep. See section 80502 of Title 49, Transportation.

Section 72, act June 29, 1906, ch. 3594, §2, 34 Stat. 608, provided that animals in transit were to be fed and watered by or at expense of owner and that railroad was to have a lien upon such animals for food, care, and custody. See section 80502 of Title 49.

Section 73, act June 29, 1906, ch. 3594, §3, 34 Stat. 608, provided penalty for failure to comply with provisions of sections 71 and 72 of this title with proviso that provisions regarding unloading of animals would not apply when animals in transit had proper food, water, space, and opportunity to rest. See section 80502 of Title 49.

Section 74, acts June 29, 1906, ch. 3594, §4, 34 Stat. 608; Mar. 3, 1911, ch. 231, §291, 36 Stat. 1167, provided that penalty created by section 73 of this title was recoverable by civil action and that United States attorneys had duty to prosecute violations of this chapter. See section 80502 of Title 49.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Short Title

Act June 29, 1906, ch. 3594, 34 Stat. 607, which enacted this chapter and which was repealed by Pub. L. 103–272, §7(b), July 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 1379, was popularly known as the "Live Stock Transportation Act" and also as the "Cruelty to Animals Act", "Twenty-Eight Hour Law", and "Food and Rest Law".
* 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. 96-31069

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

LEHMAN K. LUNDY,

Defendant-Appellant.

 

No. 96-31263

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

KERRY CUREAUX,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC Nos. 96-CV-321 M & 96-CV-1455

- - - - - - - - - -

June 25, 1999

Before EMILIO M. GARZA, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*
No. 96-31069

 No. 96-31263 

-2-

Lehman K. Lundy, federal prisoner # 21853-034, and Kerry

Cureaux, federal prisoner # 21855-034, appeal the denial of their

motions to vacate, set aside, or correct their sentences, filed

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. They argue that the evidence is

not sufficient to support the their convictions under 18 U.S.C. 

§ 924(c) for using and carrying firearms. The district court’s

erroneous “use” instruction was harmless because the jury found

beyond a reasonable doubt the facts necessary to support a

conviction for “carrying.” See United States v. Brown, 161 F.3d

256 (5th Cir. 1998); United States v. Acosta, 763 F.2d 671, 681

(5th Cir. 1985); United States v. Hall, 110 F.3d 1155, 1161 (5th

Cir. 1997). The district court’s denial of their § 2255 motions

is AFFIRMED.

Appellant Cureaux’s motion for release pending this appeal

is DENIED. See Calley v. Callaway, 496 F.2d 701, 702 (5th Cir.

1974).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the balance
sheet and statements of operations found on pages 3 and 4 of the Company's Form
10-QSB for the year to date, and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                           5,092
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   5,092
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          348,300
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           365
<OTHER-SE>                                   (343,573)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     5,092
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               209,359
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (209,359)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

THE CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL )

DIVERSITY, et al., ) 09-cv-02346-MMC

)

Plaintiffs, ) [Proposed] Order

)

vs. )

)

GARY LOCKE, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

 )

Based upon the parties’ Stipulated Extension of Deadline in Paragraph 2 of Stipulated

Settlement Agreement,

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the deadline in Paragraph 2 of the parties’

Stipulated Settlement Agreement (Doc. No. 23) is modified from February 19, 2010 to March 8,

2010.

DATED this ____ day of _____________ 2010.

________________________________

Maxine M. Chesney

United States District Judge

16th February

Case 3:09-cv-02346-MMC Document 27 Filed 02/16/10 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 21.1

List of Subsidiaries of Synutra International, Inc.



|                                                                 |  |             
|---------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ------------
|Subsidiary                                                       |  | Jurisdiction
|Synutra, Inc.                                                    |  | Illinois    
|Qingdao Sheng Yuan Dairy Co., Ltd.                               |  | China       
|Sheng Yuan Nutritional Food Co., Ltd.                            |  | China       
|Luobei Sheng Yuan Dairy Co., Ltd.                                |  | China       
|Zhangjiakou Sheng Yuan Dairy Co., Ltd.                           |  | China       
|Inner Mongolia Sheng Yuan Food Co., Ltd.                         |  | China       
|Mei Tai Technology (Qingdao) Co., Ltd.                           |  | China       
|Heilongjiang Baoquanling Sheng Yuan Dairy Co., Ltd.              |  | China       
|Inner Mongolia Meng Yuan Food Co., Ltd.                          |  | China       
|Heilongjiang Baoquanling Sheng Yuan Dairy Cow Breeding Co., Ltd. |  | China
EXHIBIT 99.1

             CERTIFICATION OF PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


   I, Hugh Miller,  President  and Chief  Executive  Officer of Delta  Financial
Corporation (the "Company"),  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, do hereby certify as follows:

1. The  quarterly  report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended March
   31, 2003 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 such Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
   respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

IN WITNESS  WHEREOF,  I have executed this  Certification  this 15th day of May,
2003.


                                    /s/HUGH MILLER
                                    ---------------------------------------
                                    Hugh Miller
                                    PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
### §394. Proceeds from sale of products of or leases of withdrawn or reserved lands

The proceeds heretofore or hereafter received from the lease of any lands reserved or withdrawn under the reclamation law or from the sale of the products therefrom shall be covered into the reclamation fund; and where such lands are affected by a reservation or withdrawal under some other law, the proceeds from the lease of land and the sale of products therefrom shall likewise be covered into the reclamation fund in all cases where such lands are needed for the protection or operation of any reservoir or other works constructed under the reclamation law, and such lands shall be and remain under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior.

(July 19, 1919, ch. 24, 41 Stat. 202.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The reclamation law, referred to in text, is identified in act July 19, 1919, ch. 24, 41 Stat. 200, under the heading "reclamation service", as act June 17, 1902, ch. 1093, 32 Stat. 388, and Acts amendatory thereof and supplementary thereto. Act June 17, 1902, popularly known as the Reclamation Act, is classified generally to this chapter. For complete classification of act June 17, 1902, to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 371 of this title and Tables.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND> 
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from PJ America's
consolidated financial statements for the three months ended March 28, 1999 and
March 29, 1998 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-26-1999
<PERIOD-START>                            DEC-28-1998
<PERIOD-END>                              MAR-28-1999
<CASH>                                          5,600
<SECURITIES>                                   11,528         
<RECEIVABLES>                                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                       527
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               14,460 
<PP&E>                                         28,445
<DEPRECIATION>                                (5,724)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 49,366
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           4,786
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                           58
<OTHER-SE>                                     43,392
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   49,366
<SALES>                                        21,855 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               21,855
<CGS>                                           6,620         
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  18,652 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                1,137
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              (169)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 2,235
<INCOME-TAX>                                      760
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             1,475
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                       (181) 
<NET-INCOME>                                    1,294
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    0.25
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.25<F1>
<FN>
<F1>EPS (both primary and diluted) are before the cumulative effective of change
in accounting principle.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KRISTIN M PERRY, SANDRA B STIER,

PAUL T KATAMI and JEFFREY J

ZARRILLO,

Plaintiffs,

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,

Plaintiff-Intervenor,

v

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, in his

official capacity as governor of

California; EDMUND G BROWN JR, in

his official capacity as attorney

general of California; MARK B

HORTON, in his official capacity

as director of the California

Department of Public Health and

state registrar of vital

statistics; LINETTE SCOTT, in her

official capacity as deputy

director of health information &

strategic planning for the

California Department of Public

Health; PATRICK O’CONNELL, in his

official capacity as clerkrecorder of the County of

Alameda; and DEAN C LOGAN, in his

official capacity as registrarrecorder/county clerk for the

County of Los Angeles, 

Defendants,

DENNIS HOLLINGSWORTH, GAIL J

KNIGHT, MARTIN F GUTIERREZ,

HAKSHING WILLIAM TAM, MARK A

JANSSON and PROTECTMARRIAGE.COM –

YES ON 8, A PROJECT OF

CALIOFORNIA RENEWAL, as official

proponents of Proposition 8,

Defendant-Intervenors. /

No C 09-2292 VRW

ORDER

Case 3:09-cv-02292-JW Document 391 Filed 01/08/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

The court has received plaintiffs’ request to allow them

during trial to arrange for secure internet access through the

Courtroom Connect service. Doc #390. Counsel should consult the

court’s information technology department; assuming its approval

and the absence of objection by any party, the court will approve

the request, subject to internet access being made available on an

equal basis to all parties.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 

VAUGHN R WALKER

United States District Chief Judge

Case 3:09-cv-02292-JW Document 391 Filed 01/08/10 Page 2 of 2
§ 266.620 Termination of contract of insurance and indemnification. ( a ) The contract of insurance shall terminate if any of the following occurs: ( 1 ) The mortgage is paid in full;
( 2 ) The HFA acquires the mortgaged property and notifies the Commissioner that it will not file an insurance claim;
( 3 ) A party other than HFA acquires the property at a foreclosure sale;
( 4 ) The HFA notifies the Commissioner of Termination of Insurance (voluntary termination);
( 5 ) The HFA or its successors commit fraud or make a material misrepresentation to the Commissioner with respect to information culminating in the contract of insurance on the mortgage or while the contract of insurance is in existence;
( 6 ) The receipt by the Commissioner of an Application for Final Claims Settlement;
( 7 ) If the HFA acquires the mortgaged property and fails to make an initial claim.
( b ) In lieu of termination of the mortgage insurance contract pursuant to paragraph (a)(5) of this section, the Commissioner may, in his or her full discretion, permit a Level I participant rated “A” or higher to indemnify HUD, or otherwise reimburse HUD in a manner acceptable to the Commissioner, for the full amount of the mortgage claim.
[59 FR 62524, Dec. 5, 1994, as amended at 85 FR 83440, 83445, Dec. 22, 2020]
### §1355. Restrictions on employment of former officers or employees of Department of the Interior

No full-time officer or employee of the Department of the Interior who directly or indirectly discharged duties or responsibilities under this subchapter, and who was at any time during the twelve months preceding the termination of his employment with the Department compensated under the Executive Schedule or compensated at or above the annual rate of basic pay for grade GS–16 of the General Schedule shall—

(1) within two years after his employment with the Department has ceased—

(A) knowingly act as agent or attorney for, or otherwise represent, any other person (except the United States) in any formal or informal appearance before;

(B) with the intent to influence, make any oral or written communication on behalf of any other person (except the United States) to; or

(C) knowingly aid or assist in representing any other person (except the United States) in any formal or informal appearance before,

any department, agency, or court of the United States, or any officer or employee thereof, in connection with any judicial or other proceeding, application, request for a ruling or other determination, regulation, order, lease, permit, rulemaking, or other particular matter involving a specific party or parties in which the United States is a party or has a direct and substantial interest which was actually pending under his official responsibility as an officer or employee within a period of one year prior to the termination of such responsibility or in which he participated personally and substantially as an officer or employee; or

(2) within one year after his employment with the Department has ceased—

(A) knowingly act as agent or attorney for, or otherwise represent, any other person (except the United States) in any formal or informal appearance before; or

(B) with the intent to influence, make any oral or written communication on behalf of any other person (except the United States) to,

the Department of the Interior, or any officer or employee thereof, in connection with any judicial, rulemaking, regulation, order, lease, permit, regulation, or other particular matter which is pending before the Department of the Interior or in which the Department has a direct and substantial interest.

(Aug. 7, 1953, ch. 345, §29, as added Pub. L. 95–372, title II, §208, Sept. 18, 1978, 92 Stat. 668.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Executive Schedule, referred to in text, is set out in section 5311 et seq. of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### References in Other Laws to GS–16, 17, or 18 Pay Rates

References in laws to the rates of pay for GS–16, 17, or 18, or to maximum rates of pay under the General Schedule, to be considered references to rates payable under specified sections of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees, see section 529 [title I, §101(c)(1)] of Pub. L. 101–509, set out in a note under section 5376 of Title 5.
#### The People of the State of New York v. Aristides Castro.

Motion to vacate order of this court entered on June 8, 1954 denied in all respects. Concur — Botein, P. J., Stevens, Eager, Steuer and Bergan, JJ.
§ 52.10 How does the Secretary make efforts to accommodate intergovernmental concerns? ( a ) If a state process provides a state process recommendation to the Department through its single point of contact, the Secretary either— ( 1 ) Accepts the recommendation;
( 2 ) Reaches a mutually agreeable solution with the state process; or
( 3 ) Provides the single point of contact with such written explanation of its decision, as the Secretary in his or her discretion deems appropriate. The Secretary may also supplement the written explanation by providing the explanation to the single point of contact by telephone, other telecommunication, or other means.
( b ) In any explanation under paragraph (a)(3) of this section, the Secretary informs the single point of contact that— ( 1 ) The Department will not implement its decision for at least ten days after the single point of contact receives the explanation; or
( 2 ) The Secretary has reviewed the decision and determined that, because of unusual circumstances, the waiting period of at least ten days is not feasible.
( c ) For purposes of computing the waiting period under paragraph (b)(1) of this section, a single point of contact is presumed to have received written notification 5 days after the date of mailing of such notification.