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**

| 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 operation of the                Company. |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date                May 1, 2007 | By:                */s/                Charles W. Fritz*                               |
|---------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                            | Name: Charles                W. Fritz                                             |
|                            | Title:                   Interim Chief                Executive Officer |
|                            |                                                                                   |
|                            |                                                                                   |
|                            |                                                                                   |

----
Exhibit 32.1
**CERTIFICATION**
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.§ 1350, as adopted), Joseph Y.Liu, Chief Executive Officer of Oplink Communications, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certifies that,to the best of his knowledge:
**1.**The Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005, to which thisCertification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the “Quarterly Report”) fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;and
**2.**The information contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition at the end of the period covered by the Quarterly Report and results ofoperations of the Company for the periods covered by the Quarterly Report.
**In Witness Whereof,**the undersigned has set his hands hereto as of the 13th day of May, 2005.   /s/ Joseph Y. Liu  Joseph Y. Liu  President and Chief Executive Officer  
This certification accompanies the Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the SECand is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Actof 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, irrespective of anygeneral incorporation language contained in such filing.
**CERTIFICATION
        PURSUANT TO**
 **SECTIONS
        906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
 **(18
        U.S.C. SECTION 1350)**
 
 In
        connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report of Radale Imports, Inc.
        (the
“Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2007 (the
“Report”), I,
        Ken
        Swanson, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify that to my
        knowledge:
 
 (1)  The
        Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 15(d) of the Securities
        Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. §78o(d)); and
 
 (2)  The
        information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
        the financial condition and results of operations of the
        Company.


Date
                November 13, 2007
              By:
              */s/
                Ken Swanson*Ken
                SwansonChief
                Executive Officer
  The
        above certification is furnished solely pursuant to
        Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. §1350) and is not being
        filed as part of the Form 10-QSB or as a separate disclosure
        document.
 Exhibit
          32
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         356,813
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               28,553,087
<ALLOWANCES>                                 4,541,086
<INVENTORY>                                 24,012,001
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            52,934,586
<PP&E>                                      12,477,232
<DEPRECIATION>                               6,307,581
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              91,515,374
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       16,726,158
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       142,409
<OTHER-SE>                                  44,400,918
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                91,515,374
<SALES>                                     85,759,262
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            85,759,262
<CGS>                                       66,900,242
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               66,900,242
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            24,011,876
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                17,428
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,097,483
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (7,267,767)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    17,503
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (7,285,270)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (7,285,270)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.51)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.51)



</TABLE>
#### Emil Grande, Respondent, v. Mary J. Torello et al., Appellants.

In an action to recover damages for injury to person and property arising out of a collision between a motor vehicle owned and operated by plaintiff and a motor vehicle owned by defendant Torello and operated by defendant De Simone, defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated September 14, 1960, which denied their motion, made pursuant to rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice, to dismiss the complaint. The motion was made on the ground that a judgment of the said court, entered March 14, 1960, against plaintiff and defendant Torello, in favor of Judith Lerro, a passenger in said defendant’s automobile, awarding such passenger $3,500 for personal injuries sustained by her as a result of the same accident, is *res judicata.*Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. We are in accord with the determination by the Appellate Division in the First Department that until *Glaser*v. *Huette*(232 App. Div. 119, affd. 256 N. Y. 686) has been specifically overturned by the Court of Appeals the doctrine of that case should be applied to situations such as that presented here (see *Friedman*v. *Salvati,*11 A D 2d 104). Moreover the defense of *res judicata*may not be asserted by defendants in support of their motion for judgment dismissing the complaint pursuant to rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice, until such defense is pleaded in their answers *(Ziegler*v. *Mancuso & Alessio,*283 App. Div. 813, 814; *Planet Constr. Corp.*v. *Board of Educ.,*7 N Y 2d 381, 386). Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Ughetta, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 19

- 1645

_____________________________ S. L., Mother o f W.R. a nd E.T.

a /k/a E.L., Minor Children
, Appellant,

v.

D EPARTMENT OF C HILDREN AND F AMILIES , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County

. Peter K. Sieg , Judge

. August 29, 2019

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
L EWIS , W INOKUR , and J AY , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Marci Silver, Assistant Regional Conflict Counsel, Tallahassee; Crystal McBee Frusciante, Sunrise
, for Appellant.

Kristen K. Erickson, Florida Statewide Guardian ad Litem Office, West Palm Beach; Thomasina F. Moore, Florida Statewide Guardian ad Litem Office, Tallahassee; Ward L. Metzger, Department of Children and Families, Jacksonville
, for Appellee.
----

| 1. | I      have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of OccuLogix,      Inc.; |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | Based      on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a      material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the      statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements      were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this      report; |
|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | /s/      William G. Dumencu                |
|--------|--------------------------------------------|
|   | William      G. Dumencu                    |
|   | Chief      Financial Officer and Treasurer |

----
CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD 

APCD/AQMD RULE EVALUATION FORM – Page 1 

(Electronic Format) 

I. GENERAL INFORMATION

District: Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District

Rule No(s): 109 Date adopted/Amended/Rescinded: Amended April 20,2010

Rule Title(s): Recordkeeping for Volatile Organic Compound

Date Submitted to ARB: May 13, 2010

If an Amended Rule, Date Last Amended (or Adopted): May 17, 2005

Is the Rule Intended to be Sent to the U.S. EPA as a SIP Revision? Yes No (If No, do not complete remainder of form)

District Contact: Julie McKeehan Phone Number: (661) 723-8070 E-mail Address: jmckeehan@avaqmd.ca.gov

Narrative Summary of New Rule or Rule Changes: New Rule Amended Rule 

Rule 109 was amended to include an alternative recordkeeping method of addressing certain industry practices, 

and to update the rule applicability list.

Pollutant(s) Regulated by the Rule (Check): ROG (NOx) SO2 

 (CO) PM TAC (name): 

II. EFFECT ON EMISSIONS

Complete this section ONLY for rules that, when implemented, will result in quantifiable changes in emissions. Attach reference(s) for emission 

factor(s) and other information. Attach calculation sheet showing how the emission information provided below was determined. 

Net Effect on Emissions: Increase Decrease N/A 

Emission Reduction Commitment in SIP for this Source Category: 

Inventory Year Used to Calculate Changes in Emissions: Area Affected: 

Future Year Control Profile Estimate (Provide information on as many years as possible): 

 
 

CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD 

APCD/AQMD RULE EVALUATION FORM - Page 2 

(Electronic Format) 

Baseline Inventory in the SIP for the Control Measure: 

Emissions Reduction Commitment in the SIP for the Control Measure: 

Revised Baseline Inventory (if any): 

Revised Emission Reduction Estimate (if developed): 

Note that the district’s input to the Rule Evaluation Form will not be used as input to the ARB’s emission forecasting and 

planning. 

III. SOURCES/ATTAINMENT STATUS

District is: Attainment Nonattainment Split 

Approximate Total Number of Small (<100 TPY) Sources Affected by this Amendment: No change

Percent in Nonattainment Area: 100% 

Number of Large (> 100 TPY) Sources Controlled: No change Percent in Nonattainment Area: 100% 

Name(s) and Location(s) (city and county) of Large (> 100 TPY) Sources Controlled by Rule (Attach additional sheets as 

necessary): N/A

IV. EMISSION REDUCTION TECHNOLOGY

Does the Rule Include Emission Limits that are Continuous? Yes No 

If Yes, Those Limits are in Section(s) of the Rule. 

Other Methods in the Rule for Achieving Emission Reductions are: 

V. OTHER REQUIREMENTS

The Rule Contains: 

Emission Limits in Section(s): N/A Work Practice Standards in Section(s): N/A

Recordkeeping Requirements in Section(s): (C) Reporting Requirements in Section(s): N/A
 

5/1/2002 

CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD 

APCD/AQMD RULE EVALUATION FORM - Page 3 

(Electronic Format) 

VI. IMPACT ON AIR QUALITY PLAN

 No Impact Impacts RFP Impacts attainment 

Discussion: The amendment does not change any control requirements. This is a procedural change in reporting periods 

and protocol.
### Clean A ir Act Ad visory Committee (CAAAC) Economic Incentives and Regulatory Innovation Subcommittee Draft Meeting Agenda January 11, 2011 8:30 AM – 12:00 noon Crowne Plaza National Airport 1489 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA 22202

8:30 Welcome, Introduction to the Sector- based Multi - Pollutant Work Group, and Agenda Review

Keith Mason and Elineth Torres (U.S. EPA) 8:5 0 EPA Greenhouse Gas BACT Guidance Update – Focus on Energy Efficiency Aspects

Brief presentation on EPA’s recently released GHG BA CT guidance, with a focus on aspects of the guidance that relate to energy efficiency. Dave Svendsgaard (EPA OAQPS) 9:15 MACT Program Risk and Technology Review

Brief presentation on EPA’s current approach and methods for conducting risk and technolo gy reviews in the MACT program to address hazardous air pollutant emissions , followed by questions and answers. Lisa Conner and Elineth Torres (EPA OAQPS) 9 : 45 Environmental Justice and Sector - Based , Multi - Pollutant Strategies

Brief presentation on enviro nmental justice considerations relevant to sector

- based, multi

- pollutant strategies in major U.S. industries, followed by brief discussion. Dr. Nicky Sheats ( Director, Center for the Urban Environment, John Watson Institute for Public Policy, Thomas Edison State College; CAAAC member) 10:15 Break 10:30 Sector - Based, Multi - Pollutant Roundtable Discussion Planning

Discussion to inform planning of three sector

- focused roundtable sessions planned for early 2011, addressing the chemical manufacturing, oil and gas, and iron and steel sectors. This discussion will focus on identifying:  Important topics and questions to explore in each roundtable  Background materials that may be useful to inform discussions 12:00 Adjourn
THELI'ITORNEYGICNERAI. 

OFTEXAS 

Auwrmr. TBCXAS 78711 

May 27, 1975 

The Honorable Joe Wyatt, Jr. 

Chairman 

Legislative Property Tax Committee 

105 West Riverside Drive 

Austin, Texas 78704 

Opinion No. H- 617 

Re: Time of expiration of the 

appropriation to the Legislative 

Property Tax Committee. 

Dear Chairman Wyatt: 

You have asked our opinion on the duration of an appropriation to the 

Legislative Property Tax Committee. Acts 1973, ch. 223, p. 519 [codified 

as V. T. C. S., art. 7100, $41 provides in part: 

sec. 1. . . . All moneys deposited in this special 

fund and any unexpended balance remaining in the 

fund on June 1, 1973, shall be and the same are 

hereby appropriated to the use of the Property Tax 

Committee in carrying out the tasks assigned under 

this Act, the funds thus appropriated to be disbursed 

upon written orders of the Committee, with an annual 

accounting by the Committee to be filed wi,th the State 

Auditor. This appropriation is made for a two-year 

period beginning June 1, 1973. 

sec. 2. This Act takes effect June 1, 1973. 

However, the conference committee report did not receive a record 

vote in the House of Representatives, and it is asserted that the Act did not 

become effective until Augu,st 27, 1973, which is ninety days after adjournment of the Legislature. We need not decide whether the bill became effective 

on June 1, 1973, or on August 27, 1973, for in our view the effective date of the 

Act does not control the date on which this appropriation expires. 

p. 2732 
The Honorable Joe Wyatt, Jr. - Page 2 (H-617) 

The Act appropriates funds for a two year period beginning June 1, 

1973. That period expires May 31, 1975. Even though the funds may not 

have become available until August 27, 1973, the failure of the House of 

Representatives to vote to give early effect to the bill cannot be construed 

to extend the appropriation to a period ending two years after the effective 

date of the Act. 

The Legislature is presumed to have chosen the words it uses with 

care, and its intention must be found in the language of the statute. Railroad 

Commission of Texas v. Miller, 434 S. W. 2d 670 (Tex. Sup. 1968). The 

language the Legislature chooses cannot be ignored. Perkins v. State, 367 

S. W. 2d 140 (Tex. Sup. 1963). Accordingly, it is our opinion that the 

appropriation to the Legislative Property Tax Committee expires on May 31, 

1975. 

SUMMARY 

The appropriation to the Legislative Property Tax 

Committee expires May 31, 1975. 

OHN L. HILL 

Attorney General of Texas 

APPROVED: 

First Assistant 

C. ROBERT HEATH, Chairman 

Opinion Committee 

jwb 

p. 2733
### §72. Public offices; at seat of Government

All offices attached to the seat of government shall be exercised in the District of Columbia, and not elsewhere, except as otherwise expressly provided by law.

(July 30, 1947, ch. 389, 61 Stat. 643.)
#### § 56.9309 Chute design.

Chute-loading installations shall be designed to provide a safe location for persons pulling chutes.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary information extracted from the unaudited
financial statements dated June 30, 1998 and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-01-1998
<CASH>                                       5,911,000
<SECURITIES>                                 1,358,000
<RECEIVABLES>                               18,432,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,155,000
<INVENTORY>                                 28,373,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            60,981,000
<PP&E>                                      24,611,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              13,696,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              83,189,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       22,640,000
<BONDS>                                      8,629,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        60,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,004,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                83,189,000
<SALES>                                     35,070,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            35,070,000
<CGS>                                       28,462,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                8,293,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (13,000)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,374,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,537,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   371,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,908,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (3,391,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.68)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.68)
        

</TABLE>
### BILL OF COSTS

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, SIXTH DISTRICT, AT TEXARKANA

No. 06

- 14

- 00084

- CV

$1,608.00 in U.S. Currency and 2008 Mazda, VIN 1YVHP80C385M37457

v.

The State of Texas

(No. 83560 IN 6TH DISTRIC T COURT OF LAMAR COU NTY)

TYPE OF FEE CHARGES PAID BY

MOT ION FEE

REPORTER'S RECORD

CLERK'S RECORD

FILING $10.00 $170.00 $0.00 $195.00 EXEMPT

INDIGENT

INDIGENT

INDIGENT STATE OF TEXAS

ROBERT DAUGHERTY

ROBERT DAUGHERTY

ROBERT DAUGHERTY

Balance of costs owing to the Sixth Court of Appeals, Texarkana, Texas: 0.00

Court costs in this cause shall be paid as per the Judgment issued by this Court.

I, DEBRA AUTREY, CLERK OF THE SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and correct copy of the cost bill of THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS, showing the charges and payments, in the above numbered and styled cause, as the same appears of record in this office.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, witness my hand and the Seal of

the COURT OF APPEALS for the Sixth District of Texas, this
June 26, 2015

.

DEBRA AUTREY, CLERK

By ___

________________________ Deputy
* 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. 97-20814 

Summary Calendar

 

DILIP K. PAUL,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

PB-KBB, INC.; PARSON, BRINKERHOFF,

QUADE & DOUGLAS, INC.; BATTELLE MEMORIAL

INSTITUTE (Project Management Division);

ANSON D. PHIPPS; ROBERT M. WOOD;

PAUL BOULON; QUADE & DOUGLAS,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. CA H 97-1004

- - - - - - - - - -

July 10, 1998

Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Delip K. Paul has appealed the district court’s orders

refusing to remand this action, which was removed from the state

court, and dismissing the action under the doctrine of res

judicata. 
No. 97-20814

-2-

IT IS ORDERED that the appellees’ motion for leave to

supplement their brief with a copy of a motion filed by Paul in a

prior federal action is GRANTED. Paul’s motion for leave to 

supplement the record on appeal with the record from the appeal

in the prior federal action is DENIED.

Paul’s nonjurisdictional challenges to the removal were

waived by his untimely remand motion. See Pavone v. Mississippi

Riverboat Amusement Corp., 52 F.3d 560, 566 (5th Cir. 1995). 

Essentially for reasons stated by the district court, we hold

that the district court did not err in finding that Paul’s claims

are barred under the doctrine of res judicata. See United States

ex rel. Paul v. PB-KBB, Inc., No. H-97-1004 (S.D. Tex. July 1,

1997). Because the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. See

Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983); 5th Cir. 

R. 42.2. 

Appellees have moved the court for an order requiring Paul

to pay their damages and costs. Paul was previously warned that

the filing of frivolous appeals would result in the imposition of

a sanction. IT IS ORDERED that the appellees’ motion is GRANTED. 

Fed. R. App. P. 38. Paul must reimburse the appellees for their

costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred in pursuing this

appeal. Appellees should move the district court for an order

determining their costs and fees. Paul’s motion for a sanction

against the appellees is DENIED.
No. 97-20814

-3-

APPEAL DISMISSED; APPELLEES’ MOTIONS GRANTED; APPELLANT’S

MOTIONS DENIED.