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 Dionics, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), the undersigned certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of the undersigneds knowledge, 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.





|                        |                                      
|----------------------- | -------------------------------------
|Dated:  August 12, 2011 | By:   /s/ Bernard L. Kravitz         
|                        | Bernard L. Kravitz,                  
|                        | President and Chief Executive Officer
|                        | (Principal Executive Officer)        
|                        |                                      
|                        |                                      
|Dated:  August 12, 2011 | By:   /s/ Bernard L. Kravitz         
|                        | Bernard L. Kravitz,                  
|                        | Principal Financial Officer          

































1
§ 746.18 Mining plan modification. ( a ) Mining plan modifications shall be approved by the Secretary.
( b ) The approval of mining plan modifications shall be in accordance with the procedures of this part for mining plan approval.
( c ) Surface coal mining and reclamation operations on lands containing leased Federal coal pursuant to a permit revision issued by the regulatory authority shall not commence until— ( 1 ) OSM determines that the permit revision does not constitute a mining plan modification under this section, or
( 2 ) If the permit revision constitutes a mining plan modification under this section, such modification has been approved by the Secretary.
( d ) Permit revisions constitute mining plan modifications if they meet any of the following criteria: ( 1 ) Any change in the mining plan which would affect the conditions of its approval pursuant to Federal law or regulation other than the Act;
( 2 ) Any change which would adversely affect the level of protection afforded any land, facility or place designated unsuitable for mining;
( 3 ) Any change in the location or amount of coal to be mined, except where such change is the result of: ( i ) A minor change in the amount of coal actually available for mining from the amount estimated; or
( ii ) An incidental boundary change;
( 4 ) Any change which would extend coal mining and reclamation operations onto leased Federal coal lands for the first time;
( 5 ) Any change which requires the preparation of an environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy Act or 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4321 *et seq.*;
( 6 ) Any change in the mining operations and reclamation plan that would result in a change in the postmining land use where the surface is federally-owned.
#### Mary A. Kuppinger, Respondent, v. Kenneth Mills, Appellant. James Frost, Respondent, v. Kenneth Mills, Appellant.

Order unanimously reversed, without costs of this appeal to any party and motion denied, without *857costs. Memorandum: The granting of the motion was an improvident exercise of discretion. (Appeal from order of Erie Special Term granting plaintiff’s motion to vacate two preclusion orders previously granted to defendant.) Present — Bastotv, J. P., Goldman, MeClusky, Henry and Noonan, JJ.
**Exhibit 31.2****CERTIFICATIONS**I, John H. Karnes, certify that:     (1) I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Mariner Energy, Inc.;     (2) Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     (3) Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;     (4) The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)), for the registrant and have:     a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;     b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and     c. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and     (5) The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors andthe audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):     a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and     b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: November 14, 2007              /s/ John H. Karnes   John H. Karnes,   Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officerand Treasurer
#### PEOPLE ex rel. BLATCHFORD v. McADOO, Police Com’r et al., Respondents.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

March 3, 1905.)

Proceedings by the people of the state of New York, on the relation of Charles D. Blatchford, against William Mc-Adoo, as police commissioner, etc., and another. No opinion. Application to amend order granted.
<PAGE>   1
EXHIBIT  23.1

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

The Board of Directors
MAI Systems Corporation:

The audits referred to in our report dated March 27, 1997, included the related
financial statement schedule as of December 31, 1996, and for each of the years
in the three-year period ended December 31, 1996, included in the annual report
on Form 10-K. This financial statement schedule is the responsibility of the
Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on this
financial statement schedule based on our audits. In our opinion, such financial
statement schedule, when considered in relation to the basic consolidated
financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly in all material respects
the information set forth therein.

We consent to the use of our reports included herein and incorporated herein
by reference.

/s/ KPMG Peat Marwick LLP
March 31, 1997
§ 550.285 How do I submit revised and supplemental EPs, DPPs, and DOCDs? ( a ) *Submittal.* You must submit to the Regional Supervisor any revisions and supplements to approved EPs, DPPs, or DOCDs for approval, whether you initiate them or the Regional Supervisor orders them.
( b ) *Information.* Revised and supplemental EPs, DPPs, and DOCDs need include only information related to or affected by the proposed changes, including information on changes in expected environmental impacts.
( c ) *Procedures.* All supplemental EPs, DPPs, and DOCDs, and those revised EPs, DPPs, and DOCDs that the Regional Supervisor determines are likely to result in a significant change in the impacts previously identified and evaluated, are subject to all of the procedures under §§ 550.231 through 550.235 for EPs and §§ 550.266 through 550.273 for DPPs and DOCDs.
----

| (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. |
|-----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date: March 12, 2010 |   /s/ John M. Lowber   |
|----------------------|-----------------------------|
|                 | John M. Lowber              |
|                 | Chief Financial Officer     |
|                 | General Communication, Inc. |

----
§ 49.60 Requirements for a local mine rescue contest. ( a ) A local mine rescue contest is one that— ( 1 ) Is conducted in the United States;
( 2 ) Uses MSHA-recognized rules;
( 3 ) Has a minimum of three mine rescue teams competing;
( 4 ) Has one or more problems conducted on one or more days with a determined winner;
( 5 ) Includes team members who— ( i ) Have the necessary equipment to participate in a simulated mine rescue team exercise,
( ii ) Participate in a simulated mine rescue team exercise while being timed and observed by trained judges who evaluate the performance of each team and provide written feedback, and
( iii ) Wear oxygen breathing apparatus while participating in a simulated mine rescue team exercise; and
( 6 ) Includes contest judges who have completed annual training for mine rescue contest judges.
( b ) A local mine rescue contest is training that provides an objective evaluation of demonstrated mine rescue team skills and can be a Mine Emergency Response Development (MERD) exercise or a practical simulation exercise, such as a fire or explosion drill, where the team participates in simulated mine rescue team exercises and wears breathing apparatus.
( c ) Upon request from the District Manager, the operator shall provide information concerning each designated team's schedule of participation in upcoming local mine rescue contests.
Exhibit 32-12
**CERTIFICATION OFPERIODIC REPORT**
I, David E. Meador, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of TheDetroit Edison Company (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of myknowledge and belief:
 (1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly periodended September 30, 2004 (the “Report”) fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and  (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.   Dated:            November 4, 2004 /s/ DAVID E. MEADOR   David E. Meador Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of The Detroit Edison Company
A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to The Detroit Edison Company and will be retained by the Company andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<PAGE>
                                                                 EXHIBIT 10.48A

                    AMENDMENT AND ADDENDUM TO PROMISSORY NOTE

      FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned, SAC Holding Corporation, a Nevada
corporation ("Maker"), hereby amends that certain Promissory Note (the "Note")
dated as of February 1, 1998 in the original principal amount of $100,000.00
payable to the order of Nationwide Commercial Co. ("Payee"), as follows.
Capitalized words used herein and not otherwise defined herein have the meaning
ascribed to such words in the Note.

      Section 2(a) of the Note is hereby amended to provide that effective as of
April 1, 2002, Basic Interest (which, for clarity, includes Pay Rate Interest
and Deferred Interest) is payable on a monthly basis, in arrears, on the first
business day of each month throughout the term of the Note.

      In addition, Section 2(e) of the Note is hereby amended to provide that
effective as of April 1, 2002, Cash Flow Contingent Interest is payable on a
monthly basis, in arrears, on the first business day of the month throughout the
term of the Note.

      The Note remains in full force and effect and is not amended in any
respect, except as expressly provided herein.

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned executes this Amendment and Addendum
to Promissory Note as of April 16, 2002.

                                                     SAC Holding Corporation

                                                     By:
                                                        ------------------------
                                                     Bruce Brockhagen, Secretary

      Payee hereby agrees and consents to the above-described amendment to the
Note this 16th day of April, 2002.

                                                     Nationwide Commercial Co.


                                                     By:
                                                        ------------------------
                                                     Gary B. Horton, Secretary
Exhibit 12

CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON (USA), INC.  STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES  (Unaudited)  (In millions, except for ratio)

|                                   |                                                              | For the Years Ended |      |      
|---------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------ | ------------------- | ---- | -----
|
|
|Earnings:                          |                                                              |                     |      |      
|                                   | Income (loss) before provision for income Taxes              |                     | $    | 661  
|Add: Fixed Charges                 |                                                              |                     |      |      
|                                   | Interest expense (gross)                                     |                     |      | 4,012
|                                   | Interest factor in rents                                     |                     |      | 29   
|                                   |                                                              |                     |      |      
|                                   |                                                              | Total fixed charges |      |      
|                                   |                                                              |                     |      |      
|                                   | Earnings before fixed charges and provision for income taxes |                     | $    | 4,702
|                                   |                                                              |                     |      |      
|Ratio of earnings to fixed charges |                                                              |                     | 1.16 |      

---

---

QuickLinks
* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

July 13, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-50005

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

FERNANDO ANTONIO BONILLA,

Defendant-Appellant.

--------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. W-03-CR-153-1

--------------------

Before REAVLEY, JOLLY and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Fernando Antonio Bonilla appeals his sentence for his

conviction for illegal reentry following deportation in violation

of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. 

Bonilla contends that the district court erred when it

increased his offense level by 16 levels because his deferred

adjudication for the Texas offense of injury to a child was not a

final felony conviction for purposes of U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A).
No. 04-50005

-2-

A Texas deferred adjudication may be counted as a felony

conviction under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1). United States v.

Valdez-Valdez, 143 F.3d 196, 203 (5th Cir. 1998). Bonilla’s

attempt to distinguish his case from Valdez-Valdez is unavailing. 

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
<Page>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.2

                                 FIRST AMENDMENT
                                       TO
                         TRIANGLE PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
                          EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN

     THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is made and entered into this 23rd day of May, 2002,
effective as stated below, by Triangle Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a Delaware
corporation (the "Corporation").

                              W I T N E S S E T H:

     WHEREAS, the Corporation has previously adopted the Triangle
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Employee Stock Purchase Plan ("Plan");

     WHEREAS, Section X of the Plan provides, in part, that the Board of
Directors of the Corporation (the "Board") may alter, amend, suspend or
discontinue the Plan at any time, subject to stockholder approval, if required;

     WHEREAS, on February 27, 2002, the Board authorized an amendment to the
Plan, subject to the approval of the stockholders of the Corporation at the 2002
annual meeting of the Corporation, increasing the number of shares of common
stock authorized for issuance over the term of the Employee Stock Purchase Plan
by 250,000 shares effective January 1, 2003; and

     WHEREAS, on May 23, 2002 the stockholders of the Corporation approved such
amendment at the 2002 annual meeting of the Corporation.

     NOW, THEREFORE, the Corporation hereby amends the Plan as follows:

I.   The following hereby amends and restates in its entirety Section III.A of
the Plan:

          "The stock purchasable under the Plan shall be shares of authorized
     but unissued or reacquired Common Stock, including shares of Common Stock
     purchased on the open market. The maximum number of shares of Common Stock
     which may be issued over the term of the Plan shall not exceed Five Hundred
     Fifty Thousand (550,000) shares."

II.  This Amendment does not supersede the terms and conditions of the Plan,
except to the extent expressly described herein.

<Page>

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Corporation has caused this Amendment to be
executed by its duly authorized officer, all as of the day and year first above
written.


                                              TRIANGLE PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.


                                              By:/s/ R. Andrew Finkle
                                                 --------------------
                                              R. Andrew Finkle
                                              Executive Vice President,
                                              General Counsel and Secretary

                                        2
METAL / NONMETAL

Serious Accident

Sand & Gravel Mine – A miner fell from a conveyor and received 

serious injuries. The miner was working atop the tail pulley section of 

an inclined conveyor while changing a speed reducer; he fell 

approximately 42 inches to the ground. There were no handrails and 

the two miners were not using fall protection equipment.

BEST PRACTICES

• Establish safe work procedures, which include incorporating the manufacturer's 

recommendations, to assure that workers are not exposed to hazards when 

performing maintenance, repairs, or demolition activity.

• Prior to beginning work, ensure that all workers are trained in safe work 

procedures.

• Examine work areas during the shift for hazards that may be created as a result 

of the work being performed.

• Before starting any work, clear the area of tripping and stumbling hazards.

• Provide and maintain safe access to all work areas.

• Secure structures against unexpected movement when performing demolition 

work.

• Stay focused on your work for your own safety and the safety of your fellow 

workers.

Power in

Power out

Power in

Power in

Power out
Editorial Note on Part 75
Editorial Note: The provisions of this part marked [Statutory Provision] appear in Title III of the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969.

§ 75.1320 Multiple-shot blasting. ( a ) No more than 20 boreholes shall be fired in a round unless permitted in writing by the District Manager under § 75.1321.
( b ) Instantaneous detonators shall not be used in the same circuit with delay detonators in any underground coal mine.
( c ) In bituminous and lignite mines, only detonators with delay periods of 1,000 milliseconds or less shall be used.
( d ) When blasting in anthracite mines, each borehole in a round shall be initiated in sequence from the opener hole or holes.
( e ) Arrangement of detonator delay periods for bituminous and lignite mines shall be as follows: ( 1 ) When blasting cut coal— ( i ) The first shot or shots fired in a round shall be initiated in the row nearest the kerf or the row or rows nearest the shear; and
( ii ) After the first shot or shots, the interval between the designated delay periods of successive shots shall be at least 50 milliseconds but not more than 100 milliseconds.
( 2 ) When blasting coal off the solid— ( i ) Each shot in the round shall be initiated in sequence from the opener hole or holes; and
( ii ) After the first shot or shots, the interval between the designated delay periods of successive shots shall be at least 50 milliseconds but not more than 100 milliseconds.
#### E. Don Smith et al. *v.*Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Greenwich et al.

The Supreme Court docket number is SC 14633.

*William E. Hegarty,*in support of the petition.

*E. Don Smith,*pro se, and *Eileen Smith,*pro se, in opposition.

Decided October 30, 1992

The defendants The Historical Society of the Town of Greenwich, Incorporated, and Anita de Lessups Keefe’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 29 Conn. App. 28 (AC 10431), is granted, limited to the following question:

“In acting on a subdivision proposal that conforms to applicable zoning regulations, may a planning and zoning commission take into account the fact that the property is located in a historic district and that the development of the property may be inconsistent with historic preservation of the district?”