alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|   | **EXHIBIT 32.2** |
|--------|------------------|

 

STATEMENT REQUIRED BY 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANTTO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Plasticon International, Inc. (the "Company") for the year ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, James Turek, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify that:

 

*   the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

*   information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 /s/ James Turek

______________________________

James Turek, Chief Financial Officer

Director, President and Chief Executive Officer

 

May 4, 2006

 

This certification accompanies this 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 the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
15.406-1 Prenegotiation objectives. ( a ) The prenegotiation objectives establish the Government's initial negotiation position. They assist in the contracting officer's determination of fair and reasonable price. They should be based on the results of the contracting officer's analysis of the offeror's proposal, taking into consideration all pertinent information including field pricing assistance, audit reports and technical analysis, fact-finding results, independent Government cost estimates and price histories.
( b ) The contracting officer shall establish prenegotiation objectives before the negotiation of any pricing action. The scope and depth of the analysis supporting the objectives should be directly related to the dollar value, importance, and complexity of the pricing action. When cost analysis is required, the contracting officer shall document the pertinent issues to be negotiated, the cost objectives, and a profit or fee objective.
NOTE : This disposition is nonprecedential.



# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

JODI A. SCHWENDIMANN, Appellant

v.

NEENAH, INC., Appellee

______________________

2022

- 1951, 2022

- 1952, 2022

- 1953

______________________

Appeals from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in Nos. IPR2020

- 01361, IPR2020

- 01363, IPR2021

- 00016.

______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

D EVAN V. P ADMANABHAN

, Padmanabhan & DawsonPLLC, Minneapolis, MN, argued for appellant. Also represented by M ICHELLE D AWSON

, B RITTA L OFTUS

, P AUL J.

R OBBENNOLT

.

J OSEPH J. R ICHETTI

, Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP, New York, NY, argued for appell ee. Also represented by A LEXANDER D AVID W ALDEN ; K. L EE M ARSHALL , San Francisco, CA.

______________________ Case: 22-1951 Document: 49 Page: 1 Filed: 10/11/2023THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :

P ER C URIAM (M OORE

, Chief Judge

, S TOLL and

C UNNINGHAM

, Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

October 1 1 , 2023
Date Case: 22-1951 Document: 49 Page: 2 Filed: 10/11/2023
| 1)     |   | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and 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. |

| Date: May 17, 2010                                                                                                           |   |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                                                                                                         |   |
| /s/ Greggory Schneider                  |   |
| Greggory Schneider                                                                                                           |   |
| Chief Financial and Principal Financial Officer                                                                              |   |
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1

SEARCH CAPITAL GROUP, INC.
COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS (LOSS)
(in thousands except per share data)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                   Six Months Ended          Year Ended             Year Ended    
                                                    March 31, 1996        September 30, 1995     September 30, 1994
<S>                                                     <C>                     <C>                    <C>        
Weighted Average Shares:                                                                                       
        Common Stock outstanding at end of period      24,952                  10,774                 11,698      
                                                                                                               
        Adjustment for weighting of shares(1)         (15,002)                 (1,807)                  (440)     
                                                                                                               
        Common stock equivalents assumed
          outstanding                                     497                     -                      -
                                                      -------                --------               --------      
Weighted Average Shares Outstanding  [A]               10,447                   8,967                 11,258      
                                                      =======                ========               ========      
                                                                                                               
                                                                                                               
        Net Income (Loss)            [B]              $(2,998)               $(20,134)              $(26,190)     
                                                      =======                ========               ========      
                                                                                                               
Computation of net income (loss) per share:                                                                    
                                                                                                               
        Net income (loss) divided by weighted                                                                  
        average shares outstanding   [A]/[B]          $ (0.29)               $ (2.25)              $ (2.33)     
                                                      =======                ========               ========      
                                              
</TABLE>


------------------
(1)  On March 15, 1996, the Company issued 12,115,000 shares of common stock in
        connection with the Joint Plan of Reorganization.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Floyd E. Haskins, Appellant.

Motion for permission to proceed as a poor person and assignment of counsel denied on the ground the appeal was not timely taken. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Aulisi and Hamm, JJ., concur.
#### BEERS, Appellant, v. WASHBOND et al., Respondents.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

November 17, 1903.)

Action by Ada Beers against Henry Havens Washbond and others.

No opinion. Motion denied.
#### 15.404 Proposal analysis.
### §§901 to 903. Repealed. June 27, 1952, ch. 477, title IV, §403(a)(42), 66 Stat. 280, eff. Dec. 24, 1952

Section 901, act Oct. 14, 1940, ch. 876, title I, subchap. V, §501, 54 Stat. 1171, related to procedure when diplomatic officials believe that persons in foreign state have lost American nationality. See section 1501 of this title.

Section 902, act Oct. 14, 1940, ch. 876, title I, subchap. V, §502, 54 Stat. 1171, related to certificates of nationality for non-naturalized United States nationals. See section 1502 of this title.

Section 903, act Oct. 14, 1940, ch. 876, title I, subchap. V, §503, 54 Stat. 1171, related to judicial proceedings for declaration of United States nationality in event of denial of rights and privileges as national. See section 1503 of this title.
### In The C ou rt o f A p p ea ls Si x t h Appe l l at e Di st r i c t o f Te x as a t Te x ar ka na

______________________________ No . 0 6- 09 -0 00 40 -C R

______________________________ THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellant

V. CODY JOE P OSEY, Appellee
On Appea l from the 6th J udicial District Court

L amar County , Texas Trial Court No. 20830

B e f o r e M o r r i s s , C
. J. , C a

rt e r an d M o s e l e y , JJ. Memorandum Opinion by J ustice Carte r2 MEMORANDUM OPI

NI ON The State a

ppeals the tria l cour t ' s order g rantingCody

J oe Posey ' s motion for shock
c omm un ity su pe rv isi on . Up on

or ig ina l c on vic tio n, Pos e y wa s c on vic te d o f t

wo c ounts of

c ri min a lly
ne g lig e nt h omi c ide . B oth th e S tate and

Pos e y c on so lid a te d th e c a

us e s f or br ie fi ngpurp os e s. Be cause the brief

s and arguments raised there in a re identical in both cause s, for the r easons state d in Sta te v. Pose

y , cause number 06-09- 00039-CR, we likewise r esolve the issues in the instant appea l, cause number 06-09- 00040-CR. I n sum, we conc lude that the af firmative de adly

wea pon findingre n d er ed P o sey not "ot herw is e el igi bl e for

com mu ni ty

superv is io n u nd er [ Art icl e 42 .1 2] ." See T EX . C ODE C R IM . P R OC . ANN . art. 42.12, § 6 (V ernon Supp. 2008). I n light of the deadly wea pon finding , Section 3g (a) (2) would have pr evente d the trial cour t from orde ring community supervision. Since Section 6(a )(1)
re fe rs to " thi s art ic le ," it enc omp a sse s Se c tio n 3 g (a )( 2) ' s li mit a tio n o n c ourt -o rd e re d c omm un ity supervision. The tria l co u rt , t h en , err ed by concludingthat Posey

was " otherwise e ligible" for
comm unity

supervision under A rticle 42.12 a nd, there fore , should not have orde red shoc k community

supervision. As the written judg ment stands, it re fl ects the pr oper se ntence . To the extent that Posey invites this C ourt to refor

m the written judg ment to refle ct the illeg al ora lly -pronounc ed twenty -twomonth sentence , we decline. The trial c ourt was not author ized to reduce the sentenc e to a ter m that fe ll be low the a

pp lic a ble ra ng e of punis hme nt. We c ann ot a nd wi ll n ot e nd or se the un e nf or c e a ble3

oral pronounc ement of a n illega l sentence . We vacate t h e trial court' s order g rantingshock
c omm un ity su pe rv isi on , re ins tate the No ve mbe r 2 1, 20 08 , ju dg me nt r e vo kin g Pos e y ' s c omm un ity
su pe rv isi on and se nte nc inghim

to t wo y e ars ' c on fi ne me nt, and re mand the c a se to t

he tr ia l c ourt

wi th specific instructions to carr y out the two-y ear

sentenc e re flec ted in the written judg ment.

J ack Ca rter J ustice Date Submitted: September 16, 2009 Date D ecide d: October 20, 2009 Do No t Pu

bli sh
#### 1352.200 Scope of subpart.

This subpart sets forth the text of all CAR provisions and clauses and provides a cross-reference to the location in the CAR that prescribes their use.
EXHIBIT
      32.1





**CERTIFICATION**


**PURSUANT
      TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**





In
      connection with the Annual Report of Sparta Commercial Services, Inc. (the
      "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended April 30, 2008, as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date therein specified (the
      "Report"), I, Anthony W. Adler, as Principal Financial Officer of the Company,
      hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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/
      Anthony W. Adler


Anthony
      W. Adler


Principal
      Financial Officer


Date:
      August 13, 2008
1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

MIDWEST MARKETING COMPANY, INC., ) 

et al. ) 

 ) 

) 

Plaintiffs, ) 

vs. ) Case No. 11-CV-7786 

) 

QUALITY PRODUCE SUPPLIERS, INC., et al., ) Judge: James B. Zagel 

) 

 Defendants. ) 

MOTION FOR ENTRY OF 

FINAL JUDGMENT AGAINST QUALITY PRODUCE SUPPLIERS, INC. 

 COME NOW Plaintiffs Midwest Marketing Company, Inc. and Ruby Robinson Co., Inc., 

and Intervening Plaintiffs, Bushmans Inc. H.C. Schmieding Produce Co. Inc. and Great Lakes 

Produce & Marketing, LLC, and for the reasons set forth in the Court’s Memorandum Opinion 

and Order of December 19, 2013, granting Plaintiffs and Intervening Plaintiffs’ Motion for 

Summary Judgment against Quality Produce Suppliers, Inc., move for entry of judgment against 

Quality Produce Suppliers, Inc. in the amounts set forth in the Memorandum Opinion and Order, 

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b). A proposed Judgment is attached hereto. The 

proposed Judgment has previously been submitted for approval to counsel for Defendant Quality 

Produce Suppliers, Inc., but defense counsel has advised the undersigned it has lost contact with 

Defendant Quality Produce and therefore is not authorized to approve the proposed Judgment. 

WHEREFORE, there being no just cause for delay, Plaintiffs and Intervening Plaintiffs 

respectfully request that their Motion for Entry of Final Judgment Against Quality Produce 

Suppliers, Inc. be granted. 
2 

Dated this 23rd day of July, 2014. Respectfully submitted, 

 McCARRON & DIESS LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM B. KOHN 

By:/s/ Mary Jean Fassett By:/s/ William B. Kohn 

 Mary Jean Fassett, ID#9078552 William B. Kohn, #6196142 

 4530 Wisconsin Ave., N.W. 150 N. Wacker Drive 

 Suite 301 Suite 1400 

 Washington, DC 20016 Chicago, Illinois 60606 

 (202) 364-0400 (312) 553-1200 

 Attorneys for Ruby Robinson Co., Inc. 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 I hereby certify that on this 23rd day of July, 2014, a true and correct copy of the foregoing 

was served on all counsel of record via the Court’s CM/ECF system. 

 

 /s/ Mary Jean Fassett 

 Mary Jean Fassett
1452.224-1 Privacy Act Notification. ( a ) As prescribed in 1424.104, the clause at FAR 52.224-1, Privacy Act Notification, shall be modified before insertion into solicitations and contracts by— ( 1 ) Changing the title of the clause to read “Privacy Act Notification (JUL 1996) (Deviation)”; and
( 2 ) Adding the following sentence to the end of the clause: “Applicable Department of the Interior regulations concerning the Privacy Act are set forth in 43 CFR 2, subpart D. The CFR is available for public inspection at the Departmental Library, Main Interior Bldg., 1849 C St. NW, Washington DC, at each of the regional offices of bureaus of the Department and at many public libraries.”
( b ) As prescribed in FAR 52.103(a) and 52.107(f), the clause at FAR 52.252-6, Authorized Deviation in Clauses, shall be inserted into solicitations and contracts containing the clause in paragraph (a) of this section.
#### § 751.3 Authority.

The Personnel Claims Act provides the authority for maximum payment up to $40,000, $100,000 in extraordinary circumstances for loss, damage, or destruction of personal property of military personnel or civilian employees incident to their service. No claim may be paid unless it is presented in writing within 2 years of the incident that gave rise to the claim.

[72 FR 53422, Sept. 19, 2007]
Fiscal Year 2017 Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies - DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

FY 2017 Title I

LEA ID District Allocation*

1100030 District of Columbia Public Schools 47,397,826

1199999 PART D SUBPART 2 0

* Actual amounts received by LEAs will be smaller than shown here due to State-level adjustments to Federal Title I allocations. States adjust

 allocations, for example, to reflect LEA boundary changes or the creation of new LEAs, including charter school LEAs, that are not accounted

 for in the statutory calculations. States also are permitted to reserve, for administration, up to 1 percent of the allocations they would receive

 if $14 billion were appropriated and generally must reserve 7 percent of their allocations for school improvement. These 

 adjustments will reduce the actual amounts available.
(June 22, 1962)

In decision Nos. 1-11: Present—Coon, J. P., Gibson, Herlihy, Reynolds and Taylor, JJ.

#### (A) In the Matter of the Claim of Bert Kupperman, Appellant, v. Visual Electronics Corporation et al., Respondent. (B) In the Matter of the Claim of Michael Lynch, Respondent, v. Joseph Gelb Company et al., Appellants. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent. (C) In the Matter of the Claim of Mary Williams, Respondent, v. Wallace S. Karutz, Appellant. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent. (D) In the Matter of the Claim of Dorothy Clark, Appellant, v. Brown & Bigelow, Inc., Respondent. (E) In the Matter of the Claim of Dominick Miceli, Respondent, v. Tracy-Smith Co., Inc., et al., Appellants, and Central Rigging & Contracting Corporation, et al., Respondents. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

[In each action] Motions to dismiss appeals granted by default, without costs.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Carol Poste, Respondent, v Howard Stores, Inc., et al., Appellants. Workers’ Compensation Board, Respondent.

Appeals from a decision of the Workers' Compensation Board, filed September 9, 1977, and an amended decision filed March 9, 1978. The sole issue raised on this appeal is whether or not there is substantial evidence to support the conclusion of the board that the employer made an advance payment of compensation to waive the bar of section 28 of the Workers’ Compensation Law. The decedent was the head of the shoe department for his employer and had the responsibility for buying that department’s merchandise. On September 7, 1970, decedent died in Italy while on a buying trip. The employer learned of the death several days later and issued a pay check for the week of September 7 to September 11 to claimant, the decedent’s widow. Claimant did not file a compensation claim until May 14, 1974 and the board held that the normal two-year filing requirement had been waived by virtue of the employer’s advance payment of money to claimant. The employer contends that it believed the decedent to be in Europe on a vacation rather than a business trip and thus any payment made to claimant does not constitute a waiver of section 28 of the Workers’ Compensation Law. While it is true that the circumstances surrounding the payment must imply an acknowledgement or recognition of liability in order to support a finding of waiver *(Matter of Schmitt v Alpha Delta Phi Fraternity House,*33 AD2d 1082, mot for lv to app den 27 NY2d 481), there is substantial evidence in the record to support the finding that the employer knew that the decedent was in Italy on a business trip. Claimant testified that the decedent had received an expense check for "around $750” from the employer before leaving for Italy and the record shows a canceled *945check dated September 2, 1970 for $850 from the employer to decedent. The board was certainly not required to believe the testimony of the employer’s administrative assistant who testified that the company was not approving buyers’ trips to Europe in 1970 and that he could not recall an expense disbursement being made to decedent. Nor was the board required to concur in the assistant’s speculation that the $850 check to decedent could have been for a loan or "anything” rather than for expenses. Accordingly, the board’s decision must be sustained. Decisions affirmed, with costs to the Workers’ Compensation Board against the appellants. Mahoney, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Staley, Jr., and Herlihy, JJ., concur.
### §3505. Reports to the States

Not later than 30 days after the end of each 6-month period beginning after the effective date of section 3501 of this title, the Secretary shall transmit to each State department of agriculture, or such other appropriate State agency as the Secretary considers advisable, a copy of each report which was submitted to the Secretary under section 3501 of this title during such 6-month period and which involved agricultural land located in such State.

(Pub. L. 95–460, §6, Oct. 14, 1978, 92 Stat. 1266.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

For the effective date of section 3501 of this title, referred to in text, see section 10(b) of Pub. L. 95–460, set out as an Effective Date note under section 3501 of this title.
Exhibit 4




Exhibit 4.3


CERTIFICATE OF TRUST


OF


ARROW CAPITAL TRUST I


THIS CERTIFICATE OF TRUST of Arrow Capital Trust I (the "Trust"), dated as of November 22, 1999, has been duly executed and is being filed by the undersigned, as trustee, to form a business trust under the Delaware Business Trust Act (12 Del. C.
Section 3801 et seq.).

1.Name.  The name of the business trust formed hereby is Arrow Capital Trust I (the "Trust").

2.Delaware Trustee.  The name and business address of the trustee of the Trust with a principal place of business in the State of Delaware are Chase Manhattan Bank Delaware, 1201 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware 19801.

3.Effective Date.  This Certificate of Trust shall be effective upon filing in the Office of the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned trustee of the Trust has executed this Certificate of Trust as of the date first above written.

CHASE MANHATTAN BANK DELAWARE,

not in its individual capacity but solely as trustee 

of the Trust


By: /s/ John J. Cashlin

      Name:John J. Cashin

      Title:Vice President
----

----

| (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/  Matthew K.      Rose       |   | /s/     Thomas N.      Hund           |   |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Matthew      K. Rose                                                    |   | Thomas      N. Hund                                                                                         |   |
|   | Chairman,      President and Chief Executive Officer                    |   | Executive      Vice President and Chief Financial Officer                                                   |   |

Form 10-Q

----

----