alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 13






906 Certification




The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2013 (the “Report”) for the purpose of complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code. This certification is not to be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act and is not deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act.




Jason C.S. Chang, the Chief Executive Officer, and Joseph Tung, the Chief Financial Officer of Advanced Semiconductor Engineering, Inc., each certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:




1.    the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and




2.    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Advanced Semiconductor Engineering, Inc.




Date: April 17, 2014




By:
/s/ Jason C.S. ChangName:
Jason C.S. ChangTitle:
Chief Executive Officer
  By:
/s/ Joseph TungName:
Joseph TungTitle:
Chief Financial Officer
## NO. 12

- 1 0

- 00 260

- C R

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

'

IN RE: MICHAEL KENNEDY

, ' ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

RELATOR '

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

Relator Michael Kennedy filed a petition for writ of manda mus directing the trial court to

rule on his motion to dismiss his counsel and his motion requesting an “incompetence hearing.”

Based on the record before us, we conclude that Relator has not shown he is entitled to the relief

requested. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 52.8( a); see also In re Kennedy , No. 12

– 10

– 00251

– CR, 2010

WL 3168245, at *1

– 2 (Tex. App.

– Tyler Aug. 11, 2010, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not

designated for publication). Accordingly, we deny Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus.

Opinion delive red August 18 , 2010.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.

(DO NOT PUBLISH)
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 Duke Energy Ohio, Inc. (Duke Energy Ohio) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, James E. Rogers, Chief Executive
Officer of Duke Energy Ohio, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Duke Energy Ohio.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                    
|------------------------------------
|                                    
|/s/    JAMES E. ROGERS              
|James E. Rogers                     
|Chief Executive Officer May 13, 2009
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -           2013 Monitoring the Future Survey      

# 2013 Monitoring the Future Survey

The Monitoring the Future survey, conducted annually, measures the current drug use, and attitudes toward drugs, of students in grades 8, 10, and 12 across the country. Results included observed declines in the abuse of prescription opioids, alcohol, and cigarettes by teens, the use of synthetic marijuana, Vicodin, and salvia among twelfth graders, and the use of inhalants by eighth graders, but an increase in teens’ use of Adderall. The results also reveal that less than 40% of high school seniors believed that regular marijuana users risk harming themselves, meaning that the perception by seniors that regular marijuana may be dangerous is the lowest it has been since 1978. 

http://www.drugabuse.gov/monitoring-future-survey-overview-findings-2013
Good evening and thank you for the opportunity to speak with you. I 

appreciate the great work the EPA has done to limit greenhouse gas 

emissions and protect our environment for future generations. 

I'm a native Georgian and have seen with my own eyes the changes in 

our climate over my lifetime. I am concerned about the future of our 

climate and the damage we continue to inflict on the environment that 

supports all of life on earth. I'm also concerned about the economic 

impacts of failing to take steps to drastically reduce greenhouse 

emissions quickly enough. We can no longer afford to ignore the 

impacts of decades of carbon dioxide accumulation in the atmosphere, 

and fixing the problem will continue to get more expensive the longer 

we wait to change course. 

Reducing carbon emissions is a smart, sensible path forward for our 

nation, and it comes with a host of side benefits, such as cleaner air & 

water, along with decreases in respiratory illnesses and premature 

deaths. Those who object to regulating emissions often point to the 

belief that acting to regulate these emissions will be detrimental to US 

jobs and economic growth. Well, it turns out that there is a policy option 

that reduces these emissions AND benefits the US economy. It's called 

carbon fee & dividend, and it's a policy that I hope the EPA will include 

as a mechanism for state compliance in its final rules in 2015. 
• 

A recent non-partisan study conducted by REMI concluded that putting 

a fee on carbon and returning all of the money to the public would slash 

carbon emissions while creating jobs and increasing GDP in the process. 

The report shows that fixing the market distortion that has allowed 

fossil-based energy to be artificially cheap due to externalized and 

socialized costs will drive innovation and create 2.8 million jobs while 

reducing emissions over 50% in a 20-year time span. 

I'm confident that if the EPA reads the full REMI report, it will see why 

the carbon fee & dividend approach is a sensible policy solution that 

states can employ to be in compliance with final EPA rules to come. In 

that case, I would ask that the EPA specifically include carbon fee & 

dividend as a compliance mechanism and that details on carbon pricing 

levels, escalation schedules, and administrative guidance on the 

implementation of the policy be included in the final rules that would 

ensure states have a roadmap for using this policy for compliance. 

Thank you again for the work you are doing here. I appreciate the 

chance to share information on this policy mechanism that will allow 

states to comply with the proposed emissions reductions. 

http:// citizen scl imatel o h by. org/wp-con tent/ u ploacls /2 014/06/REMIcarbon -tax-report-62141. pdf
#### GOTTLIEB v. DOLE.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

December 30, 1905.)

Action by one Gottlieb against one Dole.

No opinion. Motion to amend granted.
#### 9904.412-62 Exemption.

None for this Standard.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Peter P. Spina, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.

[776 NYS2d 139]

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed July 2, 2003, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he refused an offer of suitable employment.

Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board finding that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he refused an offer of suitable employment without good cause. The record establishes that claimant refused a job offer from a previous employer because it was less than 80% of his high calendar quarter wages in his base period. Labor Law § 593 (2) permits refusal of an offer of employment if, after receiving unemployment insurance benefits for 13 weeks, the wages are less than 80% of one’s high calendar quarter wages in the base period. Here, however, claimant had been receiving unemployment insurance benefits for only three weeks at the time that the offer was made, thus Labor Law § 593 (2) is inapplicable. Inasmuch as claimant refused an offer of employment for which he was “reasonably fitted by training and experience” (Labor Law § 593 [2]), the Board’s decision will not be disturbed. Furthermore, having failed to disclose the offer of employment when certifying for benefits, the Board’s finding of willful misrepresentation and recoverable overpayment of benefits will not *871be disturbed *(see Matter of Nappi [Commissioner of Labor],*260 AD2d 714 [1999]; *Matter of Beeker [Ross],*82 AD2d 953 [1981]).

Mercure, J.P., Spain, Carpinello, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ, concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
Exhibit 32-3

Certificate Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 United States Code

The undersigned officer hereby certifies, as to the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Exelon Generation Company, LLC for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2008, that (i) the report fully complies
with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Exelon
Generation Company, LLC.



/s/    John W. RoweJohn W. RoweChairman (Principal Executive Officer)


Date: October 24, 2008



215
EXHIBIT
        32.1
 
 SECTION
        1350 CERTIFICATION OF
 CHIEF
        EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
 
 In
        connection with the annual report of Global Food Technologies, Inc. ("Company")
        on Form 10-KSB/A for the year ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the
        Securities and Exchange Commission ("Report"), the undersigned, in the
        capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certify pursuant to Section
        906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350) that to their
        knowledge:
 
 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
        June 10, 2007
 
 
 
 /s/ Keith
        Meeks
 Keith
        Meeks, President and Chief Executive Officer
 
 
 
 /s/
        Marshall F.
        Sparks
 Marshall
        F. Sparks, Chief Financial Officer
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch on Law Enforcement Responses to Opioid Overdoses (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -           Share with Youth: Game Changers: Establishing a Youth Advisory Council      

# Share with Youth: Game Changers: Establishing a Youth Advisory Council

This resource will guide youth through some key concepts, planning tools and resources to help them develop youth councils.

https://www.youthpower.org/resources/generationon-game-changers-establishing-youth-advisory-council-toolkit
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch on Law Enforcement Responses to Opioid Overdoses (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -  Announcements 
            -           AANAPISIs: Serving a Critical AAPI Student Population      

# AANAPISIs: Serving a Critical AAPI Student Population

This blog post outlines the issues discussed at a recent meeting that Secretary of Education Arne Duncan held with Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander education stakeholders. At the meeting, attendees requested a clear statement that Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander Serving Institutions (AANAPISIs) are indeed in the same class of institutions as Historically Black Colleges and Universities and other minority-serving institutions under the Higher Education Act (HEA). In response to these concerns, the Department updated its website, recommending listing AANAPISIs along with the other classes of schools delineated under HEA. **Learn more.**
#### Kym Respass, Appellant, v James F. Dean, Defendant, and Roger C. Capozzi, Jr., Respondent.

[775 NYS2d 576]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (M. Garson, J.), dated April 30, 2003, which, inter alia, granted the motion of defendant Roger C. Capozzi, Jr., to *504dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against him as time-barred.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court correctly determined that the plaintiffs action was not subject to the seven-year statute of limitations for crime victims provided by CPLR 213-b (1). There was no causal connection between the plaintiff’s injuries and the defendant’s criminal conviction *(see Koerick v Lotito,*262 AD2d 367 [1999]; *Boice v Burnett,*245 AD2d 980 [1997]). Thus, this action is governed by, and barred by the expiration of, the three-year period of limitations set forth in CPLR 214 (5).

In light of our determination, we need not reach the plaintiffs remaining contentions. Ritter, J.P., S. Miller, Adams and Cozier, JJ., concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. John J. Molloy, Also Known as John James Joseph Molloy, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant: (1) from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered July 31, 1963 on his plea of guilty, convicting him of attempted grand larceny in the second degree and imposing sentence upon him as a second felony offender; and (2) from an order of said court dated April 5, 1963 which denied, after a hearing, his motion to suppress evidence. Judgment and order affirmed. The sole question presented is whether the motion to suppress was properly denied. It appears that on the night of November 21, 1962, pursuant to a police radio message which reported the presence of prowlers, the arresting officer went to the scene of 871 Elatbush Avenue and found defendant on the roof of a nearby building at 12 Martense Street. Defendant’s explanation for his presence there was that he had run away from a fight and was looking for a place to sleep. The officer and defendant went downstairs where defendant repeated his story. Defendant was then arrested and searched. The search revealed a registration card of an automobile which it later developed had been stolen. Upon further search of the area the officer found, parked in front of the Martense Street building, an automobile bearing the same registration; and in the automobile he found another man, named Smith, hiding under the dashboard. Defendant and Smith were charged- with burglary; that charge was thereafter dismissed. About two months later the defendant was charged with grand larceny of the automobile. The motion to suppress followed, and was denied after a hearing wherein the above facts were developed. Thereafter defendant withdrew his plea of not guilty and pleaded guilty to attempted grand larceny in the second degree. In our opinion, under the circumstances here, the officer had probable cause to believe that a felony had been or was about to be committed by this defendant. The fact that the burglary charge was thereafter dismissed did not render the arrest unlawful (Code Crim. Pro., § 177, subd. 4). Since there was a reasonable cause for the arrest, the subsequent search incident to the arrest was lawful *(Draper*v. *United States,*358 U. S. 307, 310-311; *People*v. *Loria,*10 N Y 2d 368, 373). The evidence seized at the time of the arrest for burglary, -which charge was dismissed, was admissible on a subsequent charge of larceny *(Paper*v. *United States,*53 P. 2d 184; *Carroll*v. *United States,*267 U. S.132, 158; *Harris*v. *United States,*331 U. S. 145, 155; *People*v. *Lombardi,*18 A D 2d 177, 180, and cases there cited). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>




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 on Form 10-Q of Chicago Rivet & Machine
Co. (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
John A. Morrissey, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

         (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/ John A. Morrissey
-------------------------------------
Name:  John A. Morrissey
Title: Chief Executive Officer
Date:  May 3, 2004