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 Genco Shipping & Trading Limited’s (the “Company”) quarterly
report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the
undersigned President of the Company, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
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 result of operations of the
      Company.





Date: 
      November 9, 2009
            
            /s/ Robert
      Gerald BuchananName:  Robert
      Gerald BuchananTitle:
      President





The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350
and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
document.  A signed original of this written statement required by
Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
#### § 29.6086 Rules.

The application of these official standard grades shall be in accordance with the following rules.
Exhibit 13.2




CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In connection with the Annual Report of ZIM Corporation (the "Company") on Form 20-F for the year ended March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John Chapman, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 18 U.S.C. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 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 Chapman


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


John Chapman


Chief Financial Officer


July 15, 2009
p.1 

OAR Box 1796 

Prepped by Keeia Richards 

Document Number: 

68) VI-B-19 

Docket Number: 

A-90-37 

Printed 10/31/2008 4:20:38 PM Sheet 68 of 107 
P.2 

A-90-37 

VI-B-19 

This document has been moved to IV-E-30 at the request of the project 

officer. It was incorrectly categorize originally.
#### § 29.3530 Lot.

A pile, basket, bulk, or more than one bale, case, hogshead, tierce, package, or other definite package unit.

[30 FR 9207, July 23, 1965. Redesignated at 49 FR 16759, Apr. 20, 1984]
Exhibit 32.2

Certification Pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350)

I, Neil I. Salmon, certify that:

1. the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2010 (the Report), fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

2.
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Innophos, Inc. at the dates and for the periods indicated.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided Innophos, Inc. and will be retained by
Innophos, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

The undersigned expressly
disclaims any obligation to update the foregoing certification except as required by law.

Date: May 7, 2010



/s/ NEIL I. SALMONNeil I. Salmon
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to the requirements of 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed
as a part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
Case 3:99-cv-00402-LC-mcr Document 49 Filed 05/04/00 Page 1 of 13
Case 3:99-cv-00402-LC-mcr Document 49 Filed 05/04/00 Page 2 of 13
Case 3:99-cv-00402-LC-mcr Document 49 Filed 05/04/00 Page 3 of 13
Case 3:99-cv-00402-LC-mcr Document 49 Filed 05/04/00 Page 4 of 13
Case 3:99-cv-00402-LC-mcr Document 49 Filed 05/04/00 Page 5 of 13
Case 3:99-cv-00402-LC-mcr Document 49 Filed 05/04/00 Page 6 of 13
Case 3:99-cv-00402-LC-mcr Document 49 Filed 05/04/00 Page 7 of 13
Case 3:99-cv-00402-LC-mcr Document 49 Filed 05/04/00 Page 8 of 13
Case 3:99-cv-00402-LC-mcr Document 49 Filed 05/04/00 Page 9 of 13
Case 3:99-cv-00402-LC-mcr Document 49 Filed 05/04/00 Page 10 of 13
Case 3:99-cv-00402-LC-mcr Document 49 Filed 05/04/00 Page 11 of 13
Case 3:99-cv-00402-LC-mcr Document 49 Filed 05/04/00 Page 12 of 13
Case 3:99-cv-00402-LC-mcr Document 49 Filed 05/04/00 Page 13 of 13
*

 A review of the district court docket sheet reveals that though at issue in

September 2005, the habeas petition remains pending. In September 2007, the

magistrate judge issued an order to show cause why the matter should not be

dismissed for failure to prosecute. Both Mr. Jackson and the State objected on

the grounds that the petition was ready for a ruling.

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

July 11, 2008

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

LAWRENCE M. JACKSON,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

CLINT FRIEL, Warden,

Respondent - Appellee.

No. 08-4040

(D.C. No. 2:05-CV-00365-DB)

(D. Utah)

ORDER 

DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

Before TACHA, KELLY, and McCONNELL, Circuit Judges.

Lawrence Jackson, a state inmate appearing pro se, seeks a certificate of

appealability (“COA”) to appeal the district court’s denial of his motion for a

temporary restraining order against the prison. This motion was filed while his

habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is pending before the district

court.*

 The district court denied the motion for a temporary restraining order, and

this appeal followed.
- 2 -

In his motion seeking a COA, Mr. Jackson argues that a temporary

restraining order is necessary to require the prison to adequately care for his

medical needs. However, conditions-of-confinement claims by a state inmate

generally must be brought in a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983

rather than in a habeas petition. See Rael v. Williams, 223 F.3d 1153, 1154 (10th

Cir. 2000). The district court’s resolution of this motion is not reasonably

debatable among jurists given the procedural vehicle. See Miller-El v. Cockrell,

537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003).

We DENY a COA, DENY all pending motions, and DISMISS the appeal.

Entered for the Court

Paul J. Kelly, Jr.

Circuit Judge
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 27 (Wednesday, February 10, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6651-6652]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-2932]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


DOE/NSF Nuclear Science Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Department of Energy, Office of Science.

ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the DOE/NSF Nuclear Science 
Advisory Committee (NSAC). Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of these meetings be 
announced in the Federal Register.

DATES: Friday, February 26, 2010, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Marriott Bethesda North Hotel & Conference Center, 5701 
Marinelli Road, North Bethesda, MD 20852.

[[Page 6652]]


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brenda L. May, U.S. Department of 
Energy; SC-26/Germantown Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20585-1290; Telephone: 301-903-0536.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and guidance on a continuing 
basis to the Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation 
on scientific priorities within the field of basic nuclear science 
research.
    Tentative Agenda: Agenda will include discussions of the following:

Friday, February 26, 2010

<bullet> Perspectives From Department of Energy and National Science 
Foundation.
<bullet> Presentation and Discussion of the Committee of Visitors 
Report.
<bullet> Public Comment (10-minute rule).

    Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. If you 
would like to file a written statement with the Committee, you may do 
so either before or after the meeting. If you would like to make oral 
statements regarding any of these items on the agenda, you should 
contact Brenda L. May, 301-903-0536 or <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f5b787909b9194dbb8948cb586969c909b9690db919a90db929a83"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="98daeafdf6fcf9b6d5f9e1d8ebfbf1fdf6fbfdb6fcf7fdb6fff7ee">[email protected]</span></a> (e-
mail). You must make your request for an oral statement at least 5 
business days before the meeting. Reasonable provision will be made to 
include the scheduled oral statements on the agenda. The Chairperson of 
the Committee will conduct the meeting to facilitate the orderly 
conduct of business. Public comment will follow the 10-minute rule.
    Minutes: The minutes of the meeting will be available on the U.S. 
Department of Energy's Office of Nuclear Physics Web site for viewing.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 4, 2010.
Rachel Samuel,
Deputy Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2010-2932 Filed 2-9-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
§ 2901.2 Definitions. ( a ) *Person* means any individual, firm, sole proprietorship, partnership, association, company, joint venture or corporation.
( b ) *Director* means the Director of the Office of Energy, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
( c ) *Secretary* means the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
( d ) *Adjustment* means an interpretation, modification, rescission of, exception to or exemption from the Essential Agricultural Uses and Requirements regulations, part 2900 of this chapter.
( e ) *NGPA* means the Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978, Pub. L. 95-621.
( f ) *Petitioner* means any person seeking an adjustment under this part 2901.
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER ON M OTIONS

Appellate case name: Joel Keith Nichols v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number s : 01

- 1 8

- 0 1 0 0 0

- CR

Trial court case number s : 1 7CR0618

Trial court: 10 th District Court of G a lveston County

Appellant’s court

- appointed counsel

, Winifred Weber, filed a motion to withdraw

and a ppellate brief in the above

- styled case on June 28 , 201 9

, concluding that the above

referenced appeal s are frivolous. See Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S. Ct.

1396, 1400 (1967). On July 11, 2019, appellant, Joel Keith Nichols, incarcerated and

acting pro se

, filed a pro se motion for access to a copy of the appellate record s to prepare

response s and a motion requesting a 30

- day extension of time to file his pro se Anders brief

response. See Kelly v. State , 436 S.W.3d 313, 315, 318

– 20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014).

Accordingly, th e Court grant s appellant’s motion requesting access to the record s

and order s the district clerk, no later than 10 days from the date of this o rder , to provide a copy of the clerk’s and reporter’s record s to the pro se appellant. The trial court clerk shall

further certify to this Court, within 15 days of the date of this o rder , the date upon which

delivery of the record s to the appellant is made.

Finally, the Court grant s appellant’s motion for an extension of time t o file pro se

Anders response. A ppellant’s pro se response to his counsel’s Anders brief shall be filed

within 45 days of the date of this order

.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature:

___

/s/ Laura C. Hig ley

____  Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: __ July 16, 2019

__
United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Submitted May 30, 2014

Decided June 4, 2014

Before

WILLIAM J. BAUER, Circuit Judge

FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge

JOHN DANIEL TINDER, Circuit Judge

No. 14-2051

IN RE:

GLAXOSMITHKLINE LLC, 

Petitioner

Petition for Writ of 

Mandamus.

No. 12 C 6403

James B. Zagel, Judge.

Order

Defendant petitions for a writ of mandamus in this tort suit, which arises 

under the diversity jurisdiction. Petitioner developed paroxetine hydrochloride, 

an antidepressant, which received the FDA’s approval and was marketed as 

Paxil. After patent protection ended, other manufacturers began to sell 

generic paroxetine hydrochloride. Stewart Dolin used one of these generic 

substitutes for Paxil and later committed suicide, allegedly as a consequence of 

the drug; his estate asks for damages from petitioner, even though petitioner did 

not make the drug that Dolin took. (Mutual Pharmaceutical Co. v. Bartlett, 133 S. 

Ct. 2466 (2013), makes it difficult if not impossible to hold the generic 

manufacturer liable.)

1

NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with 

Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 

2
No. 14-2051 Page 2

The district court denied petitioner’s motion for summary judgment, ruling 

that the inventor and initial marketer of a drug can be liable for harms caused by 

the sale of generic equivalents. The district judge then denied petitioner’s request 

to certify the decision for an interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C. §1292(b). 

Petitioner asks us to issue a writ of mandamus that would compel the district 

court to grant its motion for summary judgment.

Mandamus is appropriate to rectify a district court’s usurpation or grave 

misuse of power, when an appeal from final judgment would be an inadequate 

remedy. That standard has not been met. A district court does not abuse its 

power by taking one view, rather than another, of a debatable legal issue. The 

district court recognized that a majority of federal courts has ruled in favor of the 

pioneer manufacturer, but others have ruled just as the district court did. The 

Supreme Court has yet to resolve this conflict. While the issue escapes definitive 

resolution, taking one position rather than another cannot be a usurpation of 

power.

What is more, the question can be resolved on appeal from a final judgment, 

should petitioner lose in the district court. Petitioner expresses concern that it 

will win on some other ground (perhaps a jury will conclude that the drug’s 

warnings about suicide risk are adequate, that warning was unnecessary, or that 

the drug did not cause Dolin’s death). The possibility that the “innovator 

liability” issue will not matter in the end would be a poor reason to engage in 

interlocutory review. Most cases potentially entail many subjects that turn out 

not to matter; the process of litigation winnows issues. That is a major benefit of 

the final-decision rule, not a reason to disregard it.

The petition for a writ of mandamus is denied.
Exhibit 99.5

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED**

**PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OFTHE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection withthe annual report of Petro-Canada (the “Company”) on Form 40-F for thefiscal year ending December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Ronald A. Brenneman,President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 
| 1.     |   | the Report fully  complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the  Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                      |
|--------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                                                                                                                                   |
| 2.     |   | the information  contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial  condition and results of operations of the Company. |

 

 
| Date:  March 18,  2009 | /s/ Ronald A. Brenneman               |
|----------------------------------|---------------------------------------|
|                             | Ronald A. Brenneman                   |
|                             | President and Chief Executive Officer |
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

R. WAYNE JOHNSON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES,

Defendant-Appellee.

______________________ 

2014-5102

______________________ 

Appeal from the United States Court of Federal 

Claims in No. 1:14-cv-00294-NBF, Senior Judge Eric G. 

Bruggink.

______________________ 

ON MOTION

______________________ 

O R D E R

R. Wayne Johnson moves for leave to proceed in forma 

pauperis. The United States moves for a 21-day extension 

of time, until August 21, 2014, the file its response brief. 

Johnson is incarcerated. Pursuant to the Prisoner 

Litigation Reform Act of 1995, this court may not authorize the prosecution of an appeal by a prisoner without the 

prepayment of fees. 28 U.S.C. § 1915. A prisoner is no 

Case: 14-5102 Document: 9 Page: 1 Filed: 08/26/2014
2 JOHNSON v. US

longer afforded the alternative of proceeding without 

payment of filing fees, but must, in time, pay the $505 

filing fee in its entirety.* When funds exist, an initial 

partial payment must be made consisting of 20% of the 

greater of (a) the average monthly deposits to the prisoner’s account or (b) the average monthly balance in the 

prisoner’s account for the six-month period immediately 

preceding the filing of the notice of appeal. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(b)(1). Thereafter, the prisoner is required to make 

monthly payments of 20% of the preceding month’s income credited to the prisoner’s account. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(b)(2). The agency with custody of the prisoner 

must forward payments from the prisoner’s account each 

time the amount in the account exceeds $10 until the 

$505 filing fee is paid in full. Id. 

By separate letter, the custodian of Johnson’s prison 

account is being directed to make the necessary arrangements to forward the filing fee to the court. 

Accordingly, 

It Is Ordered That:

(1) The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis

is denied.

(2) The motion for an extension of time is granted. 

* The court notes that Mr. Johnson signed an earlier 

version of Federal Circuit Form 6A, authorizing payment 

of this court’s filing fee from his account. On December 1, 

2013, the court increased its filing fee. Thus, Mr. Johnson’s account will be charged the current fee of $505. 

 

Case: 14-5102 Document: 9 Page: 2 Filed: 08/26/2014
 JOHNSON v. US 3

 FOR THE COURT

 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole 

Daniel E. O’Toole 

Clerk of Court

s24

Case: 14-5102 Document: 9 Page: 3 Filed: 08/26/2014
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

FREDDIE L. BROWN,

VS CASE NO. 4:03cv87-RH/WCS

SGT STEPHEN M. COYNE, et. al.,

REFERRAL AND ORDER

The motion/pleading was filed by plaintiff on 07/15/2005 (document #76), and referred to

Magistrate Judge William C. Sherrill on 07/19/2005.

Summary of motion/pleading: MOTION TO CLARIFY THE RECORD OF CASES

WILLIAM M. MCCOOL, CLERK OF COURT

s/ Angela Maxwell

DEPUTY CLERK

ORDER OF COURT

Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is ORDERED this 20th day of July, 2005, the

requested relief is GRANTED to the extent that the Clerk of Court is directed to provide Plaintiff

with a copy of the docket sheet for all of Plaintiff’s cases.

S/ William C. Sherrill

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 4:03-cv-00087-RH-WCS Document 77 Filed 07/20/05 Page 1 of 1
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

**18U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACTOF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of ClaytonHoldings, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31,2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), we, Frank P. Filipps, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,and Frederick C. Herbst, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to our knowledge, that:

(1)                      TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13a or 15d of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2)                      Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|        | Dated: May 11, 2007      |
|--------|--------------------------|
|   |                     |
|        | /s/ Frank P. Filipps     |   |
|   | Frank P. Filipps         |
|   | Chief Executive  Officer |
|   |                     |
|   | /s/ Frederick C. Herbst  |   |
|   | Frederick C. Herbst      |
|   | Chief Financial Officer  |

 

----
Exhibit 10.37


 


Select Comfort Corporation


Summary of Non-Employee Director Compensation


 


March 2005


 


Annual Cash
Compensation.  Each of our non-employee directors receives
an annual cash retainer of $25,000.  Each
committee chair receives additional cash compensation of $5,000 per year.  Each member of the Audit Committee receives
additional cash compensation of $5,000 per year.


 


Stock Options.  Each of our non-employee
directors is eligible to receive, as of the date that the director first begins
to serve on the Board, an initial grant of options to purchase 7,500 shares of
our common stock.  These initial options
become exercisable one year after the date of grant, so long as the director
remains a director of our company.  In
addition, each of our non-employee directors is eligible for an annual grant,
coincident with the annual meeting of shareholders, of options to purchase
7,500 shares of our common stock.   These
annual options become exercisable one year after the date of grant, so long as
the director remains a director of our company. 
All options granted to directors have an exercise price equal to the
fair market value of our common stock on the date of grant and remain
exercisable for a period of up to 10 years, subject to continuous service on our
Board of Directors.


 


Reimbursement of
Expenses.  All of our directors are reimbursed for
travel expenses for attending meetings of our Board or any Board committee.
§ 3201.146 Toys and sporting gear. ( a ) *Definition.* Toys and sporting gear are products that are designed for indoor or outdoor recreational use including, but not limited to, toys; games; and sporting equipment and accessories such as balls, bats, racquets, nets, and bicycle seats. This category does not include products such as cleaners, lubricants, and oils that are used to maintain or clean toys and sporting gear.
( b ) *Minimum biobased content.* The Federal preferred procurement product must have a minimum biobased content of at least 32 percent, which shall be based on the amount of qualifying biobased carbon in the product as a percent of the total organic carbon in the finished product.
( c ) *Preference compliance date.* No later than July 6, 2020, procuring agencies, in accordance with this part, will give a procurement preference for qualifying biobased toys and sporting gear. By that date, Federal agencies responsible for drafting or reviewing specifications for products to be procured shall ensure that the relevant specifications require the use of biobased toys and sporting gear.
[84 FR 32021, July 5, 2019]