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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Heelys, Inc. (the "Company") for the period ending December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), we, Ralph T. Parks, Interim Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Michael W. Hessong, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to our 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.

|Date: March 17, 2008 |  |                                                                 
|-------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------
|By:                  |  | /s/ RALPH T. PARKSRalph T. Parks
Interim Chief Executive Officer
|By:                  |  | /s/ MICHAEL W. HESSONGMichael W. Hessong
Chief Financial Officer

The foregoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission as an Exhibit to the Report.

---



QuickLinks
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2733 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Pigment Yellow 154. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 4, 2006 

Mr. REED (for himself and Mr. CHAFEE) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Pigment 

Yellow 154. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. PIGMENT YELLOW 154. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.32.18 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 Pigment Yellow 154) is amended by striking ‘‘12/31/ 

7 2006’’ and inserting ‘‘12/31/2009’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with BILLS
2 

•S 2733 IS 

1 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

2 the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC72 with BILLS
#### Hardin v. The State.

Appeal from Tuscaloosa Law and Equity Court.

Tried before the Hon. J. J. Mayfield.

No counsel marked'as appearing for appellant.

William C. Fitts, Attorney-General, for the State.

The appellant in this case’ was indicted, tried and convicted for carrying a pistol concealed about his person. The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Opinion by

Head, J.
44.101 Definitions.       As used in this part-          *Approved purchasing system* means a contractor’s purchasing system that has been reviewed and approved in accordance with this part.          *Contractor* means the total contractor organization or a separate entity of it, such as an affiliate, division, or plant, that performs its own purchasing.          *Contractor purchasing system review (CPSR)* means the complete evaluation of a contractor’s purchasing of material and services, subcontracting, and subcontract management from development of the requirement through completion of subcontract performance.                    *Subcontract* means any contract as defined in subpart  2.1 entered into by a subcontractor to furnish supplies or services for performance of a prime contract or a subcontract. It includes but is not limited to purchase orders, and changes and modifications to purchase orders.          *Subcontractor* means any supplier, distributor, vendor, or firm that furnishes supplies or services to or for a prime contractor or another subcontractor.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 44.1 - General
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 4:01cr48-SPM

TERRENCE WASHINGTON,

Defendant.

___________________________/ 

 

ORDER CONTINUING REVOCATION HEARING

Upon consideration, Defendant’s motion to continue his revocation hearing

(doc. 137) is granted. The sentencing hearing is reset for 1:30 p.m. on

November 17, 2008, at the United States Courthouse in Tallahassee, Florida.

SO ORDERED this twentieth day of October, 2008.

 s/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

United States District Judge

Case 4:01-cr-00048-SPM-CAS Document 138 Filed 10/20/08 Page 1 of 1
19–008

107TH CONGRESS REPORT " HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ! 2d Session 107–756

WAIVING A REQUIREMENT OF CLAUSE 6(a) OF RULE XIII WITH RESPECT 

TO THE SAME DAY CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN RESOLUTIONS REPORTED BY THE RULES COMMITTEE

OCTOBER 15, 2002.—Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington, from the Committee on Rules, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H. Res. 586]

The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration House 

Resolution 586, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to the House 

with the recommendation that the resolution be adopted. 

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

The resolution waives clause 6(a) of rule XIII (requiring a twothirds vote to consider a rule on the same day it is reported from 

the Rules Committee) against certain resolutions reported from the 

Rules Committee. The rule applies the waiver to any special rule 

reported on the legislative day of Wednesday, October 16, 2002, 

providing for the consideration or disposition of a joint resolution 

making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2003.

Æ
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C.SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Each of the undersigned hereby certifies that this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB/A fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of
First Capital Bancorp, Inc.



|                     |  |     |  |                                                                         
|-------------------- |  | --- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                     |  |    
|Date: March 19, 2008 |  | By: |  | /s/ Robert G. Watts, Jr.                                                
|                     |  |     |  | Robert G. Watts, Jr.                                                    
|                     |  |     |  | President and Chief Executive Officer                                   
|                     |  |    
|                     |  | By: |  | /s/ William W. Ranson                                                   
|                     |  |     |  | William W. Ranson                                                       
|                     |  |     |  | Senior Vice President and CFO(Principal Accounting andFinancial Officer)
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 234 (Tuesday, December 7, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 76037]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-30538]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-74,545; TA-W-74,545A]


HAVI Logistics, North America a Subsidiary of HAVI Group, LP 
Including On-Site Leased Workers of Express Personnel Services and the 
La Salle Network, Bloomingdale, IL; Havi Logistics, North America, 
Lisle, IL; Amended Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for 
Worker Adjustment Assistance

    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended 
(``Act''), 19 U.S.C. 2273, the Department of Labor issued a 
Certification of Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance 
on September 3, 2010, applicable to workers of HAVI Logistics, North 
America, a subsidiary of HAVI Group, LP, including on-site leased 
workers of Express Personnel Services and The La Salle Network, 
Bloomingdale, Illinois. The Notice was published in the Federal 
Register on September 21, 2010 (75 FR 57516). The workers are engaged 
in activities related to the supply of food distribution services.
    During the course of an investigation of another petition, the 
Department obtained information that shows that HAVI Logistics, North 
America, Lisle, Illinois is an auxiliary facility operating in 
conjunction with the Bloomingdale, Indiana facility.
    Accordingly, the Department is amending this certification to 
properly reflect this matter.
    The intent of the Department's certification is to include all 
workers of the subject firm who were adversely affected by the shift of 
food distribution services to Japan and Russia.
    The amended notice applicable to TA-W-74,545 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    All workers of HAVI Logistics, North America, a subsidiary of 
HAVI Group, LP, including on-site leased workers of Express 
Personnel Services and The La Salle Network, Bloomingdale, Illinois 
(TA-W-74,545) and all workers of HAVI Logistics, North America, 
Lisle, Illinois (TA-W-74,545A), who became totally or partially 
separated from employment on or after August 11, 2009, through 
September 3, 2012, and all workers in the group threatened with 
total or partial separation from employment on date of certification 
through two years from the date of certification, are eligible to 
apply for adjustment assistance under Chapter 2 of Title II of the 
Trade Act of 1974, as amended.

    Signed in Washington, DC, this 19th day of November 2010.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2010-30538 Filed 12-6-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
#### § 661.6 General.

Natural Resources Conservation Service implementation of the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a is contained in the regulations of the Secretary, 7 CFR 1.110 through 1.123.
(January 23, 1967)

#### Louise Filanowicz, Respondent, and Theodore Filanowicz, Appellant, v. Frank A. Guarino et al., Appellants-Respondents.

In a medical malpractice action to recover damages for personal injury, medical expenses and loss of services, etc., (1) defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated July 23, 1965, as is in favor of the plaintiff wife upon a jury verdict and (2) the plaintiff husband appeals from so much of said judgment as set aside the jury verdict in his favor and dismissed his cause of action (for medical expenses, loss of services, etc.). Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts and in the interests of justice, and new trial granted as to all parties other than defendant Fisehetti, with costs • to abide the event, and action as against said defendant severed. The ease was submitted to the jury based on the negligence of defendant Musso, a technician employed by defendant Guarino, a licensed physician. Among the theories of liability for Musso’s negligence submitted to the jury was the use of contaminated eyedrops in administering treatment to the plaintiff wife’s left eye. There was no proof in the record that in fact the eyedrops were contaminated by the organism which was established to be the source of the infection resulting in the removal of her eye. Hence, in our view, it was error to permit the experts to speculate that the eyedrops were contaminated and, as a result of this speculation, further to conclude that the eyedrops were the source of the infection. Since there was a general verdict on behalf of the . plaintiff wife, we are unable to say that the jury did not decide the ease based upon this erroneous submission; and a new trial is therefore required *(Ingersoll*
      *667v. *Liberty Bank of Buffalo,*278 N. Y. 1; *Digelormo*v. *Weil,*260 N. Y. 192, 197; *Cassano*v. *Hagstrom,*5 N Y 2d 643; *Lamb*v. *Union Ry. Co.,*195 N. Y. 260, 266). We are of the opinion that, in the interests of justice, the plaintiff husband should also be granted a new trial. Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Rabin, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur.
#### § 51.3204 Fairly firm.

*Fairly firm* means that the onion may yield slightly to moderate pressure but is not appreciably soft or spongy.
# Fourth Cou rt of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 24, 2016

No. 04

- 15

- 00610

- CV

LAREDO MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION,

Appellant

v.

CITY OF LAREDO, TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 341st Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015

- CVQ

- 00

- 1077

- D3

Honorable Rebecca Ramirez Palomo, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

On June 15, 2016

, James K. Lehman filed a Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice

requesting to appear before our court on behalf of appellant . On that same day, appellant’s

counsel of record, James B. Harris, filed a Motion to Request and In Support of James K.

Lehman’s Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice requesting this court to grant Mr. Lehman’s

motion. On June 22, 2016, Mr. Lehman filed a l etter with this court indicating counsel for

appellee has no objection to the pro hac vice motion.

After review, we GRANT Mr. Lehman’s a Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice

.

We order the clerk of this court to serve a copy of this order on the trial court and all

counsel.

It is so ORDERED on June 24, 2016.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO:

__ ______________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
#### § 66.109 Required disclosure with actual knowledge.

Notwithstanding any provision in this subpart, if a food manufacturer (other than a very small food manufacturer), a retailer, or an importer has actual knowledge that the food is a bioengineered food or contains a bioengineered food ingredient, it must disclose that the food is bioengineered or contains a bioengineered food ingredient, as applicable, using appropriate text, symbol, electronic or digital link disclosure, or text message.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-1163

In re: ALLEN RAY DYER,

Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. 

James K. Bredar, Chief District Judge. (1:18-mc-00237)

Submitted: August 13, 2019 Decided: September 5, 2019

Before MOTZ and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Allen Ray Dyer, LAW OFFICE OF ALLEN DYER, Ellicott City, Maryland, for Appellant. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Allen Ray Dyer appeals the district court’s order entering a public reprimand after 

Dyer was disciplined by the Court of Appeals of Maryland. We have reviewed the record 

and conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing reciprocal 

discipline. See In re Morrissey, 305 F.3d 211, 217 (4th Cir. 2002); In re Fallin, 255 F.3d 

195, 197 (4th Cir. 2001). Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district 

court. In re Dyer, No. 1:18-mc-00237 (D. Md. Jan. 19, 2019). We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### § 51.1905 Off-Grade tomatoes.

Tomatoes which fail to meet the requirements of either of the foregoing grades shall be Off-Grade tomatoes.
#### § 54.1023 Denial or withdrawal of appeal service.

A request for appeal service may be rejected or such service may be otherwise denied to or withdrawn from any person in accordance with the procedure set forth in § 54.1013(a), if it appears that the person or product involved is not eligible for appeal service under § 54.1020, or that the identity of the piece of equipment, portion of a piece of equipment, or utensil has been lost; or for any of the causes set forth in § 54.1032.
47.207-8 Government responsibilities.

(a) The contracting officer shall state clearly the Government’s responsibilities that have a direct

bearing on the contractor’s performance under the contract; e.g., the Government’s responsibility to

notify the contractor in advance when hazardous materials are included in a shipment.

(1) Advance notification. The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.247-24, Advance

Notification by the Government, when the Government is responsible for notifying the contractor of

specific service times or unusual shipments.

(2) Government equipment with or without operators.

(i) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.247-25, Government-Furnished Equipment

With or Without Operators, when the Government furnishes equipment with or without operators.

(ii) Insert the kind of equipment and the locations where the equipment will be furnished.

(3) Direction and marking. The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.247-26, Government

Direction and Marking, when office relocations are involved.

(b) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.247-27, Contract Not Affected by Oral

Agreement.

Parent topic: 47.207 Solicitation provisions, contract clauses, and special requirements.
# L_2014121EN.01005801.xml

| 24.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 121/58 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 121/58

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 14 April 2014

appointing a Dutch member and a Dutch alternate member of the Committee of the Regions

(2014/225/EU)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal of the Dutch Government,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 22 December 2009 and on 18 January 2010, the Council adopted Decision 2009/1014/EU (1) and Decision 2010/29/EU (2) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2010 to 25 January 2015. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 22 December 2009 and on 18 January 2010, the Council adopted Decision 2009/1014/EU (1) and Decision 2010/29/EU (2) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2010 to 25 January 2015.

| (2) | A member's seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr P.G. de VEY MESTDAGH. An alternate member's seat has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Ms S.A.E. POEPJES, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

A member's seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr P.G. de VEY MESTDAGH. An alternate member's seat has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Ms S.A.E. POEPJES,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following are hereby appointed to the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2015:

| (a) | as member:
  Mr Bote WILPSTRA, member of the Executive Council of the Province of Groningen;
  and |
| --- | --- |

(a)

as member:

Mr Bote WILPSTRA, member of the Executive Council of the Province of Groningen;

and

| (b) | as alternate member:
  Mr Hans KONST, member of the Executive Council of the Province of Fryslân. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

as alternate member:

Mr Hans KONST, member of the Executive Council of the Province of Fryslân.

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.

Done at Luxembourg, 14 April 2014.

For the Council

The President

A. TSAFTARIS

---

(1)  
  OJ L 348, 29.12.2009, p. 22.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 12, 19.1.2010, p. 11.

2

---
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-04-00669-CR

Michael Lindaas aka Michael Landaas aka Michael Greer, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, 277TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 03-811-K277, HONORABLE KEN ANDERSON, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

A jury found appellant Michael Lindaas guilty of possessing more than four grams

of methamphetamine with intent to deliver. See Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 481.112(a), (d)

(West 2003). The jury assessed punishment, enhanced by two previous felony convictions, at life

imprisonment.

Appellant’s court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding that the appeal is

frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738

(1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no

arguable grounds to be advanced. See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); High v. State, 573

S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974);

Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex.
2

Crim. App. 1969). Appellant received a copy of counsel’s brief and was advised of his right to

examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.

We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous

and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.

The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

___________________________________________

W. Kenneth Law, Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Law, Justices Patterson and Puryear

Affirmed

Filed: July 13, 2005

Do Not Publish
#### §§ 5001.128-5001.129 [Reserved]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                       4,549,560
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,549,560
<PP&E>                                       6,168,142
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,717,702
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          205,795
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  10,511,907
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,717,702
<SALES>                                        316,867
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,849,053
<CGS>                                          102,695
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  102,695
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               208,881
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,537,477
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,537,477
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,537,477
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    22.25
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    22.25
        

</TABLE>