alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,****AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO****SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002**

In connection withthe Quarterly Report of Outdoor Channel Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”) onForm 10-Q/A for the quarter ended June 30, 2006 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, PerryT. Massie, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, to the best of myknowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| /s/ Perry T. Massie     |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| **Perry T. Massie**     |
| Chief Executive Officer |
| February 12, 2007       |

 

A signed originalof this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided toOutdoor Channel Holdings, Inc. and will be retained by Outdoor ChannelHoldings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission orits staff upon request.

----
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3221 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Ecoflex F BX7011. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 25, 2006 

Mr. MENENDEZ introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Ecoflex F BX7011. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SUSPENSION OF DUTY ON EXOFLEX F BX7011. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.39.06 1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, dimethyl 

ester, polymer with 1,4-butanediol and 

hexanedioic acid (CAS No. 55231–08–8) 

(provided for in subheading 3907.99.00) Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2009 ’’. 

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

9 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
2 

•S 3221 IS 

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

2 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
**Exhibit      32.2**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

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

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

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

| (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/ Brian              Gallagher |
|         | Brian              Gallagher                                                     |
|         | (Acting              Principal Financial Officer)Date: May 19,              2006 |

----
Case 2:06-cv-00702-MEF-TFM Document 45 Filed 09/21/2006 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00702-MEF-TFM Document 45 Filed 09/21/2006 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00702-MEF-TFM Document 45 Filed 09/21/2006 Page 3 of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

MAY’S DISTRIBUTING COMPANY, INC., 

individually and as class representative of all 

those gasoline station owners similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

v.

TOTAL CONTAINMENT, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. 06-CV-00702 (DRB)

MOTION TO WITHDRAW

COMES NOW Robin G. Laurie, Balch & Bingham LLP, and respectfully requests this 

Court to grant him withdrawal as counsel for Defendant, Ticona Polymers, Inc. (“Ticona”), in 

the above-styled case. In support of this motion, counsel states as follows:

1. Robin G. Laurie was entered in error as counsel for Ticona during the electronic 

filing of the Stipulation Extending Time to Respond to Plaintiff’s Fourth Amended Complaint

(Doc. 6) filed with this Court on August 15, 2006. Paul A. Clark of this firm is the attorney of 

record for Defendant Ticona Polymers, Inc.

Respectfully submitted this 16th day of August, 2006.

/s/ Robin G. Laurie

Robin G. Laurie (LAU006)

One of the Attorneys for Defendant Ticona 

Polymers, Inc.

Balch & Bingham LLP

P. O. Box 78

Montgomery, AL 36101-0078

Telephone: (334) 834-6500

Fax: (334) 269-3115

Case 2:06-cv-00702-MEF-TFM Document 8 Filed 08/16/2006 Page 1 of 2
2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served upon the following by 

United States Mail, properly addressed and postage prepaid, on this the 16

th day of August, 2006:

L. Cooper Rutland, Jr.

RUTLAND & BRASWELL

P. O. Box 551

Union Springs, AL 36089-0551

Wesley L. Laird

LAIRD BAKER & BLACKSTOCK

501 North Main Street

Opp, AL 36467

Lynn W. Jinks, III

JINKS DANIEL & CROW

P. O. Box 350

Union Springs, AL 36089

Nicola Drake

WHATLEY DRAKE & KALLAS LLC

P. O. Box 10647

Birmingham, AL 35203-2605

Joseph T. Carpenter

Brian Mosholder

CARPENTER, PRATER, INGRAM 

& MOSHOLDER LLP

303 Sterling Centre

4121 Carmichael Road

Montgomery, AL 36106

Kimberly W. Sayoc

LIPPES SILVERSTEIN MATHIAS

& WEXLER

700 Guaranty Building

28 Church Street

Buffalo, NY 14202-3950

James E. Blazek

ADAMS & REESE LLP

One Shell Square

701 Poydras Street

Suite 4500

New Orleans, LA 70139

James H. McLemore

CAPELL & HOWARD, PC

P. O. Box 2069

Montgomery, AL 36102-2069

James Williams

MILLER & MARTIN LLP

832 Georgia Avenue

Suite 1000, Volunteer Bldg.

Chattanooga, TN 37402

Walter F. McGowan

GRAY, LANDFORD, SAPP, McGOWN,

GRAY & NATHANSON

P.O. Box 830239

Tuskegee, AL 36083

John F. Olinde

CHAFFEE, McCALL, PHILLIPS,

TOLER & SARPY, L.L.P.

1100 Poydras Street

Suite 2300

New Orleans, LA 70163

L Shane Seaborn

PENN & SEABORN, LLC

Post Office Box 688

Clayton, AL 36016

/s/ Robin G. Laurie

OF COUNSEL

Case 2:06-cv-00702-MEF-TFM Document 8 Filed 08/16/2006 Page 2 of 2
207.171-3 Policy.       DoD policy is to break out components of weapons systems or other major end items under certain circumstances.                    (a)  When it is anticipated that a prime contract will be awarded without adequate price competition, and the prime contractor is expected to acquire any component without adequate price competition, the agency shall break out that component if—                    (1)  Substantial net cost savings probably will be achieved; and                    (2)  Breakout action will not jeopardize the quality, reliability, performance, or timely delivery of the end item.                    (b)  Even when either or both the prime contract and the component will be acquired with adequate price competition, the agency shall consider breakout of the component if substantial net cost savings will result from—                    (1)  Greater quantity acquisitions; or                    (2)  Such factors as improved logistics support (through reduction in varieties of spare parts) and economies in operations and training (through standardization of design).                    (c)  Breakout normally is not justified for a component that is not expected to exceed $1 million for the current year's requirement.    **Parent topic:** 207.171 Component breakout.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

NICHOLAS STRICKLAND, et al., )

)

Plaintiffs, )

)

v. ) 1:06-CV-00682-DRB

)

CHAMPION ENTERPRISES, INC., et al., )

 )

Defendants. )

ORDER ON MOTION

After duly considering Defendant’s Motion to Strike Exhibit I (Affidavit of Plaintiffs’

Expert, Edward W. Saul), filed by Plaintiff in opposition to Defendant’s summary judgment,

and Plaintiff’s Response (Doc. 27, Dec. 11, 2006), the court concludes that Plaintiff has shown

good cause for denial of the Motion. Moreover, the deficiencies cited by Defendant for the

expert’s qualifications and conclusions go to the weight of his testimony and shall be

considered in evaluating all the submissions. It is, therefore,

ORDERED that the Motion to Strike (Doc. 25) is DENIED. 

Done this 13 day of December, 2006. th

/s/ Delores R. Boyd

DELORES R. BOYD

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00682-TFM Document 28 Filed 12/13/2006 Page 1 of 1
Case 2:06-cv-00707-ID-CSC Document 18 Filed 09/04/2007 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00707-ID-CSC Document 18 Filed 09/04/2007 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00707-ID-CSC Document 18 Filed 09/04/2007 Page 3 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00707-ID-CSC Document 18-2 Filed 09/04/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:06-cv-00707-ID-CSC Document 18-2 Filed 09/04/2007 Page 2 of 2
Case 2:06-cv-00707-ID-CSC Document 18-3 Filed 09/04/2007 Page 1 of 1
June 22, 2009

OPPT Document Control Office (DCO) EPA East Building, Room 6428 1201 Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, DC

Attention: EPA Docket ID Number OPPT-2003-0071

VIA COURIER

Dear Sir or Madam,

On behalf of the companies identified below, I am submitting six paper copies and a PDF copy on disk of Interim Report No. 8 required by the terms of th e Enforceable Consent Agreement (ECA) for the Laboratory-Scale Incineration Testing of Fluoropol ymers (EPA Docket No. OPPT-2003-0071). The due date for this submission is June 22, 2009.

This submission is being made on be half of the following companies:

AGC Chemicals Americas, Inc. 55 E. Uwchlan Avenue, Suite 201 Exton, PA 19341

Daikin America, Inc. 20 Olympic Drive Orangeburg, NY 10962

E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company

1007 Market Street Wilmington, DE 19898

Dyneon, LLC

6744 33 rd Street Oakdale, MN 55128

If you have any questions on this submi ssion, please contact me at 202-974-5217.

Respectfully submitted,

Lynne R. Harris Vice President, Science and Technology

ATCH
ANNEX 24 - CONTRACT CLOSEOUT METRIC

REPORT

Pursuant to 5204.804-1 Closeout by the office administering the contract.(S-90), the template below

shall be used in reporting monthly contract closeout metrics. The electronic version of this template

is available on the website identified at NMCARS 5201.105-3 Copies..
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                  SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                        771,276
<SECURITIES>                  0                         <F1>
<RECEIVABLES>                 47,962
<ALLOWANCES>                  0
<INVENTORY>                   0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>              0
<PP&E>                        9,122,690                 <F2>
<DEPRECIATION>                0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                10,303,627
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>         211,534
<BONDS>                       5,961,145                 <F3>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>         0
<PREFERRED>                   0
<COMMON>                      0                         <F4>
<OTHER-SE>                    0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  0
<SALES>                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>              1,021,997                 <F5>
<CGS>                         0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                 420,618                   <F6>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>              33,042                    <F7>
<LOSS-PROVISION>              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>            375,215
<INCOME-PRETAX>               0
<INCOME-TAX>                  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>           0
<DISCONTINUED>                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>               0
<CHANGES>                     0
<NET-INCOME>                  259,206
<EPS-BASIC>                 0
<EPS-DILUTED>                 0
<FN>
<F1>   "SECURITIES" REPRESENTS INVESTMENT IN JOINT VENTURE
<F2>   "PP&E" REPRESENTS INVESTMENT IN REAL ESTATE [LAND AND
BUILDING]
<F3>   "BONDS" REPRESENTS MORTGAGES PAYABLE
<F4>   "COMMON" REPRESENTS TOTAL PARTNERS CAPITAL
<F5>   "TOTAL REVENUES" REPRESENTS RENTAL, INTEREST, AND OTHER
INCOME
<F6>   "TOTAL COSTS" REPRESENTS TOTAL EXPENSES LESS INTEREST
EXPENSE
<F7>   "OTHER EXPENSES" REPRESENTS INTEREST IN JOINT VENTURES'
NET INCOME/LOSS
</FN>


</TABLE>
Exhibit 23.1

[LETTERHEAD OF EHRHARDT KEEFE STEINER & HOTTMAN PC]

Consent of
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form
S-8 (No. 333-144102 and No. 333-156249) and on Form S-3 (No. 333-158252, No. 333-160242 and No. 333-166766) of Allied Nevada Gold Corp. (the Company) of our report dated February 25, 2011, relating to the consolidated financial
statements and internal control over financial reporting of the Company included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2010.



|                                       
|---------------------------------------
|/s/ Ehrhardt Keefe Steiner & Hottman PC
|Ehrhardt Keefe Steiner & Hottman PC    

Denver, Colorado

February 25, 2011
# L_2015114EN.01002501.xml

| 5.5.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 114/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.5.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 114/25

---

Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 908/2014 of 6 August 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to paying agencies and other bodies, financial management, clearance of accounts, rules on checks, securities and transparency

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 255 of 28 August 2014
  )

On page 86, in Article 34(6):

for:

‘second subparagraph of paragraph 3’,

read:

‘third subparagraph of paragraph 3’;

on page 89, in Article 40(1):

for:

‘second subparagraph of Article 34(3)’,

read:

‘third subparagraph of Article 34(3)’.

---
<PAGE>

FIRST CENTRAL FINANCIAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES                  Exhibit 11

COMPUTATION OF PER COMMON SHARE EARNINGS





<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30,
                                                             1996             1995             1994
                                                             ----             ----             ----
<S>                                                      <C>              <C>              <C>          
PRIMARY
 Net income applicable to common shares                  $   1,313,012    $   4,803,495    $   4,354,612
                                                        ===============  ===============  ===============
 Weighted average number of primary common shares:
  Outstanding                                                5,987,685        5,990,098        5,801,698
  Issuable upon assumed exercise of dilutive warrants            7,806           54,908           42,488
                                                        ---------------  ---------------  ---------------
     TOTAL                                                   5,995,491        6,045,006        5,844,186
                                                        ===============  ===============  ===============
Primary earnings per common share                           $0.219           $0.795           $0.745
                                                            ======           ======           ======
FULLY DILUTED
 Net income applicable to common shares                  $   1,313,012    $   4,803,495    $   4,354,612
 Add interest and amortization of debentures
  (net of tax)                                                 262,379          291,035          320,092
                                                        ---------------  ---------------  ---------------
     TOTAL                                               $   1,575,391    $   5,094,530    $   4,674,704
                                                        ===============  ===============  ===============
 Weighted average number of primary common shares:
  Outstanding                                                5,987,685        5,990,098        5,801,698
  Increase to assumed exercise of stock options and
   conversion of convertible debt to reflect maximum
   dilution effect                                             653,333          904,721          954,178
                                                        ---------------  ---------------  ---------------
     TOTAL                                                   6,641,018        6,894,821        6,755,876
                                                        ===============  ===============  ===============
 Fully diluted earnings per common share                    $0.219           $0.739           $0.692
                                                            ======           ======           ======
</TABLE>


<PAGE>
NotesFAQContact Us

Collection

Thesaurus
AdvancedSearch Tips

Collection

Thesaurus
BrowseThesaurus

 Download full text

**ERIC Number:**

**Record Type:**

**Publication Date:**

**Pages:**

**Abstractor:**

**ISBN:**

**ISSN:**

**EISSN:**

Computer Assisted InstructionComputer Mediated CommunicationComputer Uses in EducationEducational MediaEducational TechnologyInstructional EffectivenessInternetOnline Systems

**Publication Type:**

**Education Level:**

**Audience:**

**Language:**

**Sponsor:**

**Authoring Institution:**

**Grant or Contract Numbers:**

PrivacyCopyrightContact UsSelection PolicyAPI
JournalsNon-JournalsDownloadSubmitMultimediaWidget
PART 727—PATENTS, DATA, AND COPYRIGHTS       Authority:                            Sec. 621, Pub. L. 87–195, 75 Stat. 445, (22 U.S.C. 2381) as amended; E.O. 12163, Sept. 29, 1979, 44 FR 56673; 3 CFR 1979 Comp., p. 435.          Source:                            72 FR 53163, Sept. 18, 2007, unless otherwise noted.                                       Subpart 727.3—Patent Rights under Government Contracts                                                         727.303 Contract clause.                                                                             Subpart 727.4—Rights in Data and Copyrights                                                         727.404 Basic rights in data clause.                                                            727.409 Solicitation provisions and contract clauses.    **Parent topic:** SUBCHAPTER E—GENERAL CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTSSubpart 727.3—Patent Rights under Government Contracts    727.303 Contract clause.       Contracting officers must insert the clause at 752.227–70, Patent Reporting Procedures, in all solicitations and contracts that contain the clause at (48 CFR) FAR 52.227–11, Patent Rights—Ownership by the Contractor.Subpart 727.4—Rights in Data and Copyrights    727.404 Basic rights in data clause.       (a) through (f) [Reserved]          (g) When the contract includes a requirement for the contractor to assign copyright to the Government or another party, the contracting officer must insert (48 CFR) 752.227–14 and/or include an express limitation or restriction in the contract. USAID contracting officers will assert such a right in limited circumstances in accordance with the principles as stated in (48 CFR) 27.402.727.409 Solicitation provisions and contract clauses.       (a) When the contracting officer inserts (48 CFR) FAR 52.227–14, and if the release or publication of data first produced in the performance of the contract may be sensitive to U.S. Government relations with the cooperating country, the contracting officer must use the clause at (48 CFR) AIDAR 752.227–14.          (b) through (m) [Reserved]          (n) The prescriptions for provisions and clauses in (48 CFR) FAR 27.409 apply to all USAID contracts regardless of place of performance.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-60223

Summary Calendar

RANDY POTTER,

Petitioner-Appellant

v.

BRUCE PEARSON, Warden,

Respondent-Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 5:08-CV-290

Before DAVIS, SMITH, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Randy Potter, federal prisoner # 49029-004, requests leave to proceed in

forma pauperis (IFP) in his appeal from the district court’s dismissal of his 28

U.S.C. § 2241 petition and the denial of his motion for relief of judgment

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). Potter’s notice of appeal was

timely only with respect to the denial of his Rule 60(b) motion, see FED. R. APP.

P. 4(a)(1)(B), and we thus lack jurisdiction to review the underlying dismissal of

his § 2241 petition. See Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007). The district

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

January 17, 2012

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not *

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

Case: 11-60223 Document: 00511727042 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/17/2012
No. 11-60223

court determined that Potter had not established any basis for relief under Rule

60(b), and it denied him leave to proceed IFP on appeal, finding that he had not

shown the presence of a nonfrivolous appellate issue.

To proceed IFP, a litigant must be economically eligible, and his appeal

must not be frivolous. Carson v. Polley, 689 F.2d 562, 586 (5th Cir. 1982).

Potter’s IFP motion addresses only the claims he raised in his § 2241 petition

and does not address the district court’s determination that he had not shown

he was entitled to relief under Rule 60(b) or that there existed no nonfrivolous

appellate issue.

When an appellant fails to identify any error in the district court’s

analysis, it is the same as if the appellant had not appealed the decision.

Brinkmann v. Dall. Cnty. Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir.

1987). Although pro se briefs are afforded liberal construction, see Haines v.

Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972), even pro se litigants must brief arguments in

order to preserve them. Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993).

Potter has not shown that he will raise a nonfrivolous issue on appeal. 

Thus, his IFP motion is DENIED. See Carson, 689 F.2d at 586. Because the

appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

2

Case: 11-60223 Document: 00511727042 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/17/2012