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  Quarterly  Report  of  Tonga  Capital  Corp  (the
"Company")  on Form  10-QSB/A for the period  ending June 30, 2006 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report").  I,
Barent W. Cater, President and Chief Executive Officer of the company,  certify,
pursuant  to 18 USC  Section  1350,  as adopted  pursuant  to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief.

        (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/ Barent W. Cater
                                         --------------------------------
                                           Barent W. Cater, President and Chief
Dated: April 10, 2007                       Executive Officer
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markm an Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

, Justices

I, Corbin R. D avis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_________________ ________________________ Clerk September 4, 2012

d0827 

# Order

September 4, 2012

144877

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 144877

COA: 301482

Wayne CC: 10

- 000967

- FH

RICHARD LEE CURRIE,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court , the application for leave to appeal the February 23, 2012

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
<PAGE>


                     Consent of Anders, Minkler & Diehl LLP

We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Amended Annual Report on 
Form 10-K/A, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission by NHP 
Incorporated (NHP) of our reports dated February 3, 6, 9, 11, 14, 15 and 20, 
1995 with respect to the audits of these Partnerships:

<TABLE>
    <S>                                           <C>

    Pershing Waterman Phase I      (DB I)          Caroline Associates I
    PW III Associates              (DB II)         Columbus Square Associates I
    PW IV Associates               (DB III)        Columbus Square Associates II
    PW V Associates                (DB IV)         Savoy Court Associates
    PW VI Associates               (DB V)          Wigar, Ltd. (Winter Garden)

</TABLE>


for the year ended December 31, 1994, and the incorporation by reference of 
such reports into NHP's Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-11933), 
NHP's Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-11863), NHP's Registration 
Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-11917), NHP's Registration Statement on Form 
S-8 (No. 333-11857), and NHP's Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 
333-08137).


/s/ Anders, Minkler & Diehl LLP


St. Louis, Missouri
October 3, 1997
Editorial Note on Part 172
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 172 appear at 61 FR 14482, Apr. 2, 1996; 66 FR 56035, Nov. 6, 2001; 66 FR 66742, Dec. 27, 2001; 68 FR 15355, Mar. 31, 2003; 70 FR 40880, July 15, 2005; 70 FR 67651, Nov. 8, 2005; 70 FR 72074, Dec. 1, 2005; and 81 FR 49896, July 29, 2016.

§ 172.816 Methyl glucoside-coconut oil ester. Methyl glucoside-coconut oil ester may be safely used in food in accordance with the following conditions: ( a ) It is the methyl glucoside-coconut oil ester having the following specifications: Acid number: 10-20 Hydroxyl number: 200-300 pH (5% aqueous): 4.8-5.0 Saponification number: 178-190
( b ) It is used or intended for use as follows: ( 1 ) As an aid in crystallization of sucrose and dextrose at a level not to exceed the minimum quantity required to produce its intended effect.
( 2 ) As a surfactant in molasses at a level not to exceed 320 parts per million in the molasses.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

                       SUBSIDIARIES OF VISIO CORPORATION


ENTITY                                               JURISDICTION
------                                               ------------

Visio International Incorporated                     Washington
Visio Australia Pty Ltd                              Australia
Visio Canada Inc.                                    Canada
Visio SARL                                           France
Visio GmbH                                           Germany
Visio International Limited                          Ireland
Visio S.r.l.                                         Italy
Visio Japan K.K.                                     Japan
Visio Korea Ltd.                                     Korea
Visio Business Graphics B.V.                         Netherlands
Visio Singapore Pte Ltd.                             Singapore
Visio Business Graphics (Proprietary) Limited        South Africa
Visio Business Graphics GmbH                         Switzerland
Visio International (UK) Limited                     United Kingdom
Visio Bahamas Limited                                The Bahamas
§ 520.1450a Morantel tartrate bolus. ( a ) *Specifications.* Each bolus contains 2.2 grams morantel tartrate equivalent to 1.3 grams of morantel base.
( b ) *Sponsor.* See No. 054771 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter.
( c ) *Related tolerances.* See § 556.425 of this chapter.
( d ) *Conditions of use* — ( 1 ) *Amount.* One bolus per 500 pounds of body weight (4.4 milligrams per pound of body weight) as a single oral dose. Boluses may be divided in half for more accurate dosing as follows: up to 325 pounds, 1 ⁄ 2 bolus; 326 to 600 pounds, 1 bolus; 601 to 900 pounds, 11 ⁄ 2 boluses; and 901 to 1,200 pounds, 2 boluses.
( 2 ) *Indications for use.* For removal and control of mature gastrointestinal nematode infections of cattle including stomach worms (*Haemonchus* spp., *Ostertagia* spp., *Trichostrongylus* spp.), worms of the small intestine (*Cooperia* spp., *Trichostrongylus* spp., *Nematodirus* spp.), and worms of the large intestine (*Oesophagostomum radiatum*).
( 3 ) *Limitations.* Conditions of constant worm exposure may require retreatment in 2 to 4 weeks. Consult your veterinarian before administering to severely debilitated animals and for assistance in the diagnosis, treatment, and control of parasitism. Do not treat within 14 days of slaughter.
[46 FR 50949, Oct. 16, 1981. Redesignated at 49 FR 47831, Dec. 7, 1984, and amended at 51 FR 9005, Mar. 17, 1986; 78 FR 28825, May 20, 2014]
Exhibit 31.1
 
 Certification:
 
 I, Gary D. Engle, certify that:
 
 1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Semele Group Inc;
 
 2.  Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;
 
 3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;
 
 4.  The registrants other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 
 a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
 
 b)  evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
 
 
 5.  The registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controls over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 
 a)  all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
 
 b)  any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal controls over financial reporting.
 
 6.  The registrants other certifying officers and I have indicated in this quarterly report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.
 
 
 
 /s/ Gary D. Engle
 Gary D. Engle
 Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
 (Principal Executive Officer)
 August, 23, 2004
<PAGE>   1
                                  EXHIBIT 23.3

                      CONSENT OF PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

                We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in this
Registration Statement on Form S-8 of our report dated April 24, 1998, except
for the first paragraph of Note 9 which is as of August 27, 1999, relating to
the financial statements of Arcxel Technologies, Inc., which appears in Vixel
Corporation's Registration Statement on Form S-1.





PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Seattle, Washington
September 28, 1999
UNITED
STATES


SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Washington,
D.C. 20549


______________





FORM
10-Q/A


Amendment
No. 1


(MARK
      ONE)x
            QUARTERLY
      REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT
      OF 1934For
      the quarterly period ended March 31, 2009
              or
            TRANSITION
      REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT
      OF 1934For
      the transition period from to





Commission
File Number: 0-15930


___________________





SOUTHWALL
TECHNOLOGIES INC.


(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)





Delaware
              (State
      or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
            94-2551470
              (I.R.S.
      Employer Identification Number)3788
      Fabian Way, Palo Alto, California
              (Address
      of principal executive offices)
            94303
              (Zip
      Code)





Registrant's
telephone number, including area code:(650) 798-1200


___________________





Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to
be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the
registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to
such filing requirements for the past
90 days. Yes      No 





Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated
filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check
One).





Large
accelerated filer    Accelerated filer
   Non-accelerated filer 





Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange


Act).   Yes
    No 





As of
March 31, 2009, there were 28,706,222 shares of the registrant's Common Stock
outstanding.










EXPLANTORY
NOTE





We are
amending our Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009 to revise our Section
302 certifications to include the introductory language of paragraph 4 and the
language of paragraph 4(b) and to conform the wording exactly to that required
by Item 601(31) of Regulation S-K.





SIGNATURES





Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has
duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto
duly authorized.





Dated:  
      November 24, 2009Southwall
      Technologies Inc.By:
            /s/
      Dennis F. CapovillaDennis
      F. CapovillaChief
      Executive OfficerBy:
            /s/
      Mallorie BurakMallorie
      BurakChief
      Accounting Officer
#### Davis et al. *v.*Landis

[No. 17,146.

Filed March 17, 1944.

Rehearing denied April 27, 1944.

Transfer denied May 23, 1944.]

*666
      *Robert L. Smith,*of Portland, and *Bonham & Emswiller,*of Hartford City, for appellants.

*Francis A. Shaw*and *F. Clayton Mansfield,*both of Muncie, *Victor Simmons,*of Hartford City, and *Roscoe D. Wheat,*of Portland, for appellee.

Flanagan, J.

On December 20, 1941, appellants were in possession of certain real estate in Blackford County, Indiana, which they were buying on contract. On that date they borrowed $1300 from appellee. They gave appellee a promissory note in the usual form, due in thirty days, and for the purpose of securing the debt assigned to him their real estate contract. The assignment provided that if the debt should not be paid at maturity the contract should become the absolute property of appellee upon service of notice by him upon appellants and delivery to them of their note duly can-celled. The note was not paid at maturity, appellee served the notice and delivered the note properly can-celled and brought this action for possession of the involved real estate.

Issues were formed; trial was to the court which *667found, the facts specially as we have stated them in substance; and judgment was rendered for appellee.

Appellants contend that the assignment of the real estate contract amounted to a mortgage only and foreclosure was therefore a prerequisite to any right on appellee’s part to possession of the real estate.

The note contained an unconditional promise to pay. Appellants did not have the option to pay or not as they pleased and the transaction could not therefore amount to a conditional sale. Voss v. *Eller*(1886), 109 Ind. 260, 10 N. E. 74.

The transaction could not constitute a pledge because personal property only can be the subject of a pledge. 41 Am. Jur., p. 586, § 7; 49 C. J., p. 902, § 18; Restatement of the Law of Security, p. 5, § 1; and no personal property is here involved. The contract which was, assigned created in appellants an equitable interest in the real estate described therein. *Burham*v. *Burk*(1884), 96 Ind. 270; *Bucher*v. *Young*(1932), 94 Ind. App. 586, 158 N. E. 581. This equitable interest in real estate was the security given for the debt. It necessarily follows that the assignment of the real estate contract amounted to a mortgage, *Wilson*v. *Fatout*(1873), 42 Ind. 52; 66 C. J., p. 1077, § 866, and cases cited; 36 Am. Jur., p. 750, § 126, which could only be enforced through proper foreclosure proceedings.

Judgment reversed with instructions to the trial court to restate its conclusions of law in conformity with this opinion.

Note. — Reported in 53 N. E. (2d) 544.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

          - 26 CFR Part 301
          - [REG-111833-99]
          - RIN 1545-AX46

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

# ACTION:

Cancellation of notice of public hearing on proposed rulemaking.

# SUMMARY:

This document cancels a public hearing on proposed regulation relating to awards of administrative costs and attorneys fees under section 7430 to conform to amendments made in the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 and the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998.

# DATES:

The public hearing, originally scheduled for March 10, 2010 at 10 a.m. is cancelled.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Regina Johnson of the Publications and Regulations Branch, Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure and Administration) at (202) 622-7180 (not a toll-free number).

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    A notice of proposed rulemaking and notice of public hearing that appeared in the                     **Federal Register**                     on Wednesday, November 25, 2009 (74 FR 61589) announced that a public hearing was scheduled for March 10, 2010 at 10 a.m. in the IRS Auditorium, Internal Revenue Building, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. The subject of the public hearing is under section 7430 of the Internal Revenue Code.                

The public comment period for these regulations expired on February 8, 2010. Outlines of topics to be discussed at the hearing were due on February 10, 2010. The notice of proposed rulemaking and notice of public hearing instructed those interested in testifying at the public hearing to submit a request to speak, and an outline of the topics to be addressed. As of Tuesday, February 23, 2010, no one has requested to speak. Therefore, the public hearing scheduled for March 10, 2010, is cancelled.

LaNita Van Dyke,

Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief Counsel.

[FR Doc. 2010-4122 Filed 2-26-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
In response to this Court’s letter requesting the fee for filing a petition for writ of 1

mandamus, Relator filed his unsworn declaration of inability to pay substantially complying

with Rule 20.1(b) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Higgins v. Randall

County Sheriff’s Office, 193 S.W.3d 898, 899-900 (Tex. 2006).

NO. 07-08-0350-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL C

SEPTEMBER 11, 2008

______________________________

IN RE RUBIO ROBERTO MONTENEGRO, RELATOR

_______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, Rubio Roberto Montenegro, an inmate proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis, seeks a writ of mandamus to compel Caroline Woodburn, the Potter County 1

District Clerk, to perform her ministerial duty regarding his notice to sue certain plaintiffs

for wrongful imprisonment. He alleges, specifically, that she failed to endorse his petition

with a file number, the date and time that it was filed, and affix her official signature thereto.

We dismiss for want of jurisdiction.
2

This Court has the authority to issue writs of mandamus against a judge of a district

or county court in our district and all writs necessary to enforce our jurisdiction. Tex. Gov't

Code Ann. § 22.221(b) (Vernon Supp. 2004). In order for a district clerk to fall within our

jurisdictional reach, it must be established that the issuance of the writ of mandamus is

necessary to enforce our jurisdiction. In re Coronado, 980 S.W.2d 691, 692-93

(Tex.App.–San Antonio 1998, no pet.). Relator has not demonstrated that the exercise of

our mandamus authority against the Potter County District Clerk is appropriate to enforce

our jurisdiction. Consequently, we have no authority to issue a writ of mandamus against

the Potter County District Clerk.

Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Patrick A. Pirtle

 Justice
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 874 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 874

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                    September 19, 2006.
Whereas older Americans have made countless contributions to the strength of the 
        United States;
Whereas older Americans include members of the ``Greatest Generation'' who 
        fought in World War I, World War II, the Korean War, and other military 
        conflicts, and have sacrificed at home and abroad to keep America free;
Whereas in the United States and much of the world, older individuals throughout 
        history have been viewed with respect, honor, and dignity as sources of 
        wisdom and experience;
Whereas this year the first of the ``baby boom'' generation turn age 60, adding 
        to the 49 million Americans who are age 60 or older, including over 5 
        million who are older than age 85; and
Whereas the talent and experience of older Americans can be utilized to meet 
        community needs in critical areas such as education, health, community-
        based and faith-based social services, and homeland security: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) recognizes the importance of older Americans to the Nation's 
        past and future;
            (2) encourages multigenerational activities providing opportunities 
        for children and students to listen and learn from older Americans; and
            (3) urges all Americans to honor and respect older Americans, and to 
        offer appreciation for their contributions to the strength of the United 
        States.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```