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

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Gregory T. Lucier, Chief Executive Officer of Invitrogen Corporation (the
Registrant), do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on my knowledge:

(1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Registrant, to which this certification is attached as an exhibit (the Report), fully complies
with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and

(2) the information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.



|                   |  |  |  |  |  |                       |  |                        
|------------------ |  |  |  |  |  | --------------------- |  | -----------------------
|                   |  |  | 
|Dated: May 4, 2006 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ Gregory T. Lucier
|                   |  |  |  |  |  |                       |  | Gregory T. Lucier      
|                   |  |  |  |  |  |                       |  | Chief Executive Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating,
acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Invitrogen and will be retained by Invitrogen and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### SHAHEEN v ANSARA

Ohio Appeals, 6th Dist, Lucas Co

No 2274.

Decided Feb. 3, 1930

Wm. F. & H. Henry Miller, Toledo, for Shaheen.

C. J. Applegate and C. A. Hider, Toledo, for Ansara.

BY THE COURT

No question of importance arises in this case except on the weight of the evidence. So far as the right to recover on the promissory not is concerned, we think the jury was entirely justified in finding that the note was executed and on sufficient consideration and that the amount of it was justly due.

Salem Shaheen had married the sister of Mary Ansara and for many years Mary Ansara lived in the family of her brother-in-law and sister as a member of the family. She assisted generally about the housework. The record discloses no express contract between her and the defendant to pay for board and room rent. It has long been the settled law of Ohio that where a family relationship exists, and the claimant resides with the family as a member thereof, no implied contract *168will arise to pay for board and room rent, but an express contract must be established by clear and convincing evidence. After Salem Shaheen’s wife died, his sister-in-law, Mary Ansara, was the sole housekeeper and as such received monies which she expended for groceries and general household supplies.

The court cannot say that the verdict and judgment are against the weight of the evidence. We find no error in the ■ record prejudicial to the plaintiff in error.

Williams, Lloyd and Richards, JJ., concur.
# EUR-Lex - 31998D0486 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31998D0486

**98/486/EC: Council Decision of 29 July 1998 concerning the approval of a Memorandum of Understanding between the European Community and the Dominican Republic on import protection for milk powder in the Dominican Republic **

*
Official Journal L 218 , 06/08/1998 P. 0045 - 0045 *

COUNCIL DECISION of 29 July 1998 concerning the approval of a Memorandum of Understanding between the European Community and the Dominican Republic on import protection for milk powder in the Dominican Republic (98/486/EC)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 113 in conjunction with Article 228(2) first sentence thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,

Whereas the Dominican Republic has requested a rectification of its schedule under the Marrakech Agreement establishing the World Trade Organisation for eight tariff items;

Whereas only one of these items, milk powder, is of economic interest to the Community;

Whereas the Dominican Republic has offered a tariff quota of 32 000 tonnes of which 70 % would be reserved for the Community;

Whereas the Community will manage its share of the tariff quota according to a mechanism of export licences as established by Community regulations,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The Memorandum of Understanding between the European Community and the Dominican Republic on import protection for milk powder in the Dominican Republic is hereby approved on behalf of the Community.

The text of the Memorandum of Understanding is attached to this Decision.

Article 2

The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person empowered to sign the Memorandum of Understanding in order to bind the Community.

Article 3

The Commission shall, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 30 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 of 27 June 1968 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products (1), adopt detailed rules for the implementation of paragraph 3 of the Memorandum of Understanding as referred to in Article 1.

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

Done at Brussels, 29 July 1998.

For the Council

The President

W. SCHÜSSEL

(1) OJ L 148, 28. 6. 1968, p. 13. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1587/96. (OJ L 206, 16. 8. 1996, p. 21).
**EXHIBIT 32.2** **SECTION 1350    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**     In connection with the Annual Report of Vector Group Ltd. (the    “Company”) on    Form 10-K    for the year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the    Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the    “Report”), I, J. Bryant Kirkland III, 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, that, to 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/  J.    Bryant Kirkland III    J. Bryant Kirkland III    Vice President, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer     February 29, 2008
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

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 accompanying Annual Report of Kewaunee Scientific Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended ended April 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof, I, William A. Shumaker, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my
knowledge:



| | (1) | such Form 10-K of the Company for the period ended April 30, 2004, fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (15
U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | the information contained in such Form 10-K of the Company for the period ended April 30, 2004, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: July 16, 2004



/s/ William A. ShumakerWilliam A. ShumakerPresident and Chief Executive Officer
#### §§ 2205.141-2205.148 [Reserved]
§ 2205.135 Electronic and information technology requirements. ( a ) In accordance with section 508 and the standards published by the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board at 36 CFR part 1194, the agency shall ensure, absent an undue burden, that the electronic and information technology developed, procured, maintained, or used by the agency allows: ( 1 ) Individuals with disabilities who are agency employees or applicants to have access to and use of information and data that is comparable to the access to and use of information and data by agency employees who are individuals without disabilities; and
( 2 ) Individuals with disabilities who are members of the public seeking information or services from the agency to have access to and use of information and data that is comparable to the access to and use of information and data by such members of the public who are not individuals with disabilities.
( b ) When development, procurement, maintenance, or use of electronic and information technology that meets the standards at 36 CFR part 1194 would impose an undue burden, the agency shall provide individuals with disabilities covered by this section with the information and data involved by an alternative means of access that allows the individuals to use the information and data.
```

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
        (SUBSECTIONS (A) AND (B) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18,
                               UNITED STATES CODE)

     Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a)
and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of
the undersigned officers of InkSure Technologies Inc., a Delaware corporation
(the "Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that the
Annual Report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 (the "Form 10-KSB") of
the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the Form
10-KSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.

Dated: April 9, 2008                      /s/ Elie Housman
                                          ------------------
                                          Elie Housman, Chief Executive Officer

Dated: April 9, 2008                      /s/ Mickey Brandt
                                          -------------------
                                          Mickey Brandt, Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided by the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
```
#### MIGUEL JOSE OSSORIO v. UNITED STATES

[Ante, p. 168;

302 U. S. 713]

Petition for writ of certiorari *denied*by Supreme Court October 11, 1937.
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State

v. Ramsden, Slip Opinion No. 2022-Ohio-4483.]

NOTICE

This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an 

advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to 

promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 

South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or other 

formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be made before 

the opinion is published.

SLIP OPINION NO. 2022-OHIO-4483

THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLEE, v. RAMSDEN, APPELLANT.

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 

may be cited as State v. Ramsden, Slip Opinion No. 2022-Ohio-4483.]

Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed on the authority of State v. Nicholas.

(No. 2021-1299―Submitted December 6, 2022―Decided December 16, 2022.)

APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Clinton County,

No. CA2020-11-016, 2021-Ohio-3071.

_________________

{¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed on the authority of 

State v. Nicholas, __ Ohio St.3d __, 2022-Ohio-4276, __ N.E.3d __.

O’CONNOR, C.J., and DEWINE, STEWART, and BRUNNER, JJ.

KENNEDY, FISCHER, and DONNELLY,JJ., would dismiss the appeal as having 

been improvidently accepted.

_________________

Timothy Young, Ohio Public Defender, and Timothy B. Hackett, Assistant 

Public Defender, for appellant, Clayton Ramsden.
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

2

_________________
§ 1912.9 Representation on section 7(b) committees. ( a ) Any advisory committee appointed by the Assistant Secretary under section 7(b) of the Act shall contain the following: ( 1 ) At least one member who is a designee of the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare;
( 2 ) At least one member who is qualified by experience and affiliation to present the viewpoint of the employers involved, and at least one member who is similarly qualified to present the viewpoint of the employees involved. There shall be an equal number of representatives of employers and employees involved; and
( 3 ) At least one representative of State health and safety agencies.
( b ) The advisory committee may include such other persons as the Assistant Secretary may appoint who are qualified by knowledge and experience to make a useful contribution to the work of the committee, including one or more representatives of professional organizations of technicians or professionals specializing in occupational safety or health and one or more persons of nationally recognized standards-producing organizations, but the number of persons so appointed shall not exceed the number of persons appointed as representatives of Federal and State agencies.
( c ) Each committee shall consist of not more than 15 members.
( d ) The representation in the Advisory Committee on Construction Safety and Health is described in § 1912.3.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

EDWARD P. LUECK,

Petitioner,

v. Case No. 5D17-1258

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Respondent.

________________________________/

Opinion filed June 30, 2017

Petition for Belated Appeal

A Case of Original Jurisdiction. 

Edward P. Lueck, Blountstown, pro se. 

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General 

Tallahassee, and, Kaylee Tatman, 

Assistant Attorney General, Daytona 

Beach, for Respondent. 

PER CURIAM. 

The petition for belated appeal is granted. A copy of this opinion shall be filed with 

the trial court and be treated as the notice of appeal from the May 24, 2016 judgments 

and sentences in Case No. 2013-CF-305418, in the Circuit Court in and for Volusia 

County, Florida. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(c)(6)(D). 

PETITION GRANTED.

COHEN, C.J., BERGER, LAMBERT, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 10.11






Exhibit 10.11




	 	 	 
	

	 	ARIZONA HEALTH CARE COST
CONTAINMENT SYSTEM ADMINISTRATION

DIVISION OF BUSINESS AND FINANCE

SECTION A: CONTRACT






	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	1. AMENDMENT

	 	2. CONTRACT
	 	3. EFFECTIVE DATE OF
	 	4. PROGRAM
	NUMBER:

	 	NO.:

	 	AMENDMENT:
	 	 
	               2

	 	YH09-0001-04
	 	          January 15, 2009
	 	DHCM — ACUTE






5. CONTRACTOR’S NAME AND ADDRESS:



Health Choice Arizona

410 N. 44TH Street, Suite 900

Phoenix, AZ 85008




6. PURPOSE
OF AMENDMENT: To amend Section D.



7. THE CONTRACT REFERENCED ABOVE IS AMENDED AS FOLLOWS:




	 	A.	 	Added to Paragraph 58, Coordination of Benefits, the following
language to the end of the paragraph:
	 
	 	 	 	AHCCCS has developed a process and agreement with Blue Cross Blue Shield of Arizona
(BCBSAZ) to receive both historic and current BCBSAZ coverage data.
	 
	 	 	 	Based on this information, AHCCCS will be submitting claims on behalf of AHCCCS
Contractors for services reimbursed for dates of services 1/15/06 through 3/31/08.
From the monies recovered, AHCCCS will disburse 50% to the Contractor and 50% to the
Agency for recoveries of non-TWG, non-PPC, non-Reinsurance related claims. For these
claims, AHCCCS will withhold 12% of the disbursement to the Contractor to compensate
the vendor recovering the funds. AHCCCS will retain 100% of any BCBSAZ recoveries
related to PPC, TWG and Reinsurance-related claims. The Contractor is restricted
from recouping any funds for BCBSAZ liability for the period of 1/15/06- 3/31/08.
However, the Contractor is responsible for coordination of benefits from 4/1/08
forward.





By signing this contract, the Contractor is agreeing to the terms of the contract.



	 	 	 
	NOTE: Please sign and date all copies and
then return one executed original to:
	 	Mark Held
	 
	 	Sr. Procurement Specialist
	 
	 	AHCCCS Contracts
	 
	 	701 E. Jefferson St., MD 5700
	 
	 	Phoenix, AZ 85034






 


 









 





8. EXCEPT AS PROVIDED FOR HEREIN, ALL TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT NOT HERETOFORE
CHANGED AND/OR AMENDED REMAIN UNCHANGED AND IN FULL EFFECT.



IN WITNESS WHEREOF THE PARTIES HERETO SIGN THEIR NAMES IN
AGREEMENT




	 	 	 
	9. SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED
REPRESENTATIVE:

	 	10. SIGNATURE OF AHCCCSA CONTRACTING
OFFICER:

	 
	 	 
	/s/ Carolyn Rose

	 	/s/ Michael Veit
	 	 	 
	TYPED NAME: CAROLYN ROSE

	 	MICHAEL VEIT
	TITLE: CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

	 	CONTRACTS & PURCHASING
ADMINISTRATOR
	DATE: 1-20-2009

	 	DATE: 1/12/2009
#### SEBEL etc v GUILFOYLE etc

Ohio Appeals, 1st Dist, Hamilton Co

No 3691.

Decided May 12, 1930

. Eugene & Sidney Adler and Bates, Stewart & Skirvin, all of Cincinnati, for Sebel

Matthews & Matthews and Anthony P. Conlon, all of Cincinnati, for Guilfoyle.

*428CUSHING, PJ.

The only question for the consideration of this Court is whether 8621 GC, applies to agreements made between real estate brokers with reference to the payment of commission.

The question before this court was considered by the Supreme Court of Ohio in the case of Cohen v. Spitz Co., 121 Ohio St., 1 (166 N. E. 804). In that case the Court held that the statute applied not only to oral agreements between owner and broker, but .also to those made between the broker and a third person.

Upon authority of the case of Cohen v. Spitz Co., supra, the judgment of the court of Common Pleas will be reversed, and the cause will be remanded to that court with instructions to enter judgment in favor of Samuel Sebel.

Ross and Hamilton, JJ, concur.
<PAGE>

Exhibit 21

                  THE LACLEDE GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

                       SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

                                                                    PERCENT OF
                                                                   VOTING STOCK
                                                                      OWNED
                                                                   ------------

Subsidiaries of The Laclede Group, Inc. (Parent)

   Laclede Gas Company                                                 100%
   Laclede Pipeline Company                                            100%
   Laclede Investment LLC*                                             100%
   Laclede Development Company**                                       100%
   SM&P Utility Resources, Inc.                                        100%


<FN>
  *Subsidiary Company of Laclede Investment LLC
    Laclede Energy Resources, Inc.                                     100%
   Subsidiary Company of Laclede Energy Resources, Inc.
    Laclede Gas Family Services, Inc.                                  100%
<FN>
 **Subsidiary Company of Laclede Development Company
    Laclede Venture Corp.                                              100%


All of the above corporations have been organized under the laws of the
State of Missouri.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**Certification of the Chief Financial Officer Pursuantto Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

I,Herbert Lindo, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the AnnualReport of Kenilworth Systems Corporation on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in suchAnnual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects thefinancial condition and results of operations of Kenilworth SystemsCorporation.

 
| By:    | /s/  Herbert Lindo       |   |
|--------|--------------------------|--------|
| Name:  | Herbert  Lindo           |
| Title: | Chief  Financial Officer |
| Date:  | March 24,  2009     |

 

***Remainder of page intentionallyleft blank***

 

----
Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record

Plant ID 04557

Removed 

from Public 

(Non-CBI) 

Docket1

Copyright 

Flag2File Name3

Description

x 04557\04557_PartA.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 04557\04557_PartE.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 04557\04557_PartH.xls Plant submitted survey file

04557\Certification Statement Plant ID_04557.PDF Plant certification statement

x 04557\Supporting Documentation\04557_MAP-1 Fort Dodge Station.PDF Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 04557\Supporting Documentation\WB-1 Fort Dodge Station.PDF Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 04557\04557_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

04557\04557_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist

1

 Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database . 

2

 Copyright documents are available from the docket. 

3

 No hardcopy log is included for this plant as no hardcopy materials were received.
#### In the Matter of the Estate of Katherine H. Brown, Deceased.

Submitted June 7,1937;

decided June 11, 1937.

Motion for a reargument denied. Opinion modified so as to state that there was no question raised regarding domicile or residence in New York State. (See 274 N. Y. 10.)
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-60083 

Conference Calendar

__________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RICHARD TIMOTHY ROBINSON,

a/k/a Richard Thomas Robinson,

a/k/a Richard Timothy Robinson,

and a/k/a Richard T. Cody,

 Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 3:94-CR-98-BN

- - - - - - - - - -

June 27, 1996

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Court-appointed counsel for Richard Timothy Robinson has

filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S.

738 (1967), and we have independently reviewed the brief and the

record and found no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, counsel is

excused from further responsibilities herein and the APPEAL IS

DISMISSED.