alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32(a)

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Hendrx Corp. (Registrant) for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (Report), I, Robert De Costa, chief executive officer, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

|(1) |  | This 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 this Report fairly represents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Registrant.
|--- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

/s/ Robert De Costa

Robert De Costa

Chief Executive Officer

May 11, 2006

This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by Registrant for the purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. This certification shall not be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of this Report), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.

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

---
§ 51-11.15 Penalties. ( a ) An employee who discloses official records or information or gives testimony relating to official information, except as expressly authorized by the Committee, or as ordered by a Federal court after the Committee has had the opportunity to be heard, may face the penalties provided in 18 U.S.C. 641 and other applicable laws. Additionally, former Committee employees are subject to the restrictions and penalties of 18 U.S.C. 207 and 216.
( b ) A current Committee employee who testifies or produces official records and information in violation of this part may be subject to disciplinary action.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4480 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4480

 To expand the boundary of the Weir Farm National Historic Site in the 
                         State of Connecticut.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 24, 1994

 Mr. Franks of Connecticut (for himself, Mrs. Kennelly, Mr. Shays, Mr. 
Gejdenson, Mrs. Johnson of Connecticut, and Ms. DeLauro) introduced the 
    following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural 
                               Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To expand the boundary of the Weir Farm National Historic Site in the 
                         State of Connecticut.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Weir Farm National Historic Site 
Expansion Act of 1994''.

SEC. 2. PURPOSE.

    The purpose of this Act is to preserve the last remaining 
undeveloped parcels of the historic Weir Farm that remain in private 
ownership by including the parcels within the boundary of the Weir Farm 
National Historic Site.

SEC. 3. BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT.

    (a) Adjustment.--Section 4(b) of the Weir Farm National Historic 
Site Establishment Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 1171) is amended--
            (1) by striking out ``and'' at the end of paragraph (1);
            (2) by striking out the flush material below paragraph (2); 
        and
            (3) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(3) the approximately 2-acre parcel of land situated in 
        the town of Wilton, Connecticut, designated as lot 18 on a map 
        entitled `Revised Map of Section I, Thunder Lake at Wilton, 
        Connecticut, Scale 1''= 100', October 27, 1978, Ryan and Faulds 
        Land Surveyors, Wilton, Connecticut', that is on file in the 
        office of the town clerk of the town of Wilton, and therein 
        numbered 3673; and
            ``(4) the approximately 0.6-acre western portion of a 
        parcel of land situated in the town of Wilton, Connecticut, 
        designated as Tall Oaks Road on the map referred to in 
        paragraph (3).''.
    (b) General Depiction.--Section 4 of such Act, as amended by 
subsection (a), is further amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(c) General Depiction.--The parcels referred to in paragraphs (1) 
through (4) of subsection (b) are all as generally depicted on a map 
entitled `Boundary Map, Weir Farm National Historic Site', dated March 
1994. Such map shall be on file and available for public inspection in 
the appropriate offices of the National Park Service.''.

                                 <all>
```
Base from 1:250,000-scale U.S. Army Topographic Command (KCSX); revised by U.S. Geological Survey, 1969;

contours show elevation in feet.

Transverse Mercator Projection North American Datum 1927 (NAD27). 100,000 foot grid based on Arizona

coordinate system central and east zones. Universal Transverse Mercator grid, zone 12.

2500 0 2500 5000 7500 10000 12500

0 5

SCALE: 1:150,000

5000

Conductivity vs. Depth Fence Diagram Superimposed on a Topographic Map of the Fort Huachuca Area, Arizona

(An Enlarged Version of Text Figure 22)

By Jeff Wynn
FORM 32. Response to Notice to Advise of Scheduling Conflicts Form 32

March 2023 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

RESPONSE TO NOTICE TO ADVISE OF SCHEDULING CONFLICTS

Case Number:

Short Case Caption:

Party Name(s):

INFORMATION: The court uses this form to determine whether and when to 

schedule cases for oral argument. Arguing counsel may be changed later, but a 

motion to reschedule is required once the court schedules argument. Please plan in 

advance to adhere to the limit on the number of arguing counsel in Fed. Cir. R. 34(e).

Argument Waiver ☐ My party intends to waive oral argument.

NOTE: Filers checking this box must still complete the below sections. The court 

may still schedule this case for oral argument even if any party intends to 

waive argument. If scheduled, parties may still elect to waive argument using 

the response to notice of oral argument form.

Other Parties Representing Interests

☐ Counsel for another party will represent my party’s interests at oral argument

NOTE: If this box is checked, skip the remaining sections. Any argument date will 

be selected based on conflict dates for counsel arguing on behalf of your party.

Name of Expected Arguing Counsel

Dates Unavailable

Do you have dates of unavailability within the specific sessions identified by the 

court’s Notice to Advise of Scheduling Conflicts in your case?

☐ Yes ☐ No

If yes, attach a separate sheet listing up to ten dates of unavailability and 

include a statement showing good cause for each date. Dates without good 

cause or that do not pertain to arguing counsel (e.g., client conflicts) will not be 

accepted. The court will only accept dates for one counsel and only if that counsel 

has filed an entry of appearance. The Clerk’s Office will evaluate and note accepted 

or rejected conflict dates; counsel may contact the Clerk’s Office about re-filing if 

dates are rejected. See Fed. Cir. R. 34(d); Practice Notes to Rule 34.
FORM 32. Response to Notice to Advise of Scheduling Conflicts Form 32

March 2023

Potential Case Conflicts

Are there other pending cases before this court (regardless of case status) in which 

expected arguing counsel in this case also expects to argue?

☐ Yes ☐ No

If yes, attach a separate sheet listing those cases.

I certify the above information and any attached statement is complete and 

accurate. I further certify that I will update my notice should new conflicts arise 

or existing conflicts change.

Date: _________________ Signature:

Name:
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL 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 Quarterly Report of Openwave Systems Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), David C. Peterschmidt, as Chief Executive Officer of Openwave Systems Inc., certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that, to the best of his
knowledge, the Report 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 Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of Openwave Systems Inc.



|            |  |     |  |                                                            
|----------- |  | --- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------
|            |  | By: |  | /s/ David C. Peterschmidt                                  
|May 9, 2006 |  |     |  | David C. Peterschmidt President and Chief Executive Officer

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Openwave Systems Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended
March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Harold L. Covert, as Chief Financial Officer of Openwave Systems Inc., certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that, to the best of his knowledge, the Report 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 Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Openwave Systems Inc.



|            |  |     |  |                                                                      
|----------- |  | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------
|            |  | By: |  | /s/ Harold L. Covert                                                 
|May 9, 2006 |  |     |  | Harold L. Covert Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit
32.1





Section
1350


CERTIFICATION








The
undersigned officer hereby certifies that, to his knowledge, (1) the Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q of COMFORCE Corporation for the quarter ended June 29, 2008
as to which this Certification is an exhibit fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)) and (2) the information contained in such Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of COMFORCE Corporation.





Signed
August 7, 2008.








/s/
      John C. FanningJohn
      C. Fanning,Chairman
      and Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 23.1      Consent of McGladrey & Pullen, LLP




To the Board of Directors
North Central Bancshares, Inc.
Fort Dodge, Iowa



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the North Central Bancshares,
Inc. Registration Statement on Form S-8 (Registration #333-33089) as filed with
the Commission on August 7, 1998 and the Registration Statement on Form S-8
(Registration #333-82490) as filed with the Commission on February 11, 2002, of
our report dated January 30, 2004, which appears in the annual report on Form
10-K of North Central Bancshares, Inc. and subsidiaries for the year ended
December 31, 2003.



                                                /s/  McGladrey & Pullen, LLP
                                                McGladrey & Pullen, LLP





Des Moines, Iowa
March 22, 2004
No. 10-11293.

#### Sanchez-Godoy *v.*United States.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Exhibit 13





Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer


pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,


as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.




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 of Lumenis Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned hereby certify pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that to the best of our knowledge:





1.
The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





2
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




/s/ Dov OferDov OferChief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)




/s/ Aviram SteinhartAviram SteinhartSenior Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer

(Principal Financial Officer)





Date: April 6, 2010




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




* The foregoing certification is being furnished as an exhibit pursuant to the rules of Form 20-F and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and, accordingly, is not being filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission as part of the Form 20-F and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made before or after the date of the Form 20-F, irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing).
# Comments on: 21-2063: INCEPT LLC v. PALETTE LIFE SCIENCES, INC. [OPINION], Precedential
# Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed November 30, 2022. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________ Nos. 3D21-2235 & 3D21-2236 Lower Tribunal Nos. 19-1719, 19-2235

________________ 

### Maria Victoria Castro , Appellant,
vs. 

### Luz Marina Castro , Appellee.
Appeals from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Jorge E. Cueto, Judge. Ellis Law Group, P.L., and Jordan R. Hammer (Boca Raton), for appellant. Golden Glasko & Associates, P.A., and William H. Glasko, for appellee. Before EMAS, GORDO and BOKOR, JJ. PER CURIAM.2

Affirmed. Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372, 380 (2007) (“When opposing parties tell two different stories, one of which is blatantly contradicted by the record, so that no reasonable jury could believe it, a court should not adopt that version of the facts for purposes of ruling on a motion for summary judgment.”) see also Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 247–48 (1986) (“[T]he mere existence of some alleged factual dispute between the parties will not defeat an otherwise properly supported motion for summary judgment; the requirement is that there be no genuine issue of material fact.”).
#### § 304-3.12 Must I receive advance approval from my agency before I perform travel paid by a non-Federal source to attend a meeting?

Yes, you must receive advance approval from your agency before performing travel paid by a non-Federal source to attend a meeting except as provided in § 304-3.13.
I

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4457

To amend the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985

to provide special look-back treatment for emergency appropriations, and

for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 19, 1994

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas introduced the following bill; which was referred

jointly to the Committees on Government Operations and Rules

A BILL

To amend the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 to provide special look-back treatment

for emergency appropriations, and for other purposes.

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

3 SECTION 1. REPEAL OF EMERGENCY RULE.

4 Section 251(b)(2)(D) of the Balanced Budget and

5 Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 is repealed.

6 SEC. 2. SPECIAL LOOK-BACK TREATMENT FOR EMERGENCY

7 APPROPRIATIONS.

8 Section 251(a)(5) of the Balanced Budget and Emer9 gency Deficit Control Act of 1985 is amended by inserting
2

•HR 4457 IH

1 ‘‘(A)’’ before ‘‘If’’ and by adding at the end the following

2 new subparagraph:

3 ‘‘(B) If an appropriation that the President

4 designates as emergency requirements and the Con5 gress so designates in statute is enacted for the fis6 cal year in progress and that causes a breach within

7 a category for that year (after taking into account

8 any sequestration of amounts within that category),

9 the discretionary spending limits for the next fiscal

10 year shall be reduced by the amount or amounts of

11 that breach.’’.

Æ
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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

January 29, 2010 

p0129 

Order 

 

January 29, 2010 

139868 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 139868 

 COA: 293082 

Genesee CC: 08-022490-FH 

DAVID STANLEY STEWART, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 30, 2009 

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

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
§ 101.145 Interference to geostationary-satellites. These limitations are necessary to minimize the probability of harmful interference to reception in the bands 2655-2690 MHz, 5925-7075 MHz, and 12.7-13.25 GHz on board geostationary-space stations in the fixed-satellite service. ( a ) Stations authorized prior to July 1, 1976 in the band 2655-2690 MHz, which exceed the power levels in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section are permitted to operate indefinitely, provided that the operation of such stations does not result in harmful interference to reception in these bands on board geostationary space stations.
( b ) *2655 to 2690 MHz and 5925 to 7075 MHz.* No directional transmitting antenna utilized by a fixed station operating in these bands with EIRP greater than 35 dBW may be aimed within 2 degrees of the geostationary-satellite orbit, taking into account atmospheric refraction. However, exception may be made in unusual circumstances upon a showing that there is no reasonable alternative to the transmission path proposed. If there is no evidence that such exception would cause possible harmful interference to an authorized satellite system, said transmission path may be authorized on waiver basis where the maximum value of the equivalent isotropically radiated power (EIRP) does not exceed: ( 1 ) + 47 dBW for any antenna beam directed within 0.5 degrees of the stationary satellite orbit; or
( 2 ) + 47 to + 55 dBW, on a linear decibel scale (8 dB per degree) for any antenna beam directed between 0.5 degrees and 1.5 degrees of the stationary orbit.
( c ) *12.7 to 13.25 GHz.* No directional transmitting antenna utilized by a fixed station operating in this band with EIRP greater than 45 dBW may be aimed within 1.5 degrees of the geostationary-satellite orbit, taking into account atmospheric refraction.
( d ) Methods for calculating the azimuths to be avoided may be found in: CCIR Report No. 393 (Green Books), New Delhi, 1970; in “Radio-Relay Antenna Pointing for controlled Interference With Geostationary-Satellites” by C. W. Lundgren and A. S. May, Bell System Technical Journal, Vol. 48, No. 10, pp. 3387-3422, December 1969; and in “Geostationary Orbit Avoidance Computer Program” by Richard G. Gould, Common Carrier Bureau Report CC-7201, FCC, Washington, DC, 1972. This latter report is available through the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Springfield, VA 22151, in printed form (PB-211 500) or source card deck (PB-211 501).
[61 FR 26677, May 28, 1996, as amended at 65 FR 38330, June 20, 2000; 68 FR 12777, Mar. 17, 2003; 77 FR 54433, Sept. 5, 2012]
No. 11-9516.

#### Martel *v.*Lamarque, Warden.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Exhibit
      32.2








**Certification
      of Chief Financial Officer**





Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
      2002, the undersigned officer of Tanger Properties Limited Partnership (the
      “ Operating
      Partnership ”)
      hereby
      certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that:





(i)  the
      accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended
      December 31, 2005 (the “ Report ”)
      fully
      complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable,
      of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





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





Pursuant
      to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission, this
      certification is being furnished and is not deemed filed.





Date:
                March 3, 2006
            /s/
                Frank C. Marchisello, Jr.Frank
                C. Marchisello, Jr.
              Vice
                President, Treasurer & Assistant Secretary of Tanger GP Trust, Sole
                General Partner of the Registrant
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-20138

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JAMES CLARENCE BLACKWELL

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:07-CR-407-ALL

Before JOLLY, BARKSDALE, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, James Clarence Blackwell

presents arguments that he concedes are foreclosed by United States

v. Daugherty, 264 F.3d 513, 518 (5th Cir. 2001), which rejected a Commerce

Clause challenge to the felon-in-possession-of-a-firearm statute, 18 U.S.C.

§ 922(g) (2006). Appellant’s motion for summary disposition is GRANTED, and

the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

October 8, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 11-9396.

#### Bradley *v.*Booker, Warden.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.