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



Certification of Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to Section 906 of the

Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



In connection with this Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K/A
of Comarco, Inc., I, Thomas A. Franza, Chief Executive Officer of Comarco, Inc., certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



| | 1. | This Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K/A 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 presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Comarco, Inc. to which it relates.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |  |  |                                                                 |  |  |  | 
|-------------------- |  |  |  | --------------------------------------------------------------- |  |  |  | 
|Date: April 11, 2005 |  |  |  | /s/    THOMAS A.
FRANZAThomas A. Franza
Chief Executive Officer



The foregoing
Certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission as part of the accompanying Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K/A. A signed original copy of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Page 1 of 2

BEE UEUA-I0
LEGAL PROCESSING DIVISION, PEC MBEUA AUG 5 2010
PUBLICATION & REGULA®

BRANCH,

As of: August 05, 2010

PUBLIC Status: Posted

SUBMISSION ere arise
Comments Due: August 16, 2010

Submission Type: Web

Docket: IRS-2010-0010
Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage Rules Relating to Status as a Grandfathe-ed
Health Plan Under the Patient Protection and Afforable Care Act

Comment On: IRS-2010-0010-0001
Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage: Interim Final Rules for Relating to Status as
a Grandfathered Health Plan under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

Document: IRS-2010-0010-0023
Comment on FR Doc # 2010-14488

Submitter Information

Name: Lisa A Walker
Address:

Newport Beach, CA,
Submitter's Representative: Lisa Walker
Organization: International Imaging Industry Assoc.
Government Agency Type: Federal

General Comment

August 4, 2010

Office of Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight
Department of Health and Human Services

Room 445-G Hubert H. Humphrey Building

200 Independence Ave. SW

Washington, DC 20201

Re: OCIIO-991-IFC, The Interim Final Rules for Group Health Plans and Health Insurance
Coverage Relating to Status as a Grandfathered Health Plan Under the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act

On behalf of the International Imaging Industry Association (13A), I appreciate the opportunity to
comment on the Interim Final Rules regarding grandfathered health plans under the Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act. I3A is a section 501(c)(6) corporate membership organization
of mare than 500 photo imaging industry executives and partners.

We are small sized tax-exempt organization with two full time employees, and have many
obstacles to obtaining good, affordable health insurance coverage.

https://fdms.erulemaking.net/fdms-web-agency/component/submitterInfoCoverPage?Call=P... 8/5/2010


Page 2 of 2

However, because the benefits of the Exchange will not be realized until 2014, most associations
will continue to experience annual cost increases and lack of control over actual coverage until
2014. As such, the grandfathering of their existing coverage is extremely important, especially
prior to the establishment of a working Exchange system.

We are greatly concerned that the grandfather provisions outlined in the Interim Final Rules are
too restrictive and will cause many tax-exempt organizations like ours to lose the grandfathering
they expected. If forced to consider options of a non-grandfathered plan before we have the
benefit of an Exchange, we are concerned that we may be priced out of the market and may even
have to drop coverage ~- something we do not want to do and a bizarre result given the intert of
health care reform.

We would suggest for the transition period before the Exchange is established, that small
employers be allowed to make cost saving changes. This could help these organizations adjust
and preserve coverage in anticipation of greater reform.

https://fdms,erulemaking.netv/fdms-web-agency/component/submitterInfoCoverPage?Call=P... 8/5/2010
AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE
ALPHARMA INC. 2005 SUPPLEMENTAL SAVINGS PLAN





The Alpharma Inc. 2005 Supplemental Savings Plan (the "Plan") is hereby amended effective as of June 22, 2006, as follows:



1.	Section 8.4 of the Plan is hereby amended by deleting the first paragraph thereof and replacing it with the following:

"The Company, acting through its Board, may amend, modify or suspend the Plan, in whole or in part, except that no amendment, modification or suspension shall have any retroactive effect to reduce any amounts allocated to a Participant's account.



Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Board has delegated to the executive management Benefits Committee the authority to adopt administrative amendments to the Plan, provided, that such amendments do not involve a change in the costs or liability of the Company or alter the benefits payable thereunder.  The Board has delegated to the Compensation Committee the authority to adopt all other amendments to the Plan, provided, that such amendments do not significantly increase or decrease benefit amounts, or  are  required  to be adopted by the Board under the Code or the regulations thereunder.  The Board retains the authority to adopt amendments to the Plan that significantly increase or decrease benefit amounts, or are required to be adopted by the Board under the Code or regulations thereunder.



The Company, acting through its Board, may terminate the Plan only to the extent permitted under Section 409A of the Code, the regulations thereunder and other guidance issued by the IRS, including but not limited to the following:"



*	*	*

|___/s/ George P. Rose______________ | October 23, 2006
|----------------------------------- | ----------------
|ALPHARMA INC.                       | DATE
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 264 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                      October 12, 2001.
    Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order 
without intervention of any point of order to consider in the House the bill 
(H.R. 2975) to combat terrorism, and for other purposes. The bill shall be 
considered as read for amendment. In lieu of the amendment recommended by the 
Committee on the Judiciary now printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature 
of a substitute consisting of the text of H.R. 3108 shall be considered as 
adopted. All points of order against the bill, as amended, are waived. The 
previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, to 
final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate on the 
bill, as amended, equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking 
minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary; and (2) one motion to 
recommit with or without instructions.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
Page 1 ',1 " 

~E G-IIrq I L -J ~ 

LEGAL PROCESSING DIVISION 


PUBLICATION It REGULATIONS 


BRANCH 


As of: August 20, 2010 

Received: August 09, 2010 PUBLIC Status: Posted

Posted: August 20, 2010 

Tracking No. 80b2c72c SUBMISSION Comments Due: August 16, 2010 

Submission Type: Web 

Docket: IRS-2010-0010 

Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage Rules Relating to Status as a Grandfathe-ed 

Health Plan Under the Patient Protection and Afforable Care Act 

Comment On: IRS-2010-0010-0001 

Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage: Interim Final Rules for Relating to Status as 

a Grandfathered Health Plan under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 

Document: IRS-201O-001O-0285 

Comment on FR Doc # 2010-14488 

------------------------------------------------------------------...... 


Submitter Information 

Name: Ray Sahag 

Address: 

Mandeville, 

------------------------------------------------------------------......
 , 

General Comment 

08/09/2010 

Office of Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight 


Department of Health and Human Services 


Attention: OCIIO-9991-IFC 

P.O. Box 8016 


Baltimore, MD 21244-1850 


Re: Interim Final Rule for Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage Relating to Status 

as a Grandfathered Health Plan Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 

As a consumer I wish to take this opportunity to formally comment (In 

the interim final rule regarding health plans and "grandfather" status (Document ID IRS-201 D0010-0001). 

I believe the consumer protections included as part of the new health care law are vitally 

important and should be extended to as many people as possible. Accordingly, every effort 

should be made to increase the number of individuals covered by the Patient Protection and 

Affordable Care Act (PPACA) via the above regulations. The triggers or conditions that would 

extend these protections to consumers under currently existing "grandfathered" plans shoulc' not 

be weakened or reduced in any way. I specifically support the position and detailed comments 

offered by the American Chiropractic Association with respect to the implementation of these 

regulations. 

https:llfdms.erulemaking.net!fdms-web-agency/ component! submitterlnfoCoverPage?Call=... 8/20/2010
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 77 Agreed to House (ATH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 77

 Designating minority membership on certain standing committees of the 
                                 House.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 6, 2001

Mr. Frost submitted the following resolution; which was considered and 
                               agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Designating minority membership on certain standing committees of the 
                                 House.

    Resolved, That the following named Members be, and are hereby, 
elected to the following standing committee of the House of 
Representatives:
    Committee on Standards of Official Conduct: Mr. Sabo of Minnesota, 
Mr. Pastor of Arizona, and Ms. Lofgren of California.
                                 <all>
```
#### C. A. HEIL, Jr., PROSECUTOR, v. THE MAYOR AND BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE CITY OF WILDWOOD, NEW JERSEY, RESPONDENTS.

Argued October 4, 1932

Decided March 6, 1933.

*172Before Justices Paekee and Lloyd.

For the prosecutor, *William Elmer Brown, Jr.*

For the respondents, *Harry Tenenbaum*and *Carl Kisselman.*

Pee Ctjkiam.

Originally a rule to show cause why a writ of *certiorari*should not issue, by stipulation of the parties it was agreed that the writ issue and that the court dispose of the case finally on the record as presented on the return of the rule.

Heil is the city clerk of Wildwood and his salary has been $3,500 per annum.. By resolution of the mayor and board of commissioners the salary was reduced to $1,200. The writ brings up this resolution. Two grounds are urged for setting it aside, (1) that there is no authority in the law for the respondent to fix a salary of any of its officials by resolution, the statute requiring that it shall be done by ordinance, and (2) that the resolution is not in good faith, but was for the purpose of forcing the prosecutor out of his office.

While not impressed with the second point, we think the first makes necessary the setting aside of the resolution in so far as it affects the salary of the prosecutor. The law seems to be clear on the subject. The Home Rule act (chapter 152 of the laws of 1917, page 350) provides in the first section of article 13 for the fixing of salaries by ordinance, and chapter 162, laws of 1929, page 291, seems to prescribe the same method. The latter statute we considered in *Adams*v. *Plainfield,*109 *N. J. L.*282; 161 *Atl. Rep.*647.

As to the second point, the straitened financial condition of most municipalities at this time is a matter of common knowledge as well as the need for drastic action in curtailment of municipal expenses. While the reduction in the case of the prosecutor is very large, there seem to be other reductions approaching the same sort of a cut.

*173Certain speeches of one of the members of the municipal board are laid hold of by the prosecutor to indicate that there was bad motive inducing the severe reduction of the prosecutor’s salary, but we think such motive is not shown by the proofs. Strong efforts were made in the fall election to displace the old city government and in doing so promises to reduce municipal expenses in the event of election of this candidate were given, but we can see nothing in this which indicates animosity or malicious purpose toward the prosecutor or that the reduction was not made in good faith.

The resolution will be set aside, but on the single ground that it was a resolution and not an ordinance.
<PAGE>





                                                                    Exhibit 23.2


                          CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement 
(Form S-8, No. 33-48370) pertaining to the Shelby Williams Industries, Inc. 
1992 Key Employees' Incentive Stock Option Plan and the related Prospectus 
and Registration Statement (Form S-8, No. 33-59705) pertaining to the Shelby 
Williams Industries, Inc. Directors' Stock Option Plan and the related 
Prospectus of our report dated January 29, 1998, with respect to the 
consolidated financial statements of Shelby Williams Industries, Inc. 
incorporated by reference in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended 
December 31, 1997.




                                   Ernst & Young LLP





Atlanta, Georgia
March 24, 1998
[No. 2665.]

#### Moynahan v. Perkins.

Appellate Practice — Failure to File Assignment of Errors — Dismissal.

The rules of the court of appeals requiring an appellant to *451assign errors in writing at the time of filing the transcript an'd providing that in case of failure to assign error the appeal may he dismissed, do not necessarily require a' dismissal in all cases, because of a failure to assign errors within the time fixed. An-appeal will not he dismissed because of a failure to assign errors within the time fixed, where the appellant makes a showing tending to explain and excuse the failure, and where it appears that no material delay nor prejudice to appellee has been caused thereby.

*Appeal from the District Court of Teller County.*

Mr. B. P. Montgomery, for appellant.

Mr. C. J. Perkins, *pro se.*

*Per Curiam.*

Appellee moves to dismiss this appeal upon several grounds, but there are only two which require any notice. One is that no assignment of errors had been filed; the other is that the record had not been lodged in this court within the time required by code section 389. Rule 11 of this court requires an appellant to assign errors in writing at the time of filing the transcript of the record, and rule 12 provides that if appellant shall fail to assign error the appeal may be dismissed. An assignment of errors is of course indispensable to the perfecting of an appeal and to its hearing, but the rule does not necessarily require in all cases a dismissal because of a failure to assign error within the time fixed. In this case counsel for appellant makes a showing tending to explain and excuse his failure in this respect. It further appearing that no material delay has been occasioned by it and that the appellee has not been prejudiced thereby the motion will not be sustained on that ground.—*Home v. Duff,*5 Colo. 344.

The appellant may present and have filed with the clerk of this court a proper assignment of errors within fifteen days from this date. Upon failure so *452to do the appellee may renew his motion to dismiss and it will be sustained.

The second ground of the motion is based upon a precisely similar state of facts to that in *Perkins v. Boyd, ante,*page 447, and for the same reasons there given this ground will not be sustained. The motion to dismiss will be denied. *Motion denied.*
H. Res. 475

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

July 12, 2002.

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule

XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of

the bill (H.R. 4687) to provide for the establishment of investigative teams to assess building performance and emergency

response and evacuation procedures in the wake of any building failure that has resulted in substantial loss of life or that

posed significant potential of substantial loss of life. The first

reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. General debate

shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour

equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking

minority member of the Committee on Science. After general

debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the

five-minute rule. It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute

rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Science now printed in the
2

•HRES 475 EH

bill. Each section of the committee amendment in the nature

of a substitute shall be considered as read. All points of order

against the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived. During consideration of the bill for

amendment, the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole

may accord priority in recognition on the basis of whether the

Member offering an amendment has caused it to be printed

in the portion of the Congressional Record designated for

that purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII. Amendments so printed shall be considered as read. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and

report the bill to the House with such amendments as may

have been adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote

in the House on any amendment adopted in the Committee

of the Whole to the bill or to the committee amendment in

the nature of a substitute. The previous question shall be

considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to

final passage without intervening motion except one motion

to recommit with or without instructions.

Attest:

Clerk.
Exhibit 10.13
 EXECUTIVE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT  FOR  WINSTON E. HICKMAN
 Agreement Effective Date Executive Company Party Parties.
 RECITALS
     Definitions
 Change of Control




---



##### 



Affiliate
 Board
 Confidential Information
 Good Cause
 Material Change




---



##### 



Severance Benefit Term
 Severance Equity Incentive
 Severance Cash Payment
 Severance Pay COBRA
 Termination Date




---



##### 



Term
 Employment
 Position and Duties President
 Representations by Executive
 Compensation and Benefits
 Salary and Bonus




---



##### 



Benefit Plans
 Paid Vacation
 Withholdings
 Car Allowance
 Code Section 409A Code
 Reasonable Business Expenses




---



##### 



Proprietary Information
 Confidential Information
 Non-Disclosure and Invention Agreement
 Unfair Competition
 Solicitation
 Injunctive Relief




---



##### 



Survivorship
 Notification to Subsequent Employer
 Termination by Company
 Companys Termination Right
 Termination by Company Without Good Cause Separation Agreement
 Termination by Company With Good Cause




---



##### 



Disability Disability Disability
 Death
 Termination by Executive
 Executives Termination Right
 Termination by Executive for Good Reason Good Cause Good Reason Termination
 Notice of Material Change )




---



##### 



Change of Control
 Option
 Change of Control in Which Company Disappears Replacement Option




---



##### 



Termination Following Change of Control
 Termination of Employment Followed by Rehiring
 Provisions Applicable to All Terminations
 Resignation from Positions
 Unpaid Cash Compensation; Accrued Vacation; Company Property
 Payment Upon Termination




---



##### 



Excise Tax Accountant
 Notices
 Arbitration
 Waiver
 Commencement
 Arbitrator
 Counsel




---



##### 



Authority
 Cost
 Decision
 Provisional Remedies
 Violation
 Stock Option Agreements Stock Option Agreement
 Miscellaneous
  Severability




---



##### 



Amendment
 Waiver
 Interpretation of Agreement
 Entire Agreement
 Governing Law
  /s/ Winston E. HickmanWinston E. HickmanCOMARCO, INC., a California corporationBy:
    /s/ Samuel M. Inman, IIISamuel M. Inman, IIIPresident and Chief Executive Officer




---



##### 



SCHEDULE 1.6
 ACCELERATED OF VESTING OF STOCK OPTIONS
 Schedule Agreement Executive Company
 Option Agreement Option
  Date on Which the Option Shall Vest Vesting
Date
 Shares Subject to Accelerated Vesting Average Closing Price




---



##### 



shares vesting
    
    =
    
    P  1.09
    
    x   40,0005.00  1.09
   Effect of the Issuance of a Replacement Option
 Expiration of Option
 No Effect on Previously Vested Option Rights
EXHIBIT 23
                                                                      ----------


            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


As independent registered public accountants, we hereby consent to the
incorporation of our report dated March 31, 2008 relating to the consolidated
financial statements of Spire Corporation and subsidiaries, for the years ended
December 31, 2007 and 2006, included in this Form 10-K, into the Company's
previously filed Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-22223,
333-128611 and 333-143517) and Registration Statement on Form S-3 (File No.
333-133776).

/s/ Vitale, Caturano & Company, Ltd.

VITALE, CATURANO & COMPANY, LTD.

March 31, 2008
Boston, Massachusetts