alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>



                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1


                 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

                             Chief Executive Officer

         The undersigned, as the chief executive officer of Allied Healthcare
         Products, Inc. (the "Company") does hereby certify for purposes of 18
         U.S.C. ss. 1350 that (i) the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
         for the Company's fiscal quarter ending September 30, 2002 (the
         "Report"), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
         November 14, 2002, fully complies with the requirements of section
         13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii)
         information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
         the Company as of and for the periods covered in the Report.



                            s/       Earl R. Refsland
                              -----------------------------------
                                     Earl R. Refsland, Chief Executive Officer



                                     February 12, 2003
No. 66534.

#### Modern Food Products Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 190392-K, etc. (San Francisco).

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of vegetables similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Mutual Supply Co.*v. *United States*(44 Cust. Ct. 75, C.D. 2155), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. 60501.

#### M. Pressner & Co. *v.*United States,

protest 268068-K (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with oral stipulation of counsel that the articles in question are not chiefly used for the amusement of children; that they are in chief value of antimony; and that they are not plated with platinum, gold, or silver, or colored with gold lacquer, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Order entered July 22, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-13-01537-CV

MARSHA JERRY AND JASON CHAMBERS, Appellant

V.

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Appellee

On Appeal from the 422nd Judicial District Court

Kaufman County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 88069-422

ORDER

We DENY appellants’ July 21, 2014 motion seeking permission to file supplemental 

brief.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS 

JUSTICE
No. 65176.

#### Estate of Carl Milles *v.*United States,

protest 60/3835 (New York).

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

Since the protest was filed more than 60 days after liquidation, it was dismissed as untimely, by virtue of section 514, Tariff Act of 1930.
Case 3:05-cv-05306-RBL Document 302 Filed 01/12/07 Page 1 of 2
Case 3:05-cv-05306-RBL Document 302 Filed 01/12/07 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                                18 U.S.C.ss.1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Osteotech, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q/A for the period ended September 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael J.
Jeffries, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C.ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

      (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/ Michael J. Jeffries
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Michael J. Jeffries
                                            Chief Financial Officer
                                            (Principal Financial Officer and
                                            Chief Accounting Officer)
                                            April 23, 2004

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or any
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 the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
**Exhibit 32.1**

** **

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANTTO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of NorthernTechnologies International Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q forthe period ending November 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, G. Patrick Lynch,President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

 

(1)                                                        The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                                                        The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
|                                       |   |
|---------------------------------------|--------|
| G. Patrick. Lynch                     |   |
| President and Chief Executive Officer |   |
| (principal executive officer)         |   |
|                                  |   |
| Circle  Pines, Minnesota              |   |
| January 14, 2009                 |   |

 

----
From: cmiddlemist@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:22:43 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Ceri Middlemist

Fort Morgan, CO 80701
No. 68106.

#### New York Merchandise Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 62/697, etc. (San Diego).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of Hibachis similar in all material respects to the Mini Bachis the subject of Abstract 67238, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. 68959.

#### Brown, Alcantar & Brown, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 59/8867, etc. (El Paso).

*334Opinion by

Nichols, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of finger jointed molding similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Best Moulding Corporation*v. *United States (Brown, Alcantar & Brown, Inc., Party in Interest)*(51 CCPA 7, C.A.D. 829), the claim of the plaintiff was substained.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

PAGE - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

RICKEY A. BEAVER, )

)

Plaintiff, ) CASE NO. C05-1938-MJP-JPD

)

v. )

)

CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, et al., ) ORDER DENYING JOINT MOTION

) FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

)

Defendants. )

____________________________________)

Defendants have filed a motion for a 30-day extension of time to file a Joint Pretrial

Statement. (Dkt. #29). Plaintiff has joined in the motion, and the Honorable Marsha J. Pechman has

referred the motion to me for consideration. (Dkt. #32). Having considered the motion and the

balance of the record, the court does hereby find and ORDER as follows:

(1) The Court previously issued a Pretrial Order setting forth September 11, 2006 as the

deadline for the Joint Pretrial Statement. (Dkt. #17 at 3). The Order also provided that “[i]f,

however, on that date a motion is pending that would dispose of the entire case, then the deadline for

the Joint Pretrial Statement is extended until thirty days after the District Judge issues a final order

resolving the dispositive motion.” (Id.) (emphasis added). This language was intended to be selfexecuting and to obviate the need for the parties to seek an extension of time such as sought here.

The Court’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) on defendants’ motion for summary

judgment is pending before Judge Pechman. Therefore, by operation of the above-quoted language

from the Pretrial Order, the deadline for the Joint Pretrial Statement is 30 days after the date that

Case 2:05-cv-01938-JPD Document 33 Filed 09/20/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

PAGE - 2

Judge Pechman rules on the pending R&R. Accordingly, the parties’ joint motion for an extension

of time is DENIED as unnecessary.

(2) The Clerk shall forward a copy of this Order to plaintiff, to counsel for defendants,

and to Judge Pechman.

DATED this 19th day of September, 2006. 

AJAMES P. DONOHUE

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 2:05-cv-01938-JPD Document 33 Filed 09/20/06 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 589 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 589

Directing the Committee on the Judiciary to investigate whether Alberto 
R. Gonzales, Attorney General of the United States, should be impeached 
                   for high crimes and misdemeanors.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 31, 2007

  Mr. Inslee (for himself, Mr. Becerra, Mr. Udall of New Mexico, Mr. 
  Chandler, Mr. Moore of Kansas, Mr. Arcuri, Mr. Braley of Iowa, Mr. 
Johnson of Georgia, Mr. Cohen, Mr. Blumenauer, Mr. DeFazio, Ms. Hooley, 
    Mr. Wu, Ms. Clarke, Ms. McCollum of Minnesota, and Mr. Ellison) 
submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee 
                                on Rules

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Directing the Committee on the Judiciary to investigate whether Alberto 
R. Gonzales, Attorney General of the United States, should be impeached 
                   for high crimes and misdemeanors.

    Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary shall investigate 
fully whether sufficient grounds exist for the House of Representatives 
to impeach Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General of the United States, 
for high crimes and misdemeanors.
                                 <all>
```
#### Belva J. VAUGHN, Appellant, v. Larry G. MASSANARI,1 Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Appellee.

No. 00-2515.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted June 7, 2001.

Decided June 15, 2001.

Before HANSEN, MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, and BYE, Circuit Judges.

1

. Larry G. Massanari has been appointed to serve as Acting Commissioner of Social Security, and is substituted as appellee pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c)(2).

PER CURIAM.

Belva Vaughn appeals the district court’s2 order affirming the Commissioner’s termination of Vaughn’s supplemental security income benefits, which had been awarded in part because of her alcoholism. Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties’ briefs, we conclude substantial evidence supported the Commissioner’s decision to end the benefits. *See*42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(2)(C) (individual shall not be considered disabled for purposes of this sub-chapter if alcoholism would be contributing factor material to Commissioner’s determination that individual is disabled); 20 C.F.R. § 416.935(b)(1) (2001) (“key factor” in determining whether alcoholism is material to determination of disability is whether claimant would still be found disabled if she stopped using alcohol); *Pettit v. Apfel,*218 F.3d 901, 903 (8th Cir.2000) (claimant who is no longer using alcohol still has initial burden of showing that remaining impairments are disabling); *Rehder v. Apfel,*205 F.3d 1056, 1059 (8th Cir.2000) (standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. *See*8th Cir. R. 47B.

2

. The Honorable Henry L. Jones, Jr., United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
Case 2:05-cv-01603-JLR Document 34 Filed 07/21/06 Page 1 of 1
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 607 

Extending best wishes to the people of India as they celebrate the 60th 

anniversary of India’s independence from the British Empire. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

AUGUST 2, 2007 

Mr. MCDERMOTT (for himself and Mr. WILSON of South Carolina) submitted 

the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign 

Affairs 

RESOLUTION 

Extending best wishes to the people of India as they celebrate 

the 60th anniversary of India’s independence from the 

British Empire. 

Whereas August 15th, India’s Independence Day, is a national holiday in India; 

Whereas on August 15, 1947, India officially became a sovereign nation; 

Whereas August 15, 2007, will mark the 60th anniversary of 

the day India gained its independence from the British 

Empire; 

Whereas India has progressed as a secular, sovereign, and 

democratic republic, and is continually making strides in 

gender, education, and social and economic equality; 


cnoel on PRODPC75 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 607 IH 

Whereas India has opened up its economy to trade and investment and the United States is the largest trading 

partner of India; 

Whereas India elected its first female President, The Honorable Pratibha Patil, on July 25, 2007, 41 years after it 

elected its first female Prime Minister, The Honorable 

Indira Gandhi; 

Whereas India and the United States have a strong ongoing 

partnership regarding the promotion of democratic values, cooperation on international security, and collaboration on strategic initiatives; 

Whereas Americans of Indian origin are the fastest growing 

and one of the highest educated immigrant groups in the 

United States; 

Whereas Americans of Indian origin have become important 

contributors in the political, military, and economic sectors of the United States; 

Whereas Americans of Indian origin are serving in all 

branches of the United States Armed Forces, including 

in Afghanistan and Iraq; and 

Whereas foreign direct investment by India continues to grow 

at record levels and contributes significantly to the 

growth of the United States economy: Now, therefore, be 

it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) recognizes India as a long-term strategic 

3 partner of the United States; 

4 (2) applauds the Indian-American community 

5 in the United States for the important role it plays 


cnoel on PRODPC75 with BILLS
3 

•HRES 607 IH 

1 in the relationship between the United States and 

2 India; and 

3 (3) extends best wishes to the people of India 

4 as they celebrate the 60th anniversary of India’s 

5 independence from the British Empire. 

Æ 


cnoel on PRODPC75 with BILLS
From: lyslecarm@juno.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:19:07 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Lysle Johnson

Wyoming, MI 49509
#### R.J. KEYSTONE, a/k/a Randall J. Keyes, Petitioner-Appellant, v. D.A. BRAXTON, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 05-6294.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 3, 2005.

Decided Aug. 18, 2005.

R.J. Keystone, Appellant Pro Se. Steven Andrew Witmer, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

*181PER CURIAM:

R.J. Keystone, a.k.a. Randall J. Keyes, a Virginia prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting the Commonwealth’s motion to dismiss and denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). The order is not appeal-able unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. *See Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Keystone has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED*
From: bobreynolds@cox.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 8:37:06 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Major (Ret) Bob Reynolds

Phoenix, AZ 85028
No. 69676.

#### Kurt S. Adler, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 64/21425, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of plastic paperweights similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 67488, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.