alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.1
 
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 In connection with Amendment no.  3 to the Quarterly Report of Orbit/FR, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the three months ending March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Per Iversen, President and Chief Executive 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:
 
 (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.
 
 Date:   November 30, 2011
 
 /s/ Per IversenPer IversenPresident and Chief Executive Officer
No. 59259.

protests 248952-K, etc. (New York).

#### Glensder Textile Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of silk scarves or squares similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *The Specialty House, Inc., Bryant & Heffernan, Inc., et al.*(42 C. C. P. A. 136, C. A. D. 585), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-60592

JOHNSTON-TOMBIGBEE FURNITURE MANUFACTURING CO., INC., Plaintiff - Appellee - Cross-Appellant,

versus

NORTHBROOK PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE CO., Defendant - Appellant - Cross-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi

(1:95-CV-142-S-D)

July 11, 1997

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, HIGGINBOTHAM and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *2

This matter is before the court on the appeal of Northbrook Property &

Casualty Company of an adverse judgment on a jury verdict and the cross-appeal

of Johnston-Tombigbee Furniture Manufacturing Company, Inc. Having

considered the briefs, oral arguments of counsel, and pertinent parts of the record,

and finding no reversible error, the judgment appealed is AFFIRMED.
From: joaks55@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 9:29:13 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am demanding in the strongest way possible that you pull the unjust and coercive mandate that all

"contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance with no co-pay to

patients. This is typical progressive, liberal, heavy-handed government control. If not, at least expand

conscience protections for any persons or organizations that have moral or religious objections. I

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

that can induce an abortion.

Please, let's not turn this country into a new Soviet Union or a Communist China. Protect the conscience

rights of insurers, providers and people who object to being forced by an over-zealous federal

government to subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially when some of these drugs

can take the life of unborn children. No Americans should be forced by the federal government to

subsidize services they object to.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Oaks

Orlando, FL 32828
Before the Second Division,

June 30, 1953

No. 57412.

#### Gimbel Bros., Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 202060-K and 203371-K (New York).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise consist of beaded bags the same in all material respects as those the classification of which was involved in Abstract 56124, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title: Economicgeology of the Amity quadrangle, eastern Washington County, Pennsylvania**
 
Report | Plate
 
SuDoc Number:I 19.3:300
Item Number:0620 (online)
CGP systemNumber: 000957647
 
July 25, 2018
March 7, 1957

No. 60560.

Suit 4869.

#### United States *v.*Astra Trading Corp.

C. D. 1754 reversed November 30, 1956. C. A. D. 627.
No. P67/227.

#### Kanematsu New York, Inc. *v.*United States, protest 65/3813 (New York).

Rao, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protest consists of bandsaws similar in all material respects to those the subject of *J. E. Bernard & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(50 Cust. Ct. 41, C.D. 2386), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
From: ian.r.macalpine@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 7:32:05 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,

Ian MacAlpine

Saint Paul, MN 55124
#### Christopher Havens, Respondent, v Flushing Hospital Medical Center et al., Appellants.

[632 NYS2d 467]

—In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, etc., (1) the defendant Flushing Hospital Medical Center appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lonschein, J.), dated June 2, 1994, as denied its motion to dismiss the action on the ground that the plaintiff foster parent lacks legal capacity to maintain the action, and granted the plaintiffs cross motion to appoint a guardian ad litem nunc pro tunc, and (2) the defendant J. Kim appeals from the same order.

Ordered that the appeal by the defendant J. Kim is dismissed, for failure to perfect the same in accordance with the rules of this Court *(see,*22 NYCRR 670.8 [c], [e]); and it is further,

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as otherwise appealed from; and it is further,

Ordered that the plaintiff is awarded one bill of costs.

Contrary to the hospital’s contention, the court did not err in granting the plaintiffs cross motion to appoint a guardian ad litem nunc pro tunc *(see,*CPLR 1201, 1202, 2001; *Rima v Russie Iron-Works,*120 NY 433; *Holmes v Staib Abendschein Co.,*198 App Div 354; *Magrill v Magrill,*16 Misc 2d 896). Bracken, J. P., Rosenblatt, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.
Author's personal copyAuthor's personal copyAuthor's personal copyAuthor's personal copyAuthor's personal copyAuthor's personal copyAuthor's personal copyAuthor's personal copyAuthor's personal copyAuthor's personal copyAuthor's personal copyAuthor's personal copyAuthor's personal copyAuthor's personal copyAuthor's personal copyAuthor's personal copyAuthor's personal copy
From: fogwalk@juno.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 6:06:33 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,

Nate Linder

Wickliffe, KY 42087
The State of 

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 16, 2015

No. 04-15-00199-CR

Gabriel JIMENEZ,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 379th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015CR0420

Honorable Ron Rangel, Judge Presiding

ORDER

The court reporter’s extension of time to file the record is NOTED. Time is extended to 

July 13, 2015. FURTHER REQUESTS FOR EXTENSIONS OF TIME TO FILE THE 

RECORD ARE DISFAVORED.

_________________________________

Jason Pulliam, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 16th day of June, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
From: cstanford@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 8:33:39 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,

Candy Stanford

Melbourne, FL 32934
Case No. 6,525.

#### In re HINSDALE et al.

[6 Ben. 231; 112 N. B. R. 480; 1 N. Y. Wkly. Dig. 127.]

District Court, S. D. New York.

Nov., 1872.

■ Reoistee’s Fees — Second Meeting — Trustee.

If a trustee, who has been appointed under the 43d section of the bankruptcy act [of 1867 (14 Stat. 538)], call a second general meeting of the creditors, the fees of the register incident to such meeting are not chargeable against the estate.

[In Case No. 6,526, an order was made requiring certain creditors to accept the composition agreed upon at a meeting of creditors.]

The register in this case certified to the court that the property of the bankrupts [Richard H. Hinsdale and Edward E. D. Doughty] had been, pursuant to the 43d section of the bankruptcy act,conveyed to atrus-tee, to be distributed under the direction of a committee of the creditors; that the question had arisen whether the estate was liable for the fees of the register incident to a second general meeting of the creditors; and that, in his opinion, the estate was not so liable.

BLATCHFORD, District Judge.

Assuming, though it is not so stated in the certificate of the register, that the second general meeting was called by the* trustee, I find in the act no authority or direction for the calling of such meeting by the trustee. I see nothing, therefore, in the facts certified that can warrant the charging against, or paying out of, the estate of the bankrupts, the fees of the register upon or incident to such meeting.
From: christensen53@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 10:06:20 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,

Mary Christensen

Berkeley Heights, NJ 07922
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 379 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                      November 6, 2007.
Whereas the Marquis de Lafayette and the people of France offered unparalleled 
        friendship to the people of the United States in their pursuit of 
        freedom and democracy during the American Revolution;
Whereas there are deep cultural ties between the American and French people, as 
        exemplified by the large flow of visitors each year between the two 
        nations, as well as extensive exchanges between United States and French 
        academic institutions, museums, and sister cities;
Whereas the United States is France's 6th largest export market, and its top 
        export market outside of the European Union, and for the United States, 
        France is its 9th largest trading partner, and the United States is the 
        largest foreign investor in France;
Whereas the United States and France are working together to solve important 
        international crises;
Whereas Nicolas Sarkozy, upon winning the election to become the next President 
        of France, said that the United States can count on France as a friend; 
        and
Whereas the people of the United States support any effort by the Governments of 
        France and the United States to maintain and grow a spirit of friendship 
        and cooperation: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives congratulates Mr. Nicolas 
Sarkozy on his election to the presidency of France and welcomes President 
Sarkozy on the occasion of his appearance before a Joint Meeting of Congress.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
No. 67581.

#### Schneider Bros. & Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 178017-K(A), etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of woven silk fabrics similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 64266, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. P67/301.

#### Louis Marx & Co. *v.*United States, protest 66/142 (San Francisco). *884Novelty Import Co., Inc. *v.*United States, protest 66/21426 (New York).

No. P67/302.

Beckwortli, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of plastic paperweights similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Ace Importing Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(50 Cust. Ct. 226, Abstract 67488), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Before the First Division,

October 30, 1962

No. 67152.

protests 60/22169, etc. (Tampa).

#### Transamerican Match Corporation *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the

merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *Falcon Sales Company*and *J. J. Murphy*& *Co.*v. *United States*(47 Cust. Ct. 129, C.D. 2292), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
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

27

28

ORDER

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

G. MICHAEL STRAUSS,

Plaintiff,

v.

DONNA HAMILTON, et al,

Defendants.

Case No. C05-5772FDB

ORDER DENYING

APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN

FORMA PAUPERIS

The Court, having reviewed the report and recommendation, petitioner’s application to proceed in

forma pauperis and the remaining record, hereby finds and ORDERS:

(1) The Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation is approved and adopted;

(2) Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED.

(3) The clerk is directed to send directed to send copies of this Order to petitioner.

DATED this 7th day of April 2006.

AFRANKLIN D. BURGESS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:05-cv-05772-FDB Document 12 Filed 04/07/06 Page 1 of 1
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 695 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                     December 11, 2007.
Whereas there are more than 1,100,000 fire fighters in the United States;
Whereas approximately 75 percent of all fire fighters in the United States are 
        volunteers who receive little or no compensation for their heroic work;
Whereas there are more than 30,000 fire departments in the United States;
Whereas thousands of fire fighters have died in the line of duty since the date 
        that Benjamin Franklin founded the first volunteer fire department in 
        1735;
Whereas 346 fire fighters and emergency personnel died while responding to the 
        terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001;
Whereas fire fighters respond to more than 20,000,000 calls during a typical 
        year;
Whereas fire fighters also provide emergency medical services, hazardous 
        materials response, special rescue response, terrorism response, and 
        life safety education;
Whereas, in 1922, President Harding first declared a Fire Prevention Week, and 
        it is appropriate to continue this tradition by supporting the 
        designation of a National Fire Fighter Appreciation Day: Now, therefore, 
        be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives supports the designation of a 
``National Fire Fighter Appreciation Day'' to honor and celebrate the fire 
fighters of the United States.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```