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 the annual report of Global Services Partners Acquisition Corp.
      (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending July 31, 2007 (the
‘‘Report’’), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
      hereof, I, Rahul Prakash, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
      of
      the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
      Sec. 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, as amended; and




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




Dated: October 29, 2007




By:   /s/
      Rahul
      Prakash


Rahul
      Prakash


Chairman
      of the Board and Chief Executive Officer


(Principal
      Executive Officer)
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1



               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual Report (Form 10-K)
of Medicis Pharmaceutical Corporation of our report dated August 6, 1999,
included in the 1999 Annual Report to Shareholders of Medicis Pharmaceutical
Corporation.

Our audit also included the financial statement schedule of Medicis
Pharmaceutical Corporation listed in Item 14(a). This schedule is the
responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion based on our audits. In our opinion, the financial statement schedule
referred to above, when considered in relation to the basic financial statements
taken as a whole, presents fairly in all material respects the information set
forth therein.

We also consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8 No. 33-45573) pertaining to the 1988 and 1990 Stock Option Plans, in
the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-88590) pertaining to the 1992 Stock
Option Plan, in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-311419) pertaining
to the 1995 Stock Option Plan, in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No.
33-333647) pertaining to the 1996 Stock Option Plan, and in the Registration
Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-81647) pertaining to the 1998 Stock Option Plan of
Medicis Pharmaceutical Corporation of our report dated August 6, 1999, with
respect to the consolidated financial statements incorporated herein by
reference, and our report included in the preceding paragraph with respect to
the financial statement schedule included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) of
Medicis Pharmaceutical Corporation.


                                                           /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP
                                                           ---------------------

Phoenix, Arizona
September 24, 1999
No. 51556.

#### Protests 115226-K, etc., of Alfred Hart Distilleries, Inc. (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *Somerset (33 C. C.*P. A. 138, C. A. D. 328), and that a quantity of liquor amounting to 10 percent or more of the total contents of the various barrels, casks, packages, etc., was lost in transit from the port of exportation to the port of destination because of breakage, leakage, or damage. In accordance therewith it was held that an allowance should have been made for the loss appearing upon the gauger’s return as verified by the affidavit of the importer. Tne protests were sustained tó this extent.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.21

                    Affadavit and Discharge of Indebtedness

     The undersigned, W. James Hindman, does hereby affirm and represent that
the certain Senior Subordinated Promissory Note of Avatech Solutions, Inc.
("Borrower") payable to the order of W. James Hindman ("Lender"), dated August
13, 2002 in the principal amount of $500,000 (the "2002 Note"), has been lost or
misplaced, and that the indebtedness evidenced by the 2002 Note has been
discharged by the delivery to the undersigned of a senior subordinated
promissory note, dated May 28, 2003, made by the Borrower and payable to the
order of the Lender in the principal amount of $500,000

Witness:


---------------------------           ---------------------------------------
                                                  W. James Hindman
Before the First Division,

August 12, 1946

No. 51262.

#### Protest 103229-K of 20th Century Fox Film Corp. (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

The comprehensive language of the tariff act makes it clear that Congress intended to levy a duty on motion-picture film at a specific rate per linear foot on the film as imported and not upon the footage of the positive screen film reproduced therefrom. The three films as imported, even though they were shipped together and intended to be used together, in no way constitute an entirety for tariff purposes. The protest was therefore overruled.
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO****SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002**

The undersigned, RodgerWeismann, Chief Financial Officer of Phase Forward Incorporated (the “Company”),in connection with the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for theperiod ended June 30, 2007 (the “Report”), as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof, hereby certifies pursuant to therequirements of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that

·                     the Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), asapplicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and

·                     theinformation in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

This certification isbeing provided pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 and is not to be deemed a part of theReport, nor is it to be deemed to be “filed” for any purpose whatsoever.
|        |   | By:    |   | /s/ RODGER WEISMANN                                                                  |
|--------|--------|--------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |   |   | Rodger Weismann  Chief Financial Officer

Phase Forward Incorporated  August 7, 2007 |

 

----
Exhibit 31.1—Section 302 CertificationI, Ellen Z. Lamale, certify that: I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form 8-K containingdistribution or servicing reports filed in respect of period included in the year covered by thisannual report, of Principal Life Income Fundings Trust 2005-76;1. Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a whole, does not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading as of the last day of the period covered by this annual report; 2. Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information required to be provided tothe depositor by the trustee under the pooling and servicing, or similar agreement, forinclusion in these reports is included in these reports; 3. I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the depositor and the trusteeunder the pooling and servicing, or similar agreement, and based upon my knowledge and theannual compliance review required under that agreement, and except as disclosed in thereports, the depositor and trustee have each fulfilled its obligations under that agreement;and 4. The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the compliance by the trusteeand the depositor with the minimum servicing or similar standards based upon the reportprovided by an independent public accountant, after conducting a review in compliance with theUniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers or similar procedures, as set forth inthe pooling and servicing, or similar agreements, that is included in these reports.In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by thefollowing unaffiliated parties: Ernst and Young and Citibank, N.A.   Date: March 24, 2006   By: /s/ Ellen Z. LamaleName:
Exhibit 10.9 for Turbine Truck






EXHIBIT 10.9


                                    FORM OF

                         PROXY TO VOTE CORPORATE SHARES

     BE IT KNOWN, that the undersigned, Alpha Engines Corporation, a Delaware
Corporation, is the owner of 9,500,000 shares of voting common stock of Turbine
Truck Engines, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, does hereby grant to Michael Rouse
a proxy and appoint him attorney-in-fact to vote on behalf of the undersigned
9,500,000 shares of said stock at any future general or special meeting of the
stockholders of Turbine Truck Engines, Inc., and said Michael Rouse is entitled
to attend said meetings and act on behalf and vote said shares personally or
through mail proxy, all to the same extent as if Alpha Engines Corporation voted
said shares.
     During the pendency of this proxy, all rights to vote said shares shall be
held by Michael Rouse with full power of substitution or revocation, provided
the undersigned may revoke this proxy at any time, upon written notice of
termination by certified mail, return receipt, to both Michael Rouse and to
Turbine Truck Engines, Inc.
     This agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the
parties, their successors, assigns and personal representatives.
     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Alpha Engines Corporation has executed this proxy this
1st day of October, 2002.

Accepted:


/s/ Michael Rouse                       /s/ Robert L. Scragg
    Michael Rouse, Proxyholder          By: Robert L. Scragg, President
                                        Alpha Engines Corporation, Stockholder


/s/ Jennifer Walls                      /s/ Jennifer Walls
    Witness                                 Witness
<TABLE> <S> <C>




<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-28-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-28-1997
<CASH>                                         140,333
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   17,407
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      6,053
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               192,569
<PP&E>                                       1,027,266
<DEPRECIATION>                                  93,061
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,227,660
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          116,988
<BONDS>                                        454,498
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           420
<OTHER-SE>                                     494,099
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,227,660
<SALES>                                        460,586
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               495,360
<CGS>                                          162,539
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  346,150
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              33,572
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 89,563
<INCOME-TAX>                                    34,503
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             55,060
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    55,060
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.27
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.27
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 72 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.J.Res.72

                       One Hundred Sixth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

           Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday,
             the twenty-fourth day of January, two thousand

                            Joint Resolution

 
 Granting the consent of the Congress to the Red River Boundary Compact.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. CONGRESSIONAL CONSENT.

    (a) In General.--The consent of Congress is given to the Red River 
Compact entered into between the States of Texas and Oklahoma and the 
new boundary established by the compact.
    (b) New Compact.--The compact referred to in subsection (a) sets 
the boundary between the States of Texas and Oklahoma as the vegetation 
line on the south bank of the Red River (except for the Texoma area 
where the boundary is established pursuant to procedures provided for 
in the compact) and is the compact--
        (1) agreed to by the State of Texas in House Bill 1355 approved 
    by the Governor of Texas on May 24, 1999; and
        (2) agreed to by the State of Oklahoma in Senate Bill 175 
    approved by the Governor of Oklahoma on June 4, 1999.
    (c) Compact.--The Acts referred to in subsection (b) are recognized 
by Congress as an interstate compact pursuant to section 10 of Article 
I of the United States Constitution.
    (d) Construction.--The compact shall not in any manner alter--
        (1) any present or future rights and interests of the Kiowa, 
    Comanche, and Apache Tribes, the Chickasaw Nation, and the Choctaw 
    Nation of Oklahoma and their members or Indian successors-in 
    interest;
        (2) any tribal trust lands;
        (3) allotted lands that may be held in trust or lands subject 
    to a Federal restriction against alienation;
        (4) any boundaries of lands owned by the tribes and nations 
    referred to in paragraph (1), including lands referred to in 
    paragraphs (2) and (3), that exist now or that may be established 
    in the future under Federal law; and
        (5) the sovereign rights, jurisdiction, or other governmental 
    interests of the Kiowa, Comanche, and Apache Tribes, the Chickasaw 
    Nation, and the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma and their members or 
    Indian successors-in interest presently existing or which may be 
    acknowledged by Federal and tribal law.

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    This joint resolution shall take effect on August 31, 2000.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
IA

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 78

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2000, and for

other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

NOVEMBER 9, 1999

Mr. YOUNG of Florida introduced the following joint resolution; which was

referred to the Committee on Appropriations

JOINT RESOLUTION

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year

2000, and for other purposes.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That Public Law 106–62 is further amended by striking

4 ‘‘November 10, 1999’’ in section 106(c) and inserting in

5 lieu thereof ‘‘November 17, 1999’’, and by striking

6 ‘‘$288,903,248’’ in section 119 and inserting in lieu there7 of ‘‘$346,483,754’’. Public Law 106–46 is amended by

8 striking ‘‘November 10, 1999’’ and inserting in lieu there9 of ‘‘November 17, 1999’’.

Æ
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of the 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 Annual Report of American Apparel Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC) on March 16, 2009 and as amended by this Amendment No. 1 as filed with the SEC on the date hereof (together, the Report), I, Adrian Kowalewski, Chief Financial Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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.
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for the period covered
by the Report.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: August 13, 2009



|                        
|------------------------
|/s/    ADRIAN
KOWALEWSKI
|Adrian Kowalewski       
|Chief Financial Officer
No. 67266.

protests 59/5979 and 60/10522 (Los Angeles).

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

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of noncellulosic vinyl trees, etc., similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 65699 and following the principles set forth in *United States*v. *Steinberg Bros.*(47 CCPA 47, C.A.D. 727), 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 TAXATION OF COSTS -- 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

MICHELLE KIM, JEONG SOOK KIM as

Guardian ad Litem for ANDREW and DANIEL

KIM, minors,

Plaintiffs,

v.

GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION,

Defendant.

Case No. C02-2404L

TAXATION OF COSTS

Costs in the above-entitled cause are hereby taxed against PLAINTIFFS MICHELLE KIM,

JEONG SOOK KIM as Guardian ad Litem for ANDREW and DANIEL KIM, minors and on behalf of

DEFENDANT GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION in the unopposed amount of $2,330.99.

Entered this 3rd day of JANUARY , 2007 .

A

Bruce Rifkin

Clerk, U.S. District Court

Case 2:02-cv-02404-RSL Document 256 Filed 01/03/07 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>     5
<LEGEND>
           THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
           FROM THE SECOND QUARTER 10-QSB FOR INSCI'S 1998 FISCAL YEAR
</LEGEND>
<CIK>     0000878612
<NAME>     m7rpwrt@
       
<S>                                                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                       6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                                MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                                     SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                                                  3238
<SECURITIES>                                                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                           1747
<ALLOWANCES>                                                             100
<INVENTORY>                                                               47
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                        5138
<PP&E>                                                                  2218
<DEPRECIATION>                                                          1539
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                          7997
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                                   2472
<BONDS>                                                                    0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                      0
<PREFERRED>                                                               36
<COMMON>                                                                  46
<OTHER-SE>                                                              5443
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                            7997
<SALES>                                                                 3700
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                        3700
<CGS>                                                                   2220
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                           2220
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                        3511
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                       (94)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                        (1937)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                               0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                    (1937)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                            0
<CHANGES>                                                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                                           (1937)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                          (0.55)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                          (0.55)
        

</TABLE>
Case No. 6,628.

#### HOLMEAD v. FOX.

[1 Cranch, C. C. 138.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

July Term, 1803.

Evidence — Bt-Laws op Georgetown — Constable.

1. The original by-laws of Georgetown need not be made under the seal of the corporation.

*3912. A constable, appointed by this court, and residing in Georgetown, is “a constable of the town of Georgetown and precincts,” within the meaning of the by-law concerning hogs.

Trover for hogs. The defendant justifies under a by-law of Georgetown, authorizing any person to take up hogs going at large, &c.

Mr. Woodward, for plaintiff,

objected to the copy of the by-law offered in evidence, because the original by-law did not appear to have been made under the seal of the corporation, although the copy produced was attested by the clerk of the corporation, as a true copy under the seal of the corporation, and also by the mayor, who has also annexed the corporate seal to his certificate.

THE COURT

overruled the objection; and a bill of exceptions was taken by the plaintiff.

Mr. Woodward, then objected, that the defendant was not “a constable of the town of Georgetown and precincts,” within the meaning of tlie by-law, having been appointed as a county constable by this court.

But THE COURT overruled this objection, also.

Verdict for the defendant
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

WALDEMAR ROMAN VEGA,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 2D22-1600

September 15, 2023

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Manatee County; Stephen Mathew 

Whyte, Judge.

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Pamela H. Izakowitz, 

Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

SILBERMAN, KELLY, and SMITH, JJ., Concur.

Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
No. 50833.

Suit 4532.

Abstract 50442.

#### United *States*v. *Great Lakes Foundry Sand Co.*

Appeal dismissed December 4, 1945,.