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

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 Quarterly Report of IQ Biometrix, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form  10-QSB/A  for the  period  ending  September  30,  2003 as filed  with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, William
Scigliano,  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.





                                        /s/ William Scigliano
                                        -----------------------------
                                        William Scigliano
                                        Chief Executive Officer



February 6, 2004
Posting an FDMS Docket without a Federal Register Notice 

MEMORANDUM 

SUBJECT: Posting EPA-HQ-ORD-20 13-0232 to Regulations.gov fo r Public Access 

FROM: 

Thru: 

Connie A. Meacham 

/NCEA!NCEA-RTP 

~~~l~ 

Amparo Castillo 

ORD Docket Manager 

OEI/OIC/CDC 

This memorandum authorizes the posting of EPA-HQ-ORD-2013-0232 to 

Regulations.gov for public access. 

Title of Docket: 

Integrated Science Assessment for Oxides ofNitrogen- Health Cri teria 

Short Title: 

ISA for NOx - Health 

Bacl<ground: 

Oxides ofNitrogen (NOx: including nitrogen dioxide [N02], nitric oxide [NO], and all 

other oxidized nitrogen-containing compounds transformed from NO and N0 2), is one 

of six principal pollutants for which EPA has established NAAQS (National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards). Periodically, EPA reviews the primary (health-based) 

scientific basis for these standards by preparing an Integrated Science Assessment, to 

meet the requirements set forth in Sections I 08 and I 09 of the Clean Air Act. 

Type: Non-rulemaking 

Comment Period: No Public Comment Period at this Time. 

Should you have any questions regarding this memorandum, please contact Eric Shultz at 

(202) 566-1883, or via email at schultz.eric@epa.gov.
1 Filed 3/20/14 P. v. Finley CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Butte)

----

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. MATHEW ROYCE FINLEY, Defendant and Appellant. C074226 (Super. Ct. No. CM037377)

On September 20, 2012, at about 10:23 p. m., deputies conducted a traffic stop on a Chevrolet truck driven by defe ndant Mathew Royce Finley. The truck was searched and a deputy found a handgun, a black metal ammunition can with three boxes of rifle ammunition, a small amount of marijuana, a butterfly knife, and three T-shirts with the Vagos Motorcycle Club insi gnia on them. Defendant was on parole at the time. Defendant pleaded no contest to possessi on of ammunition by a felon (Pen. Code, § 30305, subd. (a)(1)) and admitted a strike and a prior prison term (Pen. Code, §§ 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d), 667.5, subd. (b)). Th e trial court denied defendant’s motion to2 dismiss the strike and sentenced him to seven years in state prison, imposed various fines and fees, and awarded 560 days of presente nce credits (280 actual and 280 conduct). Defendant appeals. He did not ob tain a certificate of probable cause. We appointed counsel to represent defenda nt on appeal. Counsel filed an opening
brief that sets forth the facts of the case a nd requests this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. ( People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed,
and we received no communica tion from defendant. Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable e rror that would result in a disposition more
favorable to defendant.
DISPOSITION The judgment is affirmed.

RAYE , P. J.

We concur:

HULL , J.

MAURO , J.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

                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 EnergySouth, Inc. (the "Company") Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Charles
P. Huffman, Chief Financial 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, to the best of my knowledge:

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

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

Date:  May 15, 2003                             By: /s/ Charles P. Huffman
                                                    ----------------------------
                                                        Charles P. Huffman
                                                    Senior Vice President and
                                                     Chief Financial Officer

                                       28
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

VIACHESLAV DMITRIYEVICH

NEVROV and YURI NEVROV,

 Petitioners,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 06-70471

Agency Nos. A072-115-988

 A072-115-986

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted May 11, 2010

San Francisco, California

Before: SILVERMAN, FISHER, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Viacheslav Dmitriyevich Nevrov and his son Yuri Nevrov (collectively, the

Nevrovs) petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’s (BIA)

decision denying their applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and

protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). We have jurisdiction

FILED

MAY 17 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2

under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, Tekle v. Mukasey, 533

F.3d 1044, 1051 (9th Cir. 2008), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that the Nevrovs’

experiences of discrimination and harassment in Latvia do not rise to the level of

past persecution. See Nagoulko v. INS, 333 F.3d 1012, 1016 (9th Cir. 2003). In

addition, substantial evidence supports the BIA’s failure to find a well-founded

fear of persecution, as the Nevrovs failed to establish the existence of an

individualized risk of persecution or a pattern or practice of persecution against

similarly situated individuals. See Lolong v. Gonzales, 484 F.3d 1173, 1178 (9th

Cir. 2007) (en banc). Although the Nevrovs may be stateless, that fact alone does

not warrant a grant of asylum. See Ahmed v. Keisler, 504 F.3d 1183, 1191 n.5 (9th

Cir. 2007). They are still required to demonstrate a well-founded fear of

persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular

social group, or political opinion, see id., which they have failed to do in this case. 

Because the Nevrovs failed to establish eligibility for asylum, they

necessarily fail to meet the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. 

See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003). The Nevrovs did not

raise any challenge to the BIA’s denial of their CAT claim. See Martinez-Serrano
3

v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir. 1996) (issues not supported by argument in

the opening brief are deemed waived).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

KATHERINE LIGHT : CIVIL ACTION

:

v. : NO. 02-CV-4357

:

:

HOTLINE TELECOMMUNICATIONS :

and SEUNG JO KWAK :

ORDER

AND NOW, this 25th day of September, 2002, the Court having reviewed this

matter and determined that this case is eligible for Arbitration, it is directed that the case

be referred to Arbitration.

It is further directed that the Clerk of Court transfer this case from the Standard

Track to the Arbitration Track and that the Arbitration Clerk schedule a hearing in this

matter at the earliest possible date.

BY THE COURT:

 

TIMOTHY J. SAVAGE J.

Case 2:02-cv-04357-TJS Document 14 Filed 09/25/2002 Page 1 of 1
# C_2016410EN.01003605.xml

| 7.11.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 410/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.11.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 410/36

---

Order of the General Court of 6 September 2016 — Skechers USA France v EUIPO — IM Production (Shoes)

(Case T-9/16) (1)

1

(2016/C 410/66)

Language of the case: French

The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 98, 14.3.2016.

1

---
# C_2017070EN.01000901.xml

| 6.3.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 70/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.3.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 70/9

---

Appeal brought on 8 December 2016 by Spliethoff's Bevrachtingskantoor BV against the order of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 11 October 2016 in Case T-564/15: Spliethoff’s Bevrachtingskantoor BV v European Commission

(Case C-635/16 P)

(2017/C 070/14)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Spliethoff's Bevrachtingskantoor BV (represented by: Y. de Vries, advocaat)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Other party to the proceedings:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | set aside the order of the General Court of 11 October 2016 in case T-564/15; |
| --- | --- |

—

set aside the order of the General Court of 11 October 2016 in case T-564/15;

| — | refer the case back to the General Court; |
| --- | --- |

—

refer the case back to the General Court;

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings, including the costs before the General Court. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings, including the costs before the General Court.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The General Court erred in law by finding that the action is inadmissible, given that it is directed against the Commission, who is not the author of the contested act;

The General Court erred in law by finding that the action was inadmissible because the contested act is merely provisional in nature and therefore is not a definitive act;

The General Court erred in law by rejecting Spliethoff’s request to treat its action for annulment as if it were directed against the 31 July Decision (1).

1

---

(1)  Commission Implementing Decision C(2015) 5274 final establishing the list of proposals selected for receiving EU financial assistance in the field of Connecting Europe Facility (CEF)-Transport sector following the calls for proposals launched on 11 September 2014 based on the Multi-Annual Work Programme

1

---
Order entered August 20 , 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 19 - 00815 - CV IN RE DAVID JOACHIM, Relator O rigin al Proceeding from the 160th Judicial District Court

D allas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC - 14 - 13421



### O RDER Before the Court is relator’s August 16, 2019 suggestion of bankruptcy showing relator filed a proceeding under Chapter 7 of the United States Bankruptcy Code on August 14, 2019 in the United St ates Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of Te xas, under case no. 19

- 34546. Appellant’s bankruptcy filing automatically suspends further action in this appeal. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 8.2. Accordingly, we ABATE this appeal. It may be reinstated on prompt moti on by any party complying with Rule 8.3 and specifying what further action, if any, is required from t he Cou r t . See T EX . R. A PP . P. 8.3.

/s/ CORY L. CARLYLE JUSTICE
July 17, 1945

No. 50365.

#### Protest 20860-K of R. T. Shelton Co.

Plaintiff’s application for rehearing granted.
**Exhibit 31.02****CERTIFICATION**I, Steven L. Korby, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of CSK Auto Corporation;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:     a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;     b. Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal controlover financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assuranceregarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements forexternal purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;     c. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and     d. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):     a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial information; and     b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.        August 15, 2007 /s/ STEVEN L. KORBY      Steven L. Korby
THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 

Post Office Box 12248 

Austin, Texas 78711 (512) 463-1312 

January 06, 2000 

Mr. Timothy S. Durst 

Baker & Botts 

2001 Ross Avenue, Suite 700 

Dallas, TX 75201-2980 

Mr. Joseph D. Cheavens · fiLED \N 

Baker & Botts COURT OF APPEALS 

100 Shell Plaza 

910 Louisiana JAN 1 0 2C\fJu 

Houston, TX 77002-4995 ATZ 

USA M OlSTR\CT 

Mr. R. Laurance Macon ClERK. 5th 

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld 

300 Convent Street, Suite 1500 

San Antonio, TX 78205 

Mr. David J. Healey 

Tobor Goldstein & Healey 

1360 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 2300 

Houston, TX 77056-3023 

Ms. Lynne Liberato 

Haynes & Boone 

1000 Louisiana, Suite 4300 

Houston, TX 77002-5012 

RE: Case Number 98-1243 

Court of Appeals Number: 05-98-01204-CV 

Trial Court Number: 96-08262-L 

Mr. Bob E. Shannon co,k1lff) IN 

Baker & Botts T OF APPfALI 

98 San Jacinto Blvd., Suite 1600 

Austin, TX 78701-4039 

Mr. Joseph R. Knight 

Baker & Botts 

1 !} 2000 

USA MATZ 

CLERK, 5th DISTRICT 

98 San Jacinto Blvd., Suite 1600 

Austin, TX 78701-4039 

Mr. Jack Hightower 

Hilgers & Watkins 

P. 0. Box 2063 

Austin, TX 78768-2063 

Ms. Nina Cortell 

Haynes & Boone 

901 Main Street, Suite 3100 

Dallas, TX 75202-3789 

Mr. Mike A. Hatchell 

Ramey & Flock 

P. 0. Box 629 

Tyler, TX 75710-0629 

Style: IN RE ALCATEL USA, INC., f/k/a DSC COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION 

Dear Counsel: 

Today, the Supreme Court of Texas delivered the enclosed opinion/sin the above referenced 

cause denying the petition for writ of mandamus and overruling the emergency motion to consider trial 

developments or alternatively to vacate and remand. 

Also enclosed is the judgment of the Supreme Court as it appears in the minutes. This is the 

judgment that will issue in mandate form if no motion for rehearing is filed, or if a motion for 

rehearing is overruled. 
THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 

Post Office Box 12248 

Austin, Texas 78711 

Encl. 

cc: Ms. Lisa Matz, Clerk 

Mr. Jim Hamlin 

The Honorable Frank Andrews 

Hon. Michael J. O'Neill 

Sincerely, 

John T. Adams 

Clerk 

(512) 463-1312 
 'Q!exas 

-

.. ,. :: 

MS LISA MATZ CLERK 

FIFTH SUPREME JUDICIAL DISTRICT 

· 600 COMMERCE 2ND FLOOR 

DALLAS TX 75202-4658 

....... -.,.. __ .. 

·"'
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

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

        I, John F. Burke, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of
Annuity and Life Re (Holdings), Ltd. (the "Company"), hereby 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 Form 10-Q of the Company for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2003 (the "Form 10-Q"), fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and (2) the information contained in the Form
10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.

Date: November 14, 2003


/s/ John F. Burke
--------------------------------
Name: John F. Burke,
Title: Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer
Before the Second Division,

June 28, 1944

No. 49574.

#### Protest 79676-K of Armishaw’s, Ltd. (Portland, Oreg.)

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

The uncontradicted evidence disclosed that the merchandise consists of iron heel plates, the same in all material respects as those the subject of *Kramer*v. *United States*(11 Cust. Ct. 30, C. D. 787), which record was incorporated herein. On the record presented the protest was sustained to this extent.
No. 63569.

protest 59/6941 (New York).

#### Hartz Mountain Products *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Donlon J.

The protest was dismissed for lack of prosecution.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MARK ASHTON and

PATRICIA ASHTON

:

:

: CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-CV-4155

Plaintiffs, :

:

v. :

:

BAYER CORPORATION;

BAYER AG;

GLAXOSMITHKLINE, PLC;

GLAXOSMITHKLINE;

SMITHKLINE BEECHAM

:

:

:

:

:

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

:

Defendants. :

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

To the Clerk of the Court:

Kindly enter the appearances of Hope S. Freiwald, Aline Fairweather, Erin

Brennan and Kirstin J. Miller as attorneys for defendant GlaxoSmithKline PLC.

Respectfully Submitted,

_____________________________ _____________________________

Hope S. Freiwald Aline Fairweather

_____________________________ _____________________________

Erin Brennan Kirstin J. Miller

DECHERT PRICE & RHOADS

4000 Bell Atlantic Tower

1717 Arch Street

Philadelphia, PA 19103-2793

(215) 994-4000

Case 2:02-cv-04155-HH Document 7 Filed 09/11/2002 Page 1 of 1
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 Report of ZymoGenetics, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Form 10-K), I,
Bruce L.A. Carter, Chief Executive Officer and James A. Johnson, Chief Financial Officer, of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Form 10-K fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C 78m or 78o(d)); and

(2) The information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated: February 28, 2008



/s/ BRUCE L.A. CARTERBruce L.A. CarterChief Executive Officer




/s/ JAMES A. JOHNSONJames A. JohnsonChief Financial Officer
Exhibit
      23.1








**CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS**





We
      hereby
      consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement Nos.
      333-127820 and 333-138339 on Form S-8 of our report dated March 21, 2007,
      relating to the financial statements of Bio Solutions Manufacturing, Inc.,
      which
      appear in this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Bio Solutions Manufacturing,
      Inc.
      for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2006.








/s/
      Sherb
& Co., LLP





Sherb
      & Co., LLP


New
      York,
      New York





March
      22,
      2007
Before the First Division,

July 6, 1945

No. 50343.

#### Protest 41290-K of Pacific Customs Brokerage Co. (Portland, Maine)

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

It was stipulated that the lumber is similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Seaboard Lumber Sales Co.*v. *United States*(5 Cust. Ct. 161, C. D. 391). In accordance therewith it was held that the tax imposed should have been assessed upon the basis of the actual amount of lumber imported. The claim was therefore sustained as to the planed, tongued, and/or grooved lumber in question.