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

**Park City Group, Inc. & Subsidiaries**

**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 Park City Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB/A No. 3 for the year ending June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Randall K. Fields, Principal Executive Officer, 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 result of operations of the Company. |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| Dated: | January 11, 2007 |
|--------|------------------|

 

| /s/ Randall K. Fields            |   |
|----------------------------------|--------|
| Randall K. Fields                |   |
| Principal Executive Officer, CEO |   |

 

 

**(REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)**
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

M.V.,

 Appellant,

v.

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY 

AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES,

 Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

§ 

No. 08-14-00156-CV

Appeal from the

65th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 2012DCM07071)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was no error in the 

judgment. We therefore affirm the judgment of the court below.

It appearing to this Court that Appellant is indigent for purposes of appeal, this Court 

makes no other order with respect thereto. This decision shall be certified below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 8TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2014.

ANN CRAWFORD McCLURE, Chief Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rivera, and Rodriguez, JJ.

Rivera, J., not participating
To who it may concern: 

As a concerned citizen of the San Joaquin Valley I am troubled by the fact the EPA is grandfathering in 

the power plant in Avenal, CA. The San Joaquin valley is a region that already has high cases of asthma 

and has multiple cities in the top 10 of bad air quality in the nation. With this being the case, the highest 

and newest standards must be adhered to in order to keep its citizens healthy. Please reconsider and DO 

NOT grandfather in the Avenal power plant.

Sincerely, Alicia Solorio 

Avenal Power Plant 

Alicia Solorio 

to: 

R9AirPermits 

04/12/2011 11:47 PM 

Hide Details 

From: Alicia Solorio 

To: R9AirPermits@EPA 

History: This message has been forwarded. 

Page 1 of 1

4/14/2011
No. 55938.

protests 151905-K (E), 151905-K (F), and 153335-K (A) (New York).

#### Cooper & Brase, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

It was stipulated that the Federal Reserve bank certified dual rates of exchange for the currency involved in the liquidation of the entries for the dates of exportation of the merchandise covered by the entries and that the circumstances relating to the liquidation of the said entries are similar in all material respects to those in Abstract 54732. In view of this stipulation and following the cited decision it was held that the currency of the invoices should have been converted in the manner directed by the judgment of this court *332in said Abstract 54732, in accordance with Bureau of Customs Circular Letter No. 2675, dated October 19, 1949.
Docket Number FAA-2013-1025
(Reap. Dec. 10405)

Entry No. 7916.

#### Adolph Goldmark *&*Sons Corp. *v.*United States

(Decided December 19, 1962)

*SJmrretts, Paley & Garter*for the plaintiff.

*Joseph D. Guilfoyle,*Acting Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

OliveR, Chief Judge:

Counsel for the respective parties have submitted this appeal for reappraisement for decision on a written stipulation, reading as follows:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the attorneys for the parties hereto that the merchandise consists of orange marmalade exported from England on or about September 3,1961, and that such merchandise is not on the list of articles published in T.D. 54521 and is subject to appraisement under the Customs Simplification Act of 1956 (Public Law 927 — 84th Congress 2nd Session).

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the price, at the time of exportation to the United States of the merchandise undergoing reappraise*494ment, at winch such or similar merchandise was freely sold or, in the absence of sales, offered for sale in the principal markets of the country of exportation, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other expenses incidental to placing the merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States, was 12 shillings six pence per dozen.

On the agreed facts, I find that the proper basis for appraisement of the orange marmalade in question is statutory export value and hold that such value therefor is 12 shillings, 6 pence, per dozen.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service 

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Treasury. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Small Business/Self Employed—Taxpayer Burden Reduction Committee of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be conducted (via teleconference). The TAP will be discussing issues pertaining to increasing compliance and lessening the burden for Small Business/Self Employed individuals. 

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Tuesday, April 3, 2007. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Marisa Knispel at 1-888-912-1227 or 718-488-3557. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an open meeting of the Small Business/Self Employed—Taxpayer Burden Reduction Committee of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be held Tuesday, April 3, 2007 from 12:30 p.m. ET to 1:30 p.m. ET via a telephone conference call. If you would like to have the TAP consider a written statement, please call 1-888-912-1227 or 718-488-3557, or write to Marisa Knispel, TAP Office, 10 Metro Tech Center, 625 Fulton Street, Brooklyn, NY 11201. Due to limited conference lines, notification of intent to participate in the telephone conference call meeting must be made with Marisa Knispel. Ms. Knispel can be reached at 1-888-912-1227 or 718-488-3557, or post comments to the Web site:                     *http://www.improveirs.org.*

                    The agenda will include the following:                     *Various IRS issues.*

Dated: February 27, 2007. 

John Fay, 

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

 [FR Doc. E7-3728 Filed 3-2-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
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 of Dism issal W hite v. W endy’s, et. al.

 CIV. S-04-1392 LKK CMK

LYNN HUBBARD, III, SBN 69773

SCOTTLYNN J HUBBARD IV, SBN 212970

LAW OFFICES OF LYNN HUBBARD, III

12 WILLIAMSBURG LANE

CHICO, CA 95926

Telephone: (530) 895-3252

Fax: (530) 894-8244

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Matthew Salazar, SBN 189043

DONAHUE BATES BLAKEMORE & MACKEY

83 Scripps Drive, Suite 200

Sacramento, CA 95825

Ph: (916) 648-7444

Fax: (916) 648-7447

Attorney for Defendants

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SHERIE WHITE,

Plaintiff,

v.

WENDY’S INTERNATIONAL, INC.;

PACWEND, INC.; H AND K HOLDING

CORPORATION; and DOES 1 through 10,

Defendant.

 

Case No. CIV.S-04-1392 LKK CMK

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Case 2:04-cv-01392-LKK -CMK Document 13 Filed 10/05/05 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

27

28

Order of Dism issal W hite v. W endy’s, et. al.

- 2 - CIV. S-04-1392 LKK CMK

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the complaint of plaintiff, USDC Case No. CIV.S04-1392 LKK CMK, is hereby dismissed with prejudice.

Dated: October 4, 2005 /s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

United States District Court Judge

Case 2:04-cv-01392-LKK -CMK Document 13 Filed 10/05/05 Page 2 of 2
No. 63075.

#### Swift & Co. *v.*United States,

protests 248154-K, 253609-K, and 253613-K (Seattle).

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of fresh or frozen boneless pork similar in all material respects to that the subject of Abstract 69714, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
EXHIBIT 11

                 STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS

                                                                      SHARES
                                                                      ------

Basic Shares outstanding at June 30, 1998                             1,942,048
                                                                      ---------

     NET PROFIT AFTER TAX      $ 1,548,158     =   $ .80 per share
     --------------------        -----------
     Basic Shares outstanding    1,942,048



Diluted Shares outstanding at June 30, 1998                           2,040,737
                                                                      ---------

     NET PROFIT AFTER TAX      $ 1,548,158     =   $ .76 per share
     --------------------        -----------
     Diluted Shares outstanding  2,040,737
No. 65497.

#### Flandria Cycle Corp. et al *v.*United States,

protests 58/1841, etc. (Baltimore).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Schmidt Pritchard & Co. et al.*(47 C.C.P.A. 152, C.A.D. 750), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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

5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

Page 1

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

November 17, 2005

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 05-30218

Summary Calendar

 

WENDELL ARMANT and DR. CAROL THOMPSON-ARMANT

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

versus

JOSEPH WEST, ET AL

Defendants-Appellees.

 

Appeal from the United States District Court for

the Eastern District of Louisiana

(USDC No. 2:04-cv-2336)

_________________________________________________________

Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*1

Reviewing the record de novo, we affirm the district court’s dismissal of Armant’s

suit for the following reasons:
Page 2

1. The Rooker-Feldman doctrine establishes that lower federal courts lack 

jurisdiction to review state court judgments when the constitutional claims are 

“inextricably intertwined” with a challenged state court judgment. Richard v. 

Hoechst Celanese Chem. Group, Inc., 355 F.3d 345, 350 (5th Cir. 2003). 

Unsuccessful parties in a state court cannot reconstitute their cases as Section 1983

claims to sidestep this rule. Liedtke v. The State Bar of Texas, 18 F.3d 315, 318 

(5th Cir. 1994).

2. In their Section 1983 suit, the Armants hope a federal court will find that the 

appellees engaged in illegal conduct in their effort to enforce Judge Giarrusso’s 

judgment. However, it is impossible to reach this conclusion without first 

establishing that Judge Giarrusso’s judgment was deficient. That issue has already

been addressed by the Louisiana’s Fourth Circuit and Supreme Court. The bottom

line is that these two issues are inextricably intertwined.

Affirmed.
No. 6445.

#### CHARLES ROTH vs. FAIRCHILD AUTO COMPANY.

Syllabus.

Questions of fact only are involved.

Appeal from the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans, Division “D,” No. 108,454. Honorable Porter Parker, Judge.

Merrick, G-ensler & Schwarz, for plaintiff and appellant.

Ellis & Kaiser, for defendant and appellee.

His Honor, EMILE GrODCHAUX,

rendered the opinion and decree of the ’Court, as follows:

This is a suit to annul the sale of an automobile, the plaintiff claiming that the automobile delivered to him *51and for which he in, fact paid for was a 1913 model, while his contract called for a-1914 model. The judgment of the trial Court dismissed plaintiff’s shit and he now appeals.

The evidence shows that a print or picture of the car was exhibited to plaintiff at the time of the sale and that the car delivered to and accepted and paid for by him without protest corresponded therewith in every detail. The defendant is a dealer in automobiles, and the car delivered to plaintiff was purchased by defendant from the manufacturers therof as a 1914 model; and it was known among dealers and to the trade and was advertised as such. In fact at the time plaintiff agreed to buy, in September, 1913, and pending the date when delivery of the car was to be made, namely, November, 1913, it was the latest model advertised or on-the market, and apparently no other was then contemplated. And it likewise proved that the car delivered to plaintiff is not what is known as a 1913 model, as the latter differed from the former in price, mechanism, body design and equipment. It was not till March, 1914, that plaintiff complained of his bargain, several months after he had unconditionally accepted the car and paid the price; the occasion or cause of his dissatisfaction appears to be that a still later model was then being exhibited, one differing slightly in body design only from the car he had received. But as this later model was neither offered for sale nor put upon the market until January, 1914, it could not be the car which, as plaintiff claims, he expected to receive, since his contract of purchase was made in September, 1913, and provided for delivery in November, 1913. .

*52Opinion and decree, November 22nd, 1915.

'We find no error in the judgment and it is accordingly affirmed.

Affirmed.
No. 52994.

#### Excelsior Merchandising Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 118850-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

For the reasons stated in *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained. The protests were overruled in all other respects.
================================================================================

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 Patient Portal Technologies, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB / A (1) for the period ended September, 2008 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Kevin Kelly, 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, to my knowledge, 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: April 6, 2009

                                          /s/ Kevin Kelly
                                          Kevin Kelly
                                          President and Chief Executive Officer


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unassociated Document


    Exhibit
      10.1


    INTERACTIVE
      SYSTEMS WORLDWIDE INC.

    2
      Andrews
      Drive, 2nd
      Floor

    West
      Paterson, NJ 07424

    July
      1,
      2008

     

    Bernard
      Albanese

    18
      Doremus Drive

    Towaco,
      NJ 07082

     

    Dear
      Bernie:

     

    This
      will
      confirm our understanding that your Employment Agreement dated as of August
      10,
      2007 (the “Agreement”) is being extended for the three (3) month period from
      July 1, 2008 through September 30, 2008. In order to effectuate the foregoing,
      we agree as follows:

     

    1.  Section
      3.1 of the Agreement is amended by deleting the reference to “June 30, 2008” and
      substituting the date “September 30, 2008” in lieu thereof.

     

    2.  Section
      4.2 of the Agreement is amended by deleting the sentence “Commencing
with
      the
      Corporation’s quarter ending September 30, 2007 and with each of the next three
      quarters through June 30, 2008, the Corporation will determine whether the
      Corporation’s Revenue as of the end of such quarter meets or exceeds the Revenue
      set forth above,” and substituting the following sentence in lieu thereof
“Commencing with the Corporation’s quarter ending December 31, 2007 and with
      each of the next three quarters through September 30, 2008, the Corporation
      will
      determine whether the Corporation’s Revenue as of the end of such quarter meets
      or exceeds the Revenue set forth above.”

     

    3.  Except
      as
      herein provided, this Agreement continues in full force and effect in accordance
      with its terms.

     

    If
      you
      agree with the foregoing, please sign the duplicate copy of this letter and
      return it to me.

     

    
      	 	 	 
	 	
              Very
                truly yours,

               

              Interactive Systems Worldwide Inc.

            
	 
 	 
 	 
 
	 	By:  	/s/
              Bruce
              Feldman
	 	Bruce Feldman,
              Director


    

     

     

    Agreed
      to
      and Accepted:

     

     

    /s/Bernard
      Albanese

    Bernard
      Albanese
**Exhibit 32**

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as created bySection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the following certifications arebeing made to accompany the Registrant’s annual report on Form 10-K for thefiscal year ended June 30, 2006:

**Certificationof Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial OfficerPursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,18 U.S.C. Section 1350**

I, Michael J. Koss, Chief Executive Officer and ChiefFinancial Officer of Koss Corporation (the “Company”) hereby certify, pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

(i) the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company forthe fiscal year ended June 30, 2006 (the “Report”) fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(ii) the information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

Date:  September6, 2006
| /s/ Michael J. Koss                    |   |
|----------------------------------------|--------|
| Michael J. Koss                        |
| Chief Executive Officer, President and |
| Chief Financial Officer                |

 

----
#                 Book/Printed Material                Nepal and Bhutan : country studies
February 14, 1945

No. 50033.

#### Protests 36961-K, etc., of Wo Kee & Co. et al.

Plaintiff’s application for rehearing granted.
Exhibit 99.1


                     CERTIFICATE OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

          Pursuant to Section 906(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

     The undersigned,  being the Chief Executive  Officer of Xanser  Corporation
(the "Company")  hereby  certifies that the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended  December 31, 2002,  filed with the United States  Securities
and Exchange  Commission  pursuant to Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the  Securities
Exchange  Act of 1934  (15  U.S.C.  78m or  78o(d)),  fully  complies  with  the
requirements  of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange Act of 1934
and that  information  contained in such Annual Report fairly  presents,  in all
material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and results of operations of the
Company.

Date:    March 28, 2003



                                               //s//   JOHN R. BARNES
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           John R. Barnes
                                           President and Chief Executive Officer
Independent Accountants' Consent



The Board of Directors
Kansas City Life Insurance Company:


We  consent  to  incorporation  by  reference  in  the  registration   statement
(No.2-97351)  on Form S-8 of Kansas  City Life  Insurance  Company of our report
dated January 17, 2001 relating to the consolidated balance sheet of Kansas City
Life Insurance Company and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2000, and the related
consolidated  statements of income, stockholders' equity, and cash flows for the
year then ended and all  related  schedules,  which  report is  incorporated  by
reference  in the  December  31, 2000, annual report on Form 10-K of Kansas City
Life Insurance Company.

The audit referred to in our report dated January 17, 2001, included the related
financial  statement schedules listed in Item 14(a) as of December 31, 2000, and
for the year then included in this annual report on Form 10-K.  These  financial
statement  schedules are the  responsibility  of the Company's  management.  Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial  statement  schedules
based on our audits. In our opinion,  such financial statement  schedules,  when
considered  in  relation to the  consolidated  financial  statements  taken as a
whole,  present  fairly  in all  material  respects  the  information  set forth
therein.

                                    KPMG LLP

Omaha, Nebraska
March 23, 2001