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

                                                                   EXHIBIT 32(b)

                Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

      I, Mark J. Plush, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of
Keithley Instruments, Inc. (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, that:

      (1) The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the period ended
      September 30, 2005 which this certification accompanies 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/ Mark J. Plush
--------------------------------------
Mark J. Plush
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
December 13, 2005

A signed original of this written statement has been provided to Keithley
Instruments, Inc. and will be retained by Keithley Instruments, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

VINCENT PRICE McCOWAN,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1593 LKK DAD P

vs.

WARDEN M. KNOWLES, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action

seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate

Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local General Order No. 262.

On June 24, 2005, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations

herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any

objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Neither

party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be

supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis.

/////

/////

Case 2:04-cv-01593-LKK -DAD Document 18 Filed 08/11/05 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

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed June 24, 2005, are adopted in full;

2. Defendants’ September 17, 2004 motion to dismiss is granted; and

3. This action is dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust available

administrative remedies prior to bringing this action.

DATED: August 10, 2005.

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

/mcco1593.801

Case 2:04-cv-01593-LKK -DAD Document 18 Filed 08/11/05 Page 2 of 2
---

Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONPursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Strategic Internet
Investments, Incorporated (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ending
December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"). I, Abbas Salih, Director of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 USC Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief:

|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
      15, 2011 |  | /s/
      Abbas Salih          
|----- | -------------------- |  | -------------------------------
|      |                      |  | Abbas Salih, Director, CEO, CFO

---
<PAGE>
                                                                  Exhibit 10.21


Description of Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation Long-Term Incentive Plan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


         During 2002, the Company adopted, and the Court approved as part of
the Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation Key Employee Retention Program, a
new long-term incentive plan under which key management employees, including
the Named Executive Officers, became eligible to receive a cash award based on
the attainment by the Company of sustained cost reductions above a stipulated
threshold for the period 2002 through the Company's emergence from bankruptcy.
Under the plan, fifteen percent of such cost reductions above the stipulated
threshold are placed in a pool to be shared by participants based on their
individual target's percentage of the aggregate target for all participants. A
participant's target percentage may be adjusted upward or downward, within
certain limitations, at the discretion of the Company's Chief Executive
Officer.

         Amounts payable under the plan generally are not determinable until
conclusion of the plan. If a participant's employment is terminated without
cause or as a result of death, disability or retirement prior to conclusion of
the plan, such participant will be entitled to receive a pro rated portion of
any award earned through the date of his or her termination of employment.
Awards earned under the program are forfeited if the participant voluntarily
terminates his or her employment (other than at normal retirement) or is
terminated for cause prior to the scheduled payment date.

         In general, awards payable under the program are payable in two
installments - the first on the date that the Company emerges from bankruptcy
and the second on the one year anniversary of such date.
No. 55229.

#### Overseas Commerce Corp. and R. Neumann & Co. *v.*United States,

protests 141515-K and 141509-K (New York).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of ostrich skins the same in all material respects as those the subject of Abstract 54236, the claim for free entry under paragraph 1765 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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BYRON CHAPMAN,

Plaintiff,

v. NO. CIV. S-04-1339 LKK CMK

PIER 1 IMPORTS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

In light of plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment

filed concurrently with their opposition brief, and in order to

give defendants sufficient time to prepare their opposition,

the hearing on the cross-motions is CONTINUED to January 17, 2006

at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom No. 4. Defendants’ opposition to the

cross-motion for summary judgment and their reply in support of

their original motion shall be FILED by December 23, 2005.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: December 2, 2005

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

LAWRENCE K. KARLTON

SENIOR JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 2:04-cv-01339-MCE-AC Document 68 Filed 12/02/05 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 32.2



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 amended Quarterly Report of Elite Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the “Registrant”)
on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended September 30, 2015 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”),
I, Carter J Ward, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Registrant, 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) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



(2)      Information
contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Registrant.



|Date: November 10, 2015 | /s/ Carter J. Ward                          | 
|----------------------- | ------------------------------------------- | 
|                        | Carter J. Ward                              | 
|                        | Chief Financial Officer of                  | 
|                        | Elite Pharmaceuticals, Inc.                 | 
|                        | (Principal Accounting and Financial Officer | 



This certification has been furnished solely pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.



A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906 has been provided to Elite Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and will be retained by Elite Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Before the Third Division,

December 30, 1942

No. 47856.

#### Petition 6184-R of Armand Schmoll, Inc. (New York).

Opinion-by

Keefe, J.

Prom the record the court was of the opinion that the error which resulted in entry of the merchandise at less value than that returned -upon final appraisment was without any intent to defraud the revenue or to conceal or misrepresent the facts. The petition was therefore granted.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998             MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998             JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          37,163                 0
<SECURITIES>                                         0                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  192,261                 0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                 0
<INVENTORY>                                    149,058                 0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               378,482                 0
<PP&E>                                         813,225                 0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,488,625                 0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          623,302                 0
<BONDS>                                              0                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                 0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                 0
<COMMON>                                        10,789                 0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0                 0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,488,625                 0
<SALES>                                        408,780                 972,965
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               408,780                 972,965
<CGS>                                          216,653                 506,775
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  216,653                 506,775
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               215,162                 425,458
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                  31,525
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (23,035)                   9,207
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                     800
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (23,035)                   8,407
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (.002)                    1.12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0
        

</TABLE>
No. 66823.

#### Illfelder Importing Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 61/18480 (New York).

Opinion by

Eord, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of metal articles similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 65737, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
-84 -82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72

 34

 36

 38

 40

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 100

18 12 06 00

08/16

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 16 Aug 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.54 N 76.62 W Meters AGL
**Exhibit 23.2.b**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-108215 on Form S-3 of our reports dated March 4, 2005, relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedules of Kansas City Power & Light Company and subsidiaries (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the adoption of new accounting principles) and management’s report on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Kansas City Power & Light Company for the year ended December 31, 2004.

/s/Deloitte & Touche LLP

Kansas City, Missouri

March 4, 2005
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsScience Directorate Publications and Presentations, January 1 - December 31, 2002This Technical Memorandum lists the significant publications and presentations of the Science Directorate during the period January 1-December 31, 2002. Entries in the main part of the document are categorized according to NASA Reports (arranged by report number), Open Literature, and Presentations (arranged alphabetically by title). Most of the articles listed under Open Literature have appeared in refereed professional journals, books, monographs, or conference proceedings. Although many published abstracts are eventually expanded into full papers for publication in scientific and technical journals, they are often sufficiently comprehensive to include the significant results of the research reported. Therefore, published abstracts are listed separately in a subsection under Open Literature.Document ID20030067975Acquisition SourceMarshall Space Flight CenterDocument TypeOther - BibliographyAuthorsSummers, F. G.*(NASA Marshall Space Flight Center Huntsville, AL, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 7, 2013Publication DateJuly 1, 2003Subject CategorySpace Sciences (General)Report/Patent NumberNAS 1.15:212635NASA/TM-2003-212635M-1082Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType20030067975.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
Government RegulatoryImpact ModelCentral ACs and Heat PumpsSTANDARD CASE SCENARIOBase YearAnnounceYearStandardYear2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014Income StatementUnit Sales1.13 1.12 1.13 1.15 1.18 1.21 1.19 1.21 1.24 1.25 1.27 1.27 1.29 1.32 1.37Revenues647$639$644$656$672$690$904$926$944$951$966$968$981$ 1,009$1,042$Cost of SalesLabor35$35$35$35$36$37$49$50$51$51$52$52$53$55$56$Material410$405$409$416$426$438$573$587$599$603$613$614$622$640$661$Overhead48$48$48$49$50$52$68$70$71$71$73$73$74$76$78$Depreciation17$17$17$17$18$18$24$25$25$26$26$26$26$27$28$78.96% 79.03% 79.03%Selling, General and AdministrativeStandard SG&A91$89$90$92$94$97$ 127$130$132$133$135$136$137$141$146$R&D6$6$6$7$7$7$9$9$9$ 10$10$10$10$10$10$Product Conversion Expense-$-$1$6$ 13$17$1$ -$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$Profit Before Tax39$39$38$33$27$25$53$55$56$57$58$58$59$60$62$Taxes 18$18$17$15$12$11$24$25$26$26$26$26$27$27$28$Net Income Before Financing21$21$21$18$15$14$29$30$31$31$31$32$32$33$34$Cash Flow StatementNet Income21$21$21$18$15$14$29$30$31$31$31$32$32$33$34$Depreciation17$17$17$17$18$18$24$25$25$26$26$26$26$27$28$Change in Working Capital-$1$ (1)$(1)$(1)$(2)$ (20)$(2)$(2)$(1)$(1)$(0)$(1)$(3)$(3)$Cash Flows from Operations38$39$37$34$31$30$33$53$55$56$56$57$57$57$59$Ordinary Capital Expenditures(19)$(18)$(19)$(19)$(19)$(20)$(26)$(27)$(27)$(28)$(28)$(28)$(29)$(29)$(30)$Conversion Capital Expenditures-$-$(1)$(5)$ (11)$(13)$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$Cash Used In Investment(19)$(18)$(19)$(24)$(30)$(33)$(26)$(27)$(27)$(28)$(28)$(28)$(29)$(29)$(30)$Net Cash Flow20$20$18$10$1$ (3)$7$ 26$27$28$28$29$29$28$29$Terminal Value-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$-$Present Value Factor1.00000.94130.88600.83390.78500.73890.69550.65460.61620.58000.54590.51380.48370.45530.4285Discounted Cash Flow20$19$16$9$1$ (2)$5$ 17$17$16$15$15$14$13$12$Industry Value thru 2016407$8/29/2006Standard CaseCAC_GRIM_v3.xls
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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RONALD WILSON,

NO. CIV. S-04-633 LKK/CMK

Plaintiff,

v.

PIER 1 IMPORTS (US), INC;

and MELLON/PIER 1 PROPERTIES

LIMITED PARTNERSHIP I,

Defendants.

 /

STEVE EIDEN,

NO. CIV. S-04-977 LKK/CMK

Plaintiff,

v.

HOME DEPOT USA, INC., dba

HOME DEPOT #6609; and HD

PROPERTIES OF MARYLAND,

Defendants.

 /

////

////

Case 2:04-cv-00977-LKK -CMK Document 61 Filed 07/18/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

BYRON CHAPMAN,

NO. CIV. S-04-1339 LKK CMK

Plaintiff,

O R D E R

v.

PIER 1 IMPORTS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

The Pretrial Conference in the above-captioned cases were

vacated pending the resolution of cross-motions for summary

judgment. The motions have since been resolved and the court sets

the following dates for Pretrial Conference:

1. Eiden v. Home Depot, 04-977 September 18, 2006 at 1:30 p.m.

2. Wilson v. Pier 1, 04-633 September 18, 2006 at 2:00 p.m.

3. Chapman v. Pier 1, 04-1339 September 18, 2006 at 2:30 p.m.

The parties are referred to the court's Status Orders and the

local rules for the timing and contents of their

pretrial statements. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: July 17, 2006.

Case 2:04-cv-00977-LKK -CMK Document 61 Filed 07/18/06 Page 2 of 2
No. 59528.

protests 272054-K, etc. (New York).

#### Traders, Inc., and W. J. Byrnes & Co. of N. Y., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

It was stipulated that the items marked “A” consist of kidskin plates the same in all material respects as those the subject of *Kung Chen Fur Corpn.*v. *United States*(29 Cust. Ct. 266, C. D. 1480) and that the items marked “B” consist of lambskin plates similar to those the subject of *A. S. Gold & Bro., Inc.*v. *United States*(33 Cust. Ct. 120, C. D. 1643). Accepting this stipulation as a statement of fact and following the cited decisions, the claim for free entry under paragraph 1681 was sustained.

Mollison, J., dissented for the reasons set forth in his dissenting opinions in C. D. 1480 and C. D. 1643, *supra.*
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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SACRAMENTO DIVISION

TIMOTHY JACKSON SEELEY,

Plaintiff,

v.

TERESA A. SCHWARTZ, et al. ,

Defendants.

Case No. 2:04-cv-1800-DFL-CMK (PC)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT

PREJUDICE

Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 41(b)

On April 21, 2006, Plaintiff in Pro Per Timothy Seeley filed a motion for an order

from the Court permitting him to voluntarily dismiss this action without prejudice. On April 24,

2006, Defendants filed a Statement of Non-Opposition to Plaintiff’s motion.

Accordingly, the Court hereby GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion pursuant to Federal Rules

of Civil Procedure 41(b). 

///

///

///

///

Case 2:04-cv-01800-DFL-CMK Document 108 Filed 04/25/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed without prejudice.

 April 25, 2006

 

/s/ CRAIG M. KELLISON 

Craig M. Kellison

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 2:04-cv-01800-DFL-CMK Document 108 Filed 04/25/06 Page 2 of 2
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-6172

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

JOSE ANTONIO GARCIA,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Charleston. Patrick Michael Duffy, District

Judge. (CR-98-1136; CA-04-2558)

Submitted: April 14, 2005 Decided: April 21, 2005

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jose Antonio Garcia, Appellant Pro Se. Miller Williams Shealy,

Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, South

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Jose Antonia Garcia seeks to appeal the district court’s

order dismissing as untimely his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.

§ 2255 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in

a habeas corpus proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues

a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A

certificate of appealability will not issue for claims addressed by

a district court absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner

satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists

would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that

any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also

debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336

(2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee,

252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001).

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude

that Garcia has not made the requisite showing to obtain a

certificate of appealability. We, therefore, deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED