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

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

RULE 13a-14(b) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the
Quarterly Report of Tessera Technologies, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the Company), on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Henry R.
Nothhaft, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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.



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/    Henry R. Nothhaft             
|Henry R. Nothhaft                    
|President and Chief Executive Officer
|August 6, 2009                       

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

RULE 13a-14(b) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Tessera Technologies, Inc, a Delaware corporation (the Company), on Form 10-Q for the
period ending June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Michael Anthofer, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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.



|                                                    
|----------------------------------------------------
|/s/    Michael Anthofer                             
|Michael Anthofer                                    
|Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|August 6, 2009                                      

A signed original of this written statement required by Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 has been provided to the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
No. 41860.

#### Protests 956004-G, etc., of African Metals Corp. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Dallinger, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
#### Sonia Cameau, Appellant, v Briarwood Park Associates, Respondent.

[635 NYS2d 475]

—Appeal by the plaintiff from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lerner, J.), dated March 16, 1994.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs, for reasons stated by Justice Lerner at the Supreme Court. Balletta, J. P., Miller, O’Brien and Copertino, JJ., concur.
No. 58618.

protest 225621-K (New York).

#### Schering Corporation *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

The official papers disclosing that the protest was filed prior to the date of liquidation, the protest was dismissed as premature. (Section 514, Tariff Act of 1930.)
No. 58120.

protests 179747-K, etc. (New York).

#### Bernstein & Skolnick, Inc., and Airport Clearance Service et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of veils or veilings similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 57645, the items marked “A” were held dutiable at 45 percent under paragraph 1529 (a), as modified by T. D. 51802, and the items marked “B” were held dutiable at 32}4 percent under said paragraph, as modified by T. D. 52739.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED BY**

**SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Rockwood Specialties Group, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2010 asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Seifi Ghasemi, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.   TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
| Date:  August 6, 2010            |   |
|---------------------------------------|--------|
|                                  |   |
| /s/ SEIFI  GHASEMI               |   |
| Seifi  Ghasemi                        |   |
| Chairman  and Chief Executive Officer |   |

 

Thiscertification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company forpurposes of Section 18 or any other provision of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934, as amended.

 

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 or otherdocument authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature thatappears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statementrequired by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will beretained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commissionor its staff upon request.

 

1

----
Order issued May 3 , 201 3 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

________________________________________

No. 05

- 1 2

- 0 1043

- CR

________________________________________

ADOLFO RODRIGUEZ , Appellant



### V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

, Appellee



### O R D E R

Before Justices FitzGerald, Murphy, and Lewis

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we GRANT the March 1 , 201 3 motion of

Valencia Bush for leave to withdraw as appointed counsel on appeal. We DIRECT the Clerk of

the Court to remove Valencia Bush as counsel of record for appellant. We DIRECT the Clerk

of the Court to send a copy of this order and all future correspondence to Adolfo Rodriguez,

TDCJ No. 1802473, Gurney Transfer Facility, 1385 FM 3328, Palestine, Texas, 75803.

/David Lewis/

DAVID LEWIS

JUSTICE
(Reap. Dec. 10164)

#### Roberts, Reilly & Johns *v.*United States

Entry No. 906795.

(Decided February 7, 1962)

*Jolm D. Rode {Ellsworth JP. Qualey*of counsel) for tbe plaintiff.

*William S. Orriclc, Jr.,*Assistant Attorney General *{Samuel*D. *Spector,*trial attorney), for the defendant.

Lawrence, Judge:

This is am appeal for a reappraisemeiit of a plastic injection mould, imported from Canada in January 1951.

The case was submitted for decision upon a stipulation of fact in which it was agreed in substance that, on the date of exportation of said mould, there was neither foreign, export, nor United States value for such or similar merchandise and that the cost of production is the proper basis of appraisement. It was further agreed that said cost of production is $420.90 United States currency, net, packed.

Based upon the agreed statement of facts, the court concludes as a matter of law that cost of production,, as that value is defined in section 402(f) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. § 1402(f)), is the proper basis of appraisement of the instant merchandise and that said cost of production is $420.90 United States currency, net, packed.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

November 29, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

131974 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 131974 

 COA: 270998 

Oakland CC: 2005-200328-FC 

GREGORY RONALD COLEMAN, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 28, 2006 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

t1120 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

November 29, 2006 

 Clerk
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Ranorablo Bayam SattoHleld 

Plrwaea~r Yewlaa Cowlr8laaer 

Pat Offloe Boa 1062, 

Awtln, Tewr 

Your lst&i?r%nuBsg 21,\9$& l ddmmad to thlr 

~Department requeat# that ve~sdvise a8 what rpproprintion 

your "office help rush 88 ha&-tiw roonta~ and other neoeaoary help" should br,,,,ohscged a&a '..~ FT* 

Cowlerlowr . . . . . $3,600 $3,600 

OfflCrn~ l x p ena pe, wta ge, 

l to tlo neoffloe r J, fixture5 and suppler . . . 1,500 1,500 

!Pxwrellxlg Oxpenlloa, eontlngont expenaor, llnd 

other woewary help and 

expenses toklnourredln 

edministration of Flremen*a 

Relief and Retirement L8v. . 500 500." 
878 

Eoa. Bayne Setterfield, ?ege 2 

You l&tar ladioetee that eaee quutiou he8 rrieea 

i8 t0 vb th @ T tb OS& STieOS f 8 8OOT8tSTl d y 8 boo wmp ehw& l 

b e o h sr eed to %r fiol xe smeol ppeerl~8 n la Item 2, l upse, m to 

“other Ae0.888~ help” in Item 3. 

VOSTe Of the Oplniarrthttha ton •ofY~e~~aa 

ee ueod ln raid l ppr6prletion inolud~e eoweterial and bookImpa&g help employmi ln your offloe. fh. fart th8t tb k8~818tuTO 

%AtNXhd th8t OffiOe ePrplqU8 ehoulcl k ;lSludrd %A l wh term is 

lndloated by the refermae in Ltsn 3 to %ther neaoeemy help”. 

Ye think the us0 of the vord “other* olee~onetretee that 

the Leglelatum belkred came “help” hed rime 

for lna preoodingpart et& l ppropriattoo. 

We think thet the tom “other ruoeeeery help” ae wed 

in the apprupriatlon applloe to help l 

perforated awey from your offloe. Your “p 

lopd Lo dutlee ohlefly 

l ttor refer8 to the holdbg 0f hembga way frcmP AU8tiA 8ad the 0 l-At 0f a OOWt 

reporter to reoord the prwe~e. w8 b&” tb k8t#l&A’e 

had lo mind ‘help” of thle type b provldl~~(~ tunde for “othe, 

_-.. nqoeesery help”, thet 18, help mployed to porrioau dutlee prlmarlly performed avef from your affbe. 

JAS rfb
EXHIBIT 32





Section 1350 Certifications







I, Andrew K. Walker, certify that this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Allied Bancshares, Inc. for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 containing financial statements fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that information contained in this quarterly report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Allied Bancshares, Inc.







|s/Andrew K. Walker__________________________________
President and Chief Executive Officer
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





|Date:  May 13, 2005
|-------------------



I, Richard E. Bell, certify that this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Allied Bancshares, Inc. for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 containing financial statements fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that information contained in this quarterly report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Allied Bancshares, Inc.





|s/Richard E. Bell____________________________________
Chief Accounting Officer and Chief Financial Officer
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|Date:  May 13, 2005
|-------------------











15
----

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 Annual Reportof IntelGenx Technologies Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year endedDecember 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the "Report"), I, Paul Simmons, Principal Accounting Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that: 

(1) The Report fully complies withthe requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of1934; and 

(2) The information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresult of operations of the Company. 

A signed original of this writtenstatement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will beretained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commissionor its staff upon request. 

| March 24, 2009 | By: /s/*Paul    Simmons                                     * |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|           | Paul Simmons                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           |
|           | Chief Financial Officer                                                                                                                                                                                                                                |
|           | (Principal Accounting Officer)                                                                                                                                                                                                                         |
|           |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   |
|           |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   |

----
No. 64960.

#### J. Einstein, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 249228-K, etc. (New York).

*392Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of nylon fabrics similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Steinberg Bros.*(47 C.C.P.A. 47, C.A.D. 727), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
#### Commonwealth *v.*Gee, Appellant.

Submitted April 21, 1969.

May 28, 1969:

Before Bell, C. J., Jones, Cohen, Eagen, O’Brien, Roberts and Pomeroy, JJ.

*Earl*W. *Tabor,*Public Defender, for appellant.

*Robert M. Kemp,*District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Opinion

Per Curiam,

Order affirmed.
#### Levi W. Flagg *v.*Joseph W. Swift.

— Motion denied, without costs.
[Cite as State ex rel. Mahoney v. Lu cas Cty. Bd. of Elections, 130 Ohio St.3d 29, 2011-Ohio4551.]

T HE S TATE EX REL . M AHONEY v. L UCAS C OUNTY B OARD OF E LECTIONS . [Cite as State ex rel. Mahoney v. Lucas Cty. Bd. of Elections, 130 Ohio St.3d 29, 2011-Ohio-4551.] Writ of mandamus granted based on decision in State ex rel. Coble v. Lucas Cty. Bd. of Elections

. (No. 2011-1386—Submitted September 6, 2011—Decided September 9, 2011.) I N M ANDAMUS

.

__________________ Per Curiam. {¶ 1} Based on our decision in State ex rel. Coble v. Lucas Cty. Bd. of Elections , 130 Ohio St.3d 132, 2011-Ohio-4550, 956 N.E.2d 282, we grant a writ of mandamus to compel respondent, Lucas County Board of Elections, to place the name of relator, Neal Mahoney, on the November 8, 2011 election ballot as a candidate for Sylvania Township Trustee. Writ granted. O’C ONNOR , C.J., and O’D ONNELL , C UPP , and M C G EE B ROWN , JJ., concur. P FEIFER and L UNDBERG S TRATTON , JJ., concur in judgment. L ANZINGER , J., dissents.

__________________ L ANZINGER , J., dissenting. {¶ 2} For the reasons stated in my dissent in State ex rel. Coble v. Lucas Cty. Bd. of Elections , 130 Ohio St.3d 132, 2011-Ohio-4550, 956 N.E.2d 282, I respectfully dissent.

__________________ Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick, L.L.P., Douglas G. Haynam, and Michael J. O’Callaghan, for relator.S UPREME C OURT OF O HIO

2 Julia R. Bates, Lucas County Prosecuting Attorney, and Andrew K. Ranazzi, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for respondent. Michael DeWine, Attorney General, and Richard N. Coglianese, Erick D. Gale, and Michael Schuler, Assistant Attorneys General, for intervening respondent, Secretary of State Jon Husted.

______________________
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

For the Fifth Circuit

No. 95-60162

Summary Calendar

LUTHER WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

ABBEY MEDICAL, INC., doing business

as Abbey Home Health Care,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Southern District of Mississippi

(3:93-CV-544WS)

February 8, 1996

Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Luther Williams (Williams) sued his employer, Abbey Medical,

Inc., d/b/a Abbey Home Health Care (Abbey Medical), under Title VII

of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000(e), et seq.,

alleging discrimination in employment practices on the basis of

race and religion. The case was tried for four days to a jury and

upon conclusion of the testimony, the jury returned a verdict for
2

the defendant, Abbey Medical. Judgment on the jury verdict was

entered in favor of Abbey Medical and Williams appeals.

We have carefully reviewed the briefs, the record excerpts and

relevant portions of the record itself, and have concluded that

there is no reversible error in the record and that the judgment

for Abbey Medical should be AFFIRMED.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 844 

To amend title 18, United States Code, to allow an owner of a trade secret 

redress of the theft of trade secrets extraterritorially, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 6, 2023 

Mr. OBERNOLTE (for himself, Mr. STEUBE, Mr. PFLUGER, and Mr. 

CRAWFORD) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend title 18, United States Code, to allow an owner 

of a trade secret redress of the theft of trade secrets 

extraterritorially, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Protect American 

5 Trade Secrets Act of 2023’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 844 IH

1 SEC. 2. REDRESS OF THEFT OF TRADE SECRETS 

2 EXTRATERRITORIALLY. 

3 Section 1836 of title 18, United States Code, is 

4 amended by adding at the end the following new sub5 section: 

6 ‘‘(e) APPLICABILITY TO CONDUCT OUTSIDE UNITED

7 STATES.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 

8 this section shall apply to conduct occurring outside the 

9 United States and impacting United States commerce, in10 cluding conduct by an offender who is— 

11 ‘‘(1) not a United States person or an alien 

12 lawfully admitted for permanent residence into the 

13 United States; or 

14 ‘‘(2) an organization which is created or orga15 nized under the laws of a foreign government or 

16 which has its principal place of business located out17 side of the United States.’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1

19–011 2003

108th Congress, 1st Session – – – – – – – – – – – – – House Document 108–32

REORGANIZATION PLAN MODIFICATION FOR THE 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

COMMUNICATION

FROM

THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

TRANSMITTING

A REORGANIZATION PLAN MODIFICATION FOR THE DEPARTMENT 

OF HOMELAND SECURITY, PURSUANT TO PUB. L. 107–296, SEC. 

1502

FEBRUARY 4, 2003.—Referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 

(Select) and ordered to be printed 


E:\Seals\Congress.#13
(1)

THE WHITE HOUSE, 

Washington, January 30, 2003. 

Hon. J. DENNIS HASTERT, 

Speaker of the House of Representatives, 

Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. SPEAKER: Pursuant to section 1502 of the Homeland 

Security Act of 2002 (Public Law 107–296) (the ‘‘Act’’), I submit 

herewith the enclosed Reorganization Plan Modification for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which represents a modification of certain aspects of the DHS Reorganization Plan I submitted to you on November 25, 2002. The modification involves organizational units within the DHS Border and Transportation Security Directorate. The enclosed Reorganization Plan Modification 

provides information concerning the elements identified in section 

1502(b), and is itself subject to modification pursuant to section 

1502(d) of the Act. In accordance with section 1502(a) of the Act, 

please transmit this Reorganization Plan Modification to the appropriate congressional committees. 

Sincerely, 

GEORGE W. BUSH. 

(3)


Insert offset folio 3 here HD32.001
4


Insert offset folio 4 here HD32.002
5


Insert offset folio 5 here HD32.003
6


Insert offset folio 6 here HD32.004
7


Insert offset folio 7 here HD32.005
EXHIBIT 10.16




MANHATTAN SCIENTIFICS, INC.


The Chrysler Building


405 Lexington Avenue, 26th Floor


New York, New York 10174


March 28, 2013




Marvin Maslow, President


Normadie New Mexico Corp.




Re: Consulting Agreement dated October 1, 2009 between Manhattan Scientifics, Inc. and Normadie New Mexico Corp. (the “Agreement”)




Dear Mr. Maslow:




Reference is hereby made to the Agreement. The parties hereby agree to amend and restate Section 3(b) of the Agreement as follows:




Upon the completion of a successful debt and/or equity investment financing made by Company, during the term of this Agreement, in which investors and/or investment consultants or bankers introduced to Company by Consultant or with respect to which Consultant has a pivotal role in completing any such investment transaction, Company hereby agreed to use a portion of the proceeds of such transaction to pay off debt owed to Consultant. In addition, the Company, at the discretion of the Board of Directors, may provide additional compensation in the form of a bonus upon the closing of such transaction.




If you agree with the above terms, please execute below and return to the undersigned.




Manhattan Scientifics, Inc.By:Name:Title:ACKNOLEDGED AND AGREED:Normadie New Mexico Corp.By:Name:
Marvin MaslowTitle:
President
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Gerard Perkins, Appellant.

[634 NYS2d 385]

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Paño Z. Patsalos, J.), rendered December 15, 1994, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Under the circumstances of this case, the sentence imposed *483was neither harsh nor excessive *(see, People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80).

We have considered the appellant’s remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Mangano, P. J. Miller, Santucci and Hart, JJ., concur.