alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Allyn Greenwald, Appellant-Respondent, v Trimfoot Co., Respondent-Appellant.

[633 NYS2d 960]

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered on November 9, 1994, denying motions for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed for the reasons stated by Cahn, J., without costs and disbursements; and order, same court and Justice, entered on November 9, 1994, transferring the action to the Civil Court, unanimously affirmed, without costs and disbursements. Motion by plaintiff to compel payment of one-half the costs of printing the record granted. *(See,*Rules of App Div, 1st Dept [22 NYCRR] § 600.11 [d]:) No opinion. Concur— Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin, Asch and Nardelli, JJ.
<PAGE>


                              SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

     This Agreement entered into between DOUGLAS MACKLIN, and SONOMA FINANCIAL
CORPORATION, is entered into by the parties in compromise of that claim asserted
by DOUGLAS MACKLIN under Will County, Illinois case number 99 L 596. In return
for the dismissal of Will Count, Illinois case number 99 L 596 by DOUGLAS
MACKLIN, SONOMA FINANCIAL CORPORATION agrees:

     1. To immediately issue 450,000 shares of the common stock of SONOMA
HOLDING CORPORATION (symbol VMAX), said shares being unrestricted, and
negotiable. Said shares are to be issued to DOUGLAS MACKLIN on the date that
this Agreement is signed by the parties.

     2. SONOMA FINANCIAL CORPORATION shall, upon execution of this Agreement pay
to DOUGLAS MACKLIN the sum of $6,000.00 in reimbursement of attorneys' fees or,
at its option may instead immediately issue an additional 120,000 shares of
unrestricted negotiable common stock of SONOMA FINANCIAL CORPORATION.

     3. SONOMA FINANCIAL CORPORATION shall pay to DOUGLAS MACKLIN the total sum
of $125,000.00 pursuant to the following schedule:

     A. $3,000.00 per month on October 1, 2000, November 1, 2000, and December
1, 2000;

     SONOMA FINANCIAL CORPORATION shall pay the sum of $5,000.00 to DOUGLAS
MACKLIN on January 1, 2001, and shall continue paying $5,000.00 on the first of
each consecutive month until the total sum of $125,000.00 has been paid to
DOUGLAS MACKLIN.

     It is further agreed between the parties that any payment due of the first
of the month, which has not been received by DOUGLAS MACKLIN by the tenth of
said month shall result in SONOMA FINANCIAL CORPORATION paying a penalty of ten
percent of said payment due to DOUGLAS MACKLIN. It is further agreed between the
parties that any payment due on the first of any month, and not received by
DOUGLAS MACKLIN by the twenty-fifth (25th) day of said month, shall be a breach
of said agreement by SONOMA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, causing the remaining balance
of said $125,000.00 to be then and there immediately due in total to DOUGLAS
MACKLIN.

     It is further agreed to between the parties that should it be necessary for
DOUGLAS MACKLIN to take legal action to enforce his rights under this agreement,
he shall be entitled to the payment of all his attorneys fees and costs by
SONOMA FINANCIAL CORPORATION.

Dated this 20th day of September, 2000.

/s/ Douglas E. Macklin                    /s/ D. Desmond Paden
----------------------------------       --------------------------------
DOUGLAS MACKLIN                          DESMOND PADEN
                                         Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
                                         Of SONOMA FINANCIAL CORPORATION
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



I, Mark Shelley, 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 Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q of Sunergy, Inc. for the period ended June 30, 2012 (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 Sunergy, Inc.





|Date: August 13, 2012 | By: | /s/ Mark Shelley                                                                                      
|--------------------- | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                      |     | Name: Mark Shelley
        Title: Chief Financial Officer (Principal
Financial and Accounting Officer)







A signed original of this written statement
required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed
form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Sunergy, Inc. and will
be retained by Sunergy, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

 

I, Clifford M. Gross, Chief Executive Officer of UTEK Corporation, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of UTEK Corporation; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered 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 of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

 

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

 

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

 

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’sBoard of Directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

 

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and 

 

(b) Any fraud, whether ornot material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Dated this 24th day of February,2005.
#### JESSE MOSKOWITZ, *ET AL.,*PLAINTIFFS-PETITIONERS, v. JOHN J. GROGAN, *IND.*AND AS CLERK OF THE COUNTY OF HUDSON, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

*Mr. Jesse Moshowitz*and *Mr. Libero D. Marotta*for the petitioners.

*Mr. William P.*Kelly, *Jr.*and *Mr. Daniel F. Gilmore*for the respondents.

May 21, 1968.

Denied.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Terry L. Burrows, Appellant.

[635 NYS2d 572]

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We reject the contention of defendant that the *Sandoval*hearing was conducted in his absence and thus he was denied his right to be present at a material stage of the trial *(see, People v Dokes,*79 NY2d 656). The record clearly indicates that defendant was present for that hearing. The verdict is not contrary to the weight of the evidence *(see, People v Bleakley,*69 NY2d 490, 495). The sentence was not unduly harsh or severe. On summation the prosecutor improperly referred to matters not in evidence. Those comments, however, were not so egregious that defendant was denied a fair trial *(see, People v Taylor,*197 AD2d 841), and the trial court dispelled any prejudicial impact when it sustained defense counsel’s objections *(see, People v Villarino,*184 AD2d 475, *Iv denied*80 NY2d 977; *People v La Forge,*107 AD2d 896). (Appeal from Judgment of Niagara County Court, Fricano, J.—Robbery, 1st Degree.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Wesley, Balio and Boehm, JJ.
No. 63165.

#### Unanue & Sons, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 58/20546 (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

Since the protest was filed more than 60 days after liquidation, it was dismissed as untimely, by virtue of section 514, Tariff Act of 1930.
```

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 58 (Tuesday, March 27, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 14269]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-5521]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP07-352-000]

Guardian Pipeline, L.L.C; Notice of Proposed Changes in Ferc Gas 
Tariff

March 21, 2007.
    Take notice that on March 15, 2007, Guardian Pipeline, L.L.C 
(Guardian) tendered for filing to become part of its FERC Gas Tariff, 
First Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets to become 
effective on April 15, 2007:

Eighth Revised Sheet No. 6
Third Revised Sheet No. 75
Sixth Revised Sheet No. 103

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of 
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, 
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of 
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). 
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that 
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on 
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to 
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
[email protected], or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Philis J. Posey,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-5521 Filed 3-26-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
```
Before the 

 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY 

 WASHINGTON, DC 

INTRA ALASKA BUSH MAIL RATES Docket OST-2003-14694 

COMMENTS ON SHOW CAUSE ORDER 2010-12-28

PROPOSING UPDATED MAIL RATES

 

Communications with respect to this 

document should be addressed to: 

 Joseph Anzalone, Esq. 

 Office of General Counsel 

 United States Postal Service 

 475 L’Enfant Plaza SW 

 Washington, DC 20260-1127 

 joseph.anzalone@usps.gov 

Date Filed: January 27, 2011 

1
2

The Postal Service presents brief comments in response to Show Cause Order 2010-12-28. 

As to the substance of the rates proposed, the Postal Service has no objection. 

The Postal Service wishes to comment that it supports the reporting by air carrier(s) to the 

Department of mail class costs that are segmented by actual equipment used to perform 

service. The Postal Service also supports the Department’s use of such equipmentsegmented cost data to calculate operational costs accordingly. Equipment-segmented cost 

data is an improved method for calculating accurate and reliable operational costs for air 

carriers that operate multiple types of equipment. Therefore, the Postal Service believes 

that such segmented reporting by carriers and the Department’s methodology should be the 

imposed standard practice for all air carriers with multiple equipment types, such as 

Frontier Alaska. 

The Postal Service does not support Ryan Air, Inc.’s position of excluding specific 

equipment from the rate class that it legally operates within. All equipment operating 

under Part 121 or Part 135 bush operations should be included in the appropriate rate class 

established in the Department’s ratemaking methodology.
Before the Second Division,

December 23, 1940

No. 45056.

#### Protests 134413-G, etc., of M. W. Amberg & Co. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
No. 46813.

#### Protests 61353-K, etc., of H. P. Lambert Co., Inc. (Boston).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

It was stipulated that the lily bulbs in question are the same in all material respects ás those the subject of *Oy Wo Tong Co.*v. *United States*(5 Cust. Ct. 70, C. D. 372). In accordance therewith the claim for free entry under paragraph 1669 was sustained.
NUMBER 13-21-00413-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG

 

IN RE ARCH FUNDING, LLC

 

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

 

ORDER

Before Justices Benavides, Longoria, and Tijerina

Order Per Curiam

On November 24, 2021, relator Arch Funding, LLC filed a petition for writ of 

mandamus seeking to compel the trial court to vacate its order setting aside a trustee’s 

sale and to abate the underlying case until Robert Tudor and Fred Harms are joined as 

necessary parties. 

This Court sua sponte orders the underlying trial court proceedings to be stayed. 

See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.10(b) (“Unless vacated or modified, an order granting temporary 

relief is effective until the case is finally decided.”). We request that the real parties in 
2

interest, JP Lynx Capital Developments, LLC and Jose Pedraza Jr., or any others whose 

interest would be directly affected by the relief sought, file a response to the petition for 

writ of mandamus on or before the expiration of ten days from the date of this order. See

id. R. 52.2, 52.4, 52.8.

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed on the

30th day of November, 2021.
EXHIBIT
32.1
 
 CERTIFICATION
 
 Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection
Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.ss. 1350, as adopted), I, Claudio Gianascio, Chief
Executive Officer and  Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby
certifies that, to the best of his or her knowledge:
 
 1.
The Company's AnnualReport on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2008,
and to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the "PERIODIC
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 Periodic Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition of the Company at the end of the
period covered by the Periodic Report and results of operations of the Company
for the period covered by the Periodic Report.
 
 Dated:
March9, 2008
 
 
 S/ Claudio
Gianascio
 Claudio
Gianascio
 CEO &
CFO
 
 A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Oranco, Inc. and will be retained by Oranco, Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request
 
 THIS
CERTIFICATION ACCOMPANIES THIS REPORT PURSUANT TO SS. 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002 AND SHALL NOT BE DEEMED "FILED" BY THE COMPANY FOR PURPOSES OF
SECTION 18 OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

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

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002**

 

Pursuant to 18U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, each of the undersigned principal executive officer of RefcoFundHoldings, LLC, the general partner (the “General Partner”) of S&P ManagedFutures Index Fund, LP (the “Fund”), and principal financial officer of theGeneral Partner hereby certifies that:

 

(1)                   theaccompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q the Fund for the quarterlyperiod ended June 30, 2005 (the “Report”) fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

(2)                   theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Fund.

 

 
| Dated: August 15,  2005 | /s/ Richard  C. Butt                          |   |
|------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------|--------|
|                         | Richard C.  Butt                              |
|                         | President                                     |
|                         | (principal  executive officer)                |
|                         | RefcoFund  Holdings, LLC                      |
|                         | General  Partner                              |
|                         |                                          |
|                         | /s/ Philip  Silverman                         |   |
|                         | Philip  Silverman                             |
|                         | Secretary                                     |
|                         | (principal  financial and accounting officer) |
|                         | RefcoFund  Holdings, LLC                      |
|                         | General  Partner                              |

 

 

Thiscertification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Fund forpurposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

 

1

----
Exhibit 32.1



NPTEST HOLDING CORPORATION



CERTIFICATION



The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with the periodic report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004 (the
Report) for the purpose of complying with Rule 13-a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.



Ashok Belani, the Chief Executive Officer and David Mullin,
the Chief Financial Officer of NPTest Holding Corporation each certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:



| | 1. | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of NPTest Holding Corporation.
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: May 13, 2004



/s/ Ashok BelaniAshok BelaniChief Executive Officer/s/ David MullinDavid MullinChief Financial Officer
#### LOUIS SAROK, *ET AL.,*PLAINTIFFS-PETITIONERS, v. HOWARD A. GOLDBERGER, *ET ALS.,*DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

*Mr. Louis Sarok*and *Mrs. Kathleen Sarok in propria persona.*

*Messrs. Mead, Gleeson, Hansen & Pantages*and *Mr. Stanley G. Bedford*for the respondents.

March 21, 1967.

Denied.
#### PEOPLE *v.*HERRERA.

This case is controlled by *People*v. *Cole*(1968), 382 Mich 695.

Appeal from Court of Appeals, Division 3, T. G. Kavanagh, P. J., and McGregor and Fitzgerald, JJ., affirming Saginaw, Fred J. Borchard, J.

Submitted October 7,1969.

(Calendar No. 4 Docket No. 52,115.)

Decided January 12, 1970.

12 Mich App 67, reversed.

Lupe Ruth Herrera was convicted of manslaughter. Defendant appealed to Court of Appeals. Affirmed. Defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded for a new trial.

*Frank J. Kelley,*Attorney General, *Robert A. Derengoski,*Solicitor General, *George E. Thick, II,*Prosecuting Attorney, and *E. Michael Dwan,*Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for the people.

*Doozan, Scorsone S Trogan,*for defendant.

T. M. Kavanagh, J.

For the reasons given and authorities cited in *People*v. *Cole*(1969), 382 Mich 695, this cause is reversed and remanded for a new trial.

*50T. E. Brennan, C. J., and Kelly, and Adams, JJ., concurred with T. M. Kavanagh, J.

Dethmers and Black, JJ., concurred in result.

T. Gr. Kavanagh, J., did not sit in this case.
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

Wniteb ~tate~ ~ourt of ~peaI~

for tbe jfeberaI ~irtuit

CENCAST SERVICES, L.P., CENEX SERVICES,

L.P., DISC ACQUISITION CORP., DISC

MANAGEMENT SERVICES GROUP, INC., DISC

TALENT GROUP, INC., EP MANAGEMENT

SERVICES, L.P., EP PRODUCTION SERVICES,

L.P., EP TALENT SERVICES, L.P., PIXPAY

SERVICES, L.P., AND SCREENPAY, INC.,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

UNITED STATES,

Defendant-Appellee.

2012-5142, -5143, -5144, -5145, -5146, -5147,

-5148, -5149, -5150, -5151

Appeals from the United States Court of Federal

Claims in consolidated case nos. 02-CV-1916, 02-CV-1917,

02-CV-1918, 02-CV-1919, 02-CV-1920, 02-CV-1921, 02-

CV-1922, 02-CV-1923, 02-CV-1924, and 02-CV-1925,

Judge George W. Miller.

ON MOTION

Before SCHALL, Circuit Judge.

Case: 12-5142 Document: 37 Page: 1 Filed: 11/02/2012
CENCAST SERVICES v. US

ORDER

2

The Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers, Studio Transportation Drivers, Local Union No. 399 of

the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, and International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees Moving

Picture Technicians, Artists and Allied Crafts ofthe United

States, Its Territories and Canada, AFL-CIO, CLC move

for leave to file briefs amicus curiae in support of Cencast

Services, L.P., et al. The United States moves to file an

extended brief.

Upon consideration thereof,

IT Is ORDERED THAT:

(1) The motions for leave to file briefs amicus curiae

are granted.

(2) The United States' motion to file an extended

briefis denied.

(3) The United States' response briefis due within 40

days of the date of this order.

FOR THE COURT

/s/ Jan Horbaly

Jan Horbaly

Clerk

s26

Case: 12-5142 Document: 37 Page: 2 Filed: 11/02/2012