alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<pre>
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 on Form 10-KSB of RPM Technologies, Inc.
(the "Company") for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 (the "Report"),
the undersigned hereby certify in their capacities as Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, respectively, 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, as amended; and

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

Date: April 5, 2007                      By:    /s/ Randy Zych
                                               ---------------------
                                               Randy Zych
                                               Chief Executive Officer
                                               (principal executive officer)


Date: April 5, 2007                      By:    /s/ David Lade
                                                ---------------------
                                                David Lade
                                                Chief Financial Officer
                                                (principal financial officer)


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signatures
that appear in typed form within the electronic version of this written
statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be
retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.
(V. D. 21)

#### W. X. Huber Co. a/c The Adamo Co. *v.*United States

Entry No. 1826.

(Decided December 14, 1955)

*Lawrence & Tuttle*for the plaintiff.

*Warren E. Burger,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Ekwall, Judge:

This is a valuation proceeding which arose by-reason of a judgment rendered by the third division of this court in the case of *W. X. Huber Co.*v. *United States,*20 Cust. Ct. 121, C. D. 1093. By that judgment, under the terms of the statute (28 U. S. C. § 2636 (d)), the matter was remanded to a single judge to “determine the proper dutiable value of the merchandise.” After numerous suspensions, the proceeding before me was abandoned by counsel for the importer. It is, therefore, dismissed.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
Exhibit 32
 Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.
 Date:  November 10, 2008
    By:
    /s/ MICHAEL S. DUNLAPName:
    Michael S. DunlapTitle:
    Chairman and Chief Executive OfficerBy:
    /s/ TERRY J. HEIMESName:
    Terry J. HeimesTitle:
    Chief Financial Officer
#### People *ex rel.*Horace E. Taylor, Resp’t, *v.*Albert S. Potts, App’lt.

Motion to dismiss denied. Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.
From: <Alicea.Jezebele@epamail.epa.gov>

To: "Fletcher, Kent" <k_fletcher@wfec.com>

Date: 7/20/2010 10:57 AM

Subject: Re: ICR Extension Request

Attachments: pic24593.jpg; June 24 2010 Extension Request.PDF

Greetings,

EPA has reviewed your extension request for the steam electric effluent

guidelines questionnaire for the following Western Farmer Electric

Cooperative (WFEC) facilities:

 Hugo Plant

 Mooreland Plant

 Anadarko Plant

The deadline for your plant to submit Version 1 of the completed

questionnaire is extended to October 15, 2010. Please note that the

deadline for Part G, if applicable, is unchanged and remains 120 days

after receipt of the questionnaire. No extensions are granted for

Versions 3 or 4 of the questionnaire; the deadline for plants receiving

these questionnaires remains 90 days after receipt.

If you need assistance during the completion of the steam electric

questionnaire, please contact the steam electric helpline via e-mail at

steamhelp@erg.com or by phone at 1-877-353-7560.

Sincerely,

(Embedded image moved to file: pic24593.jpg)

 

 From: "Fletcher, Kent" <k_fletcher@wfec.com> 

 To: Jezebele Alicea/DC/USEPA/US@EPA 

 Cc: "Fletcher, Kent" <k_fletcher@wfec.com> 

 Date: 06/24/2010 03:44 PM 

 Subject: ICR Extension Request 

Dear Ms. Alicea:

Attached is a letter requesting a 90 day extension for Western Farmers

Electric Cooperative’s ICR for all three of our plants.

WFEC will also mail the original copy.

Thank you for your consideration,
Kent Fletcher

Kent Fletcher

Environmental Specialist

Western Farmers Electric Cooperative

Office: (405) 247-4298

Cell: (405)255-3887

 (See attached file: June 24 2010 Extension Request.PDF)
REGULATORY EVALUATION

Directorate Identifier: 2012-NM-052-AD

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific 

requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of 

transportation?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)
No. 53644.

protests 135507-K, etc. (New York).

#### British West Indies Co. et al. *v.*United States,

*190Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise consist of sisal handbags similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Goldberg & Seltzer, Inc.*(36 C. C. P. A. 64, C. A. D. 399), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
#### Edward Boote *v.*United States

No. 6303.

Entry No. 719544, etc.

Invoices dated Burslem, England, August 23, 1941, etc.

Certified September 3, 1941, etc.

Entered at New York, N. Y., October 14, 1941, etc.

(Decided July 29, 1946)

*Strauss*& *Hedges*for the plaintiff.

*Paul P. Rao,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Keefe, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule A, hereto attached and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto: *

> It is hereby stipulated and agreed, subject to the approval of the court, that the merchandise consisting of earthenware and chinaware and the issues in the appeals for reappraisement listed in the attached schedule are the same in all material respects as the merchandise and issues decided in *United States*v. *Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp.,*Suit No. 4513, C. A. D. 334, and that the record in said case may be incorporated herein.

> It is further stipulated and agreed that the appraised value of the merchandise consisting of earthenware and chinaware involved in each of the cases enumerated in the attached schedule, less the additions made by the importer on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases, is equal to the price, at the time of exportation of such merchandise to the United States, at which such or similar merchandise is freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, and that the foreign value of such or similar merchandise is no higher.

> It is further stipulated and agreed that these cases may be submitted on the foregoing stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the earthenware and chinaware here involved, and that such values are the appraised values, less the additions made by the importer on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases. Insofar as the appeals relate to all other merchandise they are hereby dismissed.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v William Tucker, Appellant.

[634 NYS2d 218]

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Angiolillo, J.), rendered March 25, 1994, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, assault in the second degree, and grand larceny in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the law, by reversing the defendant’s conviction of assault in the second degree, vacating the sentence imposed thereon, and dismissing that count of the indictment; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, there was legally sufficient evidence adduced at trial to establish that the complainant suffered physical injury *(see,*Penal Law § 10.00 [9]), a necessary element of the charges of robbery in the second degree and assault in the second degree. The complainant testified that the defendant hit and pushed her in the face, causing her to fall to the floor. The complainant also testified that she received medical treatment and that she was unable to go to work for two weeks because of head and backaches.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution *(see, People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620), it is legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt *(see, People v Bogan,*70 NY2d 860; *People v Carter,*219 AD2d 732; *People v Thomas,*195 AD2d 581; *People v Powell,*181 AD2d 924). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we find that the verdict of guilt is not against the weight of the evidence *(see,*CPL 470.15 [5]).

However, because the defendant was convicted of robbery in the second degree pursuant to Penal Law § 160.10 (2) (a), his conviction of the lesser included offense of assault in the second degree pursuant to Penal Law § 120.05 (6) must be reversed and that count of the indictment dismissed *(see,*CPL 300.40 [3] [b]; *People v Brinson,*216 AD2d 900; *People v Patterson,*192 AD2d 1083; *Matter of Jamal M.,*187 AD2d 654, 655; *People v Rogers,*139 AD2d 782, 783).

*671We note that, contrary to the defendant’s contention, grand larceny in the fourth degree based upon the theory that property was taken from the person of the victim *(see,*Penal Law § 155.30 [5]) is not a lesser included offense of robbery in the second degree *(see, Matter of Albert R.,*215 AD2d 563; *People v Cintron,*199 AD2d 526; *People v Sidney,*178 AD2d 445).

The trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion by denying the defendant’s challenges for cause of two prospective jurors *(see, People v Williams,*63 NY2d 882, 885; *People v Pagan,*191 AD2d 651, 652). The record reveals that the prospective jurors in question did not possess states of mind that would have precluded them from rendering an impartial verdict *(see,*CPL 270.20 [1] [b]; *People v Williams, supra; People v Torpey,*63 NY2d 361; *People v Creighton,*215 AD2d 685; *People v Holder,*204 AD2d 482, 483; *People v Pagan, supra).*O’Brien, J. P., Pizzuto, Santucci and Joy, JJ., concur.
#### Taub, Hummel & Schnall, Inc., *v.*United States

No. 7315.

Invoices dated Nottingham, England, January 25, 1946, etc.

Certified January 30, 1946, etc.

Entered at New York, N. Y., March 14, 1946, etc.

Entry No. 745357, etc.

(Decided June 26, 1947)

*Siegel, Mandell & Davidson*for the plaintiff.

*Paul P. Bao,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

La whence, Judge:

It has been agreed between the parties hereto that the issues herein relating to the above-mentioned merchandise are the same in all material respects as those decided in *United States*v. *Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp.,*33 C. C. P. A. (Customs) 183, C. A. D. 334, and that the record therein may be incorporated herein.

Upon the agreed facts I find the export value, as defined in section 402 (d), Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for determining the values of merchandise covered by the appeals for reappraisement enumerated in the annexed schedule which is marked *“A”*and made, a part of this decision, and that such values are the appraised values, less additions made by importer on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
SETTLEMENT — MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT

|   | Debtor Party: | Manhattan Scientifics, Inc. ("MHTX") |
|--------|---------------|--------------------------------------|

|   | Creditor Parties: | Marvin Maslow ("MM") |
|--------|-------------------|----------------------|

|   | Jack B. Harrod ("JBH") |
|--------|------------------------|

|   | Gross Amount of "Soft Debt" as of 12/31/06*: | MM = $1,375,000. |
|--------|----------------------------------------------|------------------|

|   | JBH = $ 1,112,500. |
|--------|--------------------|

|   | Settlement Amount(s) at 40%: | MM = $550,000 |
|--------|------------------------------|---------------|

JBH = $445,000.

 

Propo**rt**ionate payments will be made to MM (55%) & JBH (45%) plus Interest on Settlement Amount(s) of 5% per annum on unpaid sums.

| Payment format: |
|-----------------|

 (a)        Monthly based upon net proceeds of sales of shares of Novint ("NVNT") stock owned by Debtor on the following basis: MHTX will sell shares of NVNT common stock on a weekly basis at the rate of 5% of the prior week's total trading volume over the course of each week with minimum sales of at least 2,000 shares. For example: If the prior week's trading volume is an aggregate of 70,000 shares, then MHTX will sell 5% or 3,500 shares (say 700 shares/day) during the next week. All net proceeds will be paid out 55% to MM and 45% to JBH by the 10th of each month for the prior month's sales (monthly payments shall be applied first to accrued interest and then to princip**al**), and 

(b) In the event that MHTX sells any other of its assets, i.e., Novint adult rights, or patent portfolio interests, ***50%***of the net proceeds of such sale shall be promptly paid out 55/45 to MM and JBH to accelerate the repayment of the subject debt. The Company shall retain the other 50% of the net proceeds for corporate purposes.

**•**NOTE: This format allows MHTX to potentially realize some appreciation from its ownership of NVNT shares which was the original stated purpose to incubate NVNT. MHTX shareholders might otherwise complain that the Company was not allowed by "insiders" to realize the object of its NVNT investment.

| Conditions: | Approval by counsel |
|-------------|---------------------|

 

| Marvin Maslow | Manhattan Scientifics, Inc. |
|---------------|-----------------------------|

| By:/s/ Marvin Maslow | By: Emmanuel Tsoupanarias |
|----------------------|---------------------------|

|   | December 12, 2007 | December 12, 2007 |
|--------|-------------------|-------------------|

 

Jack B. Harrod 

By:/s/ Jack B. Harrod

|   | December 12, 2007 |
|--------|-------------------|

 

----
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, 2009,
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:
March 16, 2010








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.
#### Irene A. D’Onofrio, Appellant, v James T. Boehlert et al., Respondents, et al., Defendant.

(Appeal No. 2.)

[635 NYS2d 397]

—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, *930motions denied and complaint reinstated. Same Memorandum as in *D’Onofrio v Boehlert*(221 AD2d 929 [decided herewith]). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Oneida County, Tenney, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Denman, P. J., Law-ton, Fallon, Balio and Boehm, JJ.
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 this Report on Form 10-Q of Summit Financial Services Group, Inc. (the
Company), for the quarter ended March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Marshall T. Leeds, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer
and President of the Company, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, do hereby certify, 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                            
|------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Marshall T. Leeds                                       
|Marshall T. Leeds                                           
|Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer and President
|                                                            
|Dated: May 15, 2008
December 16, 1977

#### People v Fountain.

(Docket No. 60151.)

Alvin Keith Fountain, *in propria persona,*appellant.

Request for appointment of counsel granted December 16, 1977. Defendant shall file with the Recorder’s Court for the City of Detroit an affidavit concerning his present financial status (see guidelines at 387 Mich xxxi). The prosecutor shall be furnished a copy of the financial affidavit and may challenge defendant’s asserted indigency within 20 days after receiving the affidavit. The challenge, if brought, shall be resolved at a hearing before the Recorder’s Court for the City of Detroit at which the prosecutor, defendant, and counsel for defendant shall appear personally to aid the court’s inquiry. The Recorder’s Court for the City of Detroit, upon a finding of indigency, shall appoint counsel for defendant and shall furnish any portion of the record counsel may require. The scope of the application for leave to appeal shall be limited to a discussion of the issues previously raised by defendant in the Court of Appeals with regard to the habitual offender proceedings which were brought against him in this cause.

Reported below: (After Remand) 77 Mich App 71.
No. 61403.

protests 305477-K, etc.

#### B. Westergaard & Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Protests abandoned November 14, 1957. (Not published.) (Initial No. 228576-K.) Plaintiffs’ application for rehearing granted.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 56 (Friday, March 23, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 13824]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-5398]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration


Manufacturer of Controlled Substances; Notice of Registration

    By Notice dated November 21, 2006, and published in the Federal 
Register on December 1, 2006, (71 FR 69592-69593), National Center for 
Natural Products Research-NIDA MProject, University of Mississippi, 135 
Coy Waller Lab Complex, University, Mississippi 38677, made application 
by renewal to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to be 
registered as a bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled 
substances listed in schedule I:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Drug                               Schedule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marihuana (7360)...........................  I
Tetrahydrocannabinols (7370)...............  I
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The company plans to cultivate marihuana for the National Institute 
of Drug Abuse for research approved by the Department of Health and 
Human Services.
    No comments or objections have been received. DEA has considered 
the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823(a) and determined that the registration of 
National Center for Natural Products Research-NIDA MProject, University 
of Mississippi to manufacture the listed basic classes of controlled 
substances is consistent with the public interest at this time. DEA has 
investigated National Center for Natural Products Research-NIDA 
MProject, University of Mississippi to ensure that the company's 
registration is consistent with the public interest. The investigation 
has included inspection and testing of the company's physical security 
systems, verification of the company's compliance with state and local 
laws, and a review of the company's background and history. Therefore, 
pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823, and in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33, the 
above named company is granted registration as a bulk manufacturer of 
the basic classes of controlled substances listed.

    Dated: March 8, 2007.
Joseph T. Rannazzisi,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug 
Enforcement Administration.
 [FR Doc. E7-5398 Filed 3-22-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
#### Elizabeth Goodyear, Adm’rx, etc., App’lt, v. John B. Adams *et al.,*Resp’ts.

*8. Mach Smith,*for app’lt; *8. 0. Millard,*for resp’ts.

Judgment affirmed on opinion below, with costs.

All concur.

Affirming 24 N. Y. State Rep., 31.