alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.1   CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002    In connection with the Report of Competitive Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2013, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Carl OConnell, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 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.    Carl OConnell Chief Executive Officer  June 19, 2013  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Competitive Technologies and will be retained by Competitive Technologies and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# C_2014292EN.01005903.xml

| 1.9.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 292/59 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.9.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 292/59

---

Order of the General Court of 27 June 2014 — Württembergische Gemeinde-Versicherung v Commission

(Case T-421/12) (1)

1

2014/C 292/76

Language of the case: German

The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 373, 1.12.2012.

1

---
EXHIBIT 32.1

       CERTIFICATE OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
   PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)


The undersigned, Christina M. Strauch, Chairman of the Board of Directors, Chief
Executive  Officer,  Treasurer and Chief Financial  Officer of Rim Holdings Inc.
(the "Company"),  has executed this  certification in connection with the filing
with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Company's Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 (the  "Report").  The  undersigned
hereby certifies 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.

IN WITNESS  WHEREOF,  the undersigned has executed this  certification as of the
11th day of August, 2003.


/s/ Christina M. Strauch
-----------------------------------
Christina M. Strauch
Chairman of the Board of Directors,
Chief Executive Officer, Treasurer
and Chief Financial Officer
Terry Bursey, P. Geo.


28 Mill Road,
 P.O. Box 1420
 Red Lake, Ontario
 P0V 2M0
   CONSENT
      March 12th, 2013
  Rubicon Minerals Corporation
 Suite 1540 – 800 West Pender Street,
 Vancouver, B.C.
 V6C 2V6
  And
  United States Securities and Exchange Commission
    Dear Sirs/Mesdames:
   I hereby consent to being named in the Annual Information Form of the Company, dated March 12, 2013 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012 (the “AIF”) and to the use of the technical information prepared by me or under my supervision relating to the Company’s Red Lake properties, which information is contained in the AIF and incorporated by reference in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012.
   Sincerely,
  “/s/ Terry Bursey”
  Terry Bursey, P. Geo.
 Regional Manager
 Rubicon Minerals Corporation
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
(PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER)
PURSUANT TO 
TITLE 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 40-F of MDS Inc. (the "Company") for the year ending October 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, James A.H. Garner, Executive Vice President Finance and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. s.1350, as adopted pursuant to s.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), as applicable, 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: March 17, 2005 | __/s/ James A. H. Garner(James A. H. Garner)Executive Vice-President Finance & Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
|-------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
# C_2012194EN.01002301.xml

| 30.6.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 194/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.6.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 194/23

---

Action brought on 10 April 2012 — Beyond Retro v OHIM — S&K Garments (BEYOND VINTAGE)

(Case T-170/12)

2012/C 194/39

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Beyond Retro Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Malynicz, Barrister)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: S&K Garments, Inc. (New York, United States)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 31 January 2012 joined cases R 493/2011-4 and R 548/2011-4; and |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 31 January 2012 joined cases R 493/2011-4 and R 548/2011-4; and

| — | Order the Office and the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal to bear their own costs and pay those of the applicant. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Office and the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal to bear their own costs and pay those of the applicant.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: International Registration of the word mark ‘BEYOND VINTAGE’, for goods and services in classes 14, 18 and 25 — Community trade mark application No W 994046

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community trade mark registration No 5629035 of the word mark ‘BEYOND RETRO’, for goods and services in classes 25 AND 35

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition in part

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the applicant’s appeal in case R 548/2011-4 and annulled the decision of the opposition division in case R 493/2011-4

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 207/2009.

Pleas in law:

---
No. 40456.

#### Protest 943458-G of Rockwood & Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Dallinger, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of candy molds the same as those the subject of Abstract 23492 excepting- that the machine of which these molds are parts contains electric heating elements. On the agreed facts the claim at 35 percent under paragraph 353 was sustained.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-1700 

CHARLES WILLIAM LEVY,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

REITA M. RICHMOND; UNITED STATES POSTAL

SERVICE,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District

Judge. (CA-05-615-1)

Submitted: September 29, 2005 Decided: October 5, 2005

Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Charles William Levy, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Charles William Levy appeals the district court’s order

dismissing his civil action as frivolous, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(e)(2)(B) (2000). Our review of the record and the district

court’s opinion discloses no reversible error. Accordingly, we

affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Levy v.

Richmond, No. CA-05-615-1 (E.D. Va. filed June 17, 2005 & entered

June 20, 2005). 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.

AFFIRMED
# C_2015065EN.01000301.xml

| 23.2.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 65/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.2.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65/3

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 18 December 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Staatssecretaris van Financiën v X

(Case C-87/13) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Freedom of establishment - Tax legislation - Income tax - Non-resident taxpayer - Deductibility of costs relating to a historic building occupied by its owner - Costs not deductible in respect of a historic building solely on the ground that it is not listed in the State of taxation, whereas it is listed in the State of residence))

(2015/C 065/04)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Staatssecretaris van Financiën

Appellant:

Respondent: X

Respondent:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 49 TFEU must be interpreted as not precluding legislation of a Member State under which, on the ground of protection of the national cultural and historical heritage, costs relating to listed historic buildings may be deducted solely by owners of historic buildings situated in its territory, provided that that possibility is available to owners of historic buildings which may form part of the cultural and historical heritage of that Member State despite being located in the territory of another Member State.

---

(1)  OJ C 141, 18.5.2013.

1

---
Exhibit 99.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of The PBSJ Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John B. Zumwalt, III, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:



| | (1) |  | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                 
|-----------------
|February 14, 2003
|
No. 46477.

#### Protest 829090-G of Kwan On Chong (Cleveland).

Opinion by

Walker, J.

On the authority of *Lamborn*v. *United States*(27 C. C. P. A. 46, C. A. D. 60) the protest was dismissed.
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 192 (Thursday, October 3, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 61363]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-24182]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality

Correction--Scientific Information Request on Medication Therapy 
Management

    The original date of publication for this Federal Register notice 
was September 17, 2013, 78 FR 57159. On this publication, the Web site 
that appears under ADDRESSES is incorrect in page 57159. The correct 
Web site is: http://effectivehealthcare.AHRQ.gov/index.cfm/submit-scientific-information-packets/

    Dated: September 27, 2013.
Richard Kronick,
AHRQ Director.
[FR Doc. 2013-24182 Filed 10-2-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-90-P
```
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLANewsNews Article View

# Level II Mentoring Program Graduation Ceremony

By Brian KenneyDLA Land and Maritime People and Culture Directorate

                COLUMBUS, Ohio  –              
Defense Logistics Agency Land and Maritime’s Level II Mentoring Program graduation is scheduled to take place March 13 at 9:30 a.m. in the Building 20 Auditorium. 

Join the People and Culture Directorate in recognizing the graduates, mentors and presenters for fulfilling their commitments. 

All associates and leadership are welcome to attend. Associates should check with their supervisor for approval and EAGLE code. 

For a complete list of graduates, associates should view the internal Message of the Day.

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

Develop Leaders L&MResource the Enterprise L&MSustain Our People L&MFortify the Culture L&Mperform and Reward L&MDLA L&M
#### KEARNEY v. COLLINS.

March 23, 1836.

*Rule to show cause why the judgment should not he set aside.*

*A*promise in writing to “ settle all the interest due on a mortgage on or before the first Monday of October,” is not an instrument of writing for the payment of money within the act of 28th March 1835, entitling the plaintiff to judgment for want of an affidavit of defence.

THIS action was brought to D. T. ’35, 334. Plaintiff filed a copy of an instrument of writing executed by the defendant (which follows) under the act of 28th March 1835, and entered judgment for want of an affidavit of defence. Defendant obtained this rule to show cause why the judgment should not be set aside. The instrument on which this suit was brought was in these words:

“Whereas two mortgages were given by a person whose name is not now recollected, on a farm now owned by Samuel Kearney which is payable to George Scott and the heirs of James Shreeve for nine hundred dollars, the principal of which has this day been paid by Samuel Collins who was bound to pay the same, and it is not now convenient to compute the back interest,

*14“ This agreement witnesseth that I, the above named Samuel Collins, for and in consideration of the sum of five dollars to me in hand paid by Samuel Kearney aforesaid, do hereby promise and agree, that I will *settle all the interest due on the said mortgage on*or before the first Monday of October next, and keep the said Samuel Kearney and his property indemnified from any loss on account of the same.”

*J. A. Phillips,*for plaintiff.

*I. Norris,*for defendant.

Per Curiam.—

This is not an “ instrument of writing for the payment of money” within the meaning of the act, for two reasons. 1. It is not an agreement to pay a sum certain, and nothing appears of record by which the amount of the arrears oí interest can be ascertained. 2. It is not an agreement to *pay money,*but to “ *settle”*an unascertained amount of interest due on a mortgage. To “ settle” does not always mean a payment, or even a payment in money. It may consist of the mere striking of a balance where there may have been interest accounts, a compromise, composition, payment in goods or the procurement of a release. Nothing on this subject is left to us by the act, by way of inference, to help the plaintiff’s claim to have judgment.

Judgment set aside.
Source Categories

Emissions 

(tons/yr) %

Cumulative 

%

Aerospace Industries 8.66E+00 0.10 0.10

Agricultural Chemicals and Pesticides 3.87E-01 0.00 0.10

Asphalt Concrete Manufacturing 7.60E-01 0.01 0.11

Asphalt Roofing Manufacturing 3.42E-01 0.00 0.12

Carburetors, Pistons, Rings and Valves Manufacturing 6.50E-03 0.00 0.12

Cement, Hydraulic (not subject to Portland Cement MACT) 8.10E-02 0.00 0.12

Chemical Preparations 7.50E-01 0.01 0.13

Chemicals and Allied Products, nec 2.60E-02 0.00 0.13

Clay Products Manufacturing 2.80E-02 0.00 0.13

Commercial Physical Research 2.68E-01 0.00 0.13

Condensed and Evaporated milk 2.50E-03 0.00 0.13

Cyclic Crude and Intermediate Production [1] 1.76E+01 0.20 0.33

Gasoline Distribution Stage I 3.15E+03 36.20 36.53

Hand and Edge Tools Manufacturing 1.35E-01 0.00 36.54

Highway And Street Construction 7.13E+00 0.08 36.62

Hydrochloric Acid Production 1.06E+00 0.01 36.63

Industrial Boilers 2.66E+00 0.03 36.66

Industrial Organic Chemical Manufacturing 2.52E+00 0.03 36.69

Industrial Inorganic Chemical Manufacturing 3.94E+01 0.45 37.14

Institutional/Commercial Heating 5.59E+00 0.06 37.21

Iron Foundries 2.50E-03 0.00 37.21

Large Appliance (Surface Coating) 1.25E-01 0.00 37.21

Lubricating Oils and Greases 1.82E-01 0.00 37.21

Manufacturing Industries, nec 1.63E+00 0.02 37.23

Metal Furniture (Surface Coating) 2.50E-01 0.00 37.23

Miscellaneous Organic Chemical Manufacturing (MON) 1.75E+01 0.20 37.43

Motor Vehicle Equipment 1.55E-02 0.00 37.43

Municipal Landfills 1.30E+02 1.50 38.93

Natural Gas Transmissions and Storage 2.76E+02 3.17 42.10

Nonmetallic Mineral Products Manufacturing 2.50E-03 0.00 42.10

Oil and Natural Gas Production 4.15E+03 47.73 89.83

Paints and Allied Products Manufacturing 9.50E+00 0.11 89.94

Petroleum Bulk Stations and Terminals (not subject to 

Petroleum Refining MACT) 1.69E+00 0.02 89.96

Petroleum Refineries: Other Sources Not Distinctly Listed 1.10E+02 1.26 91.22

Petroleum Refining (not subject to Petroleum Refining MACT) 4.61E+01 0.53 91.75

Pharmaceuticals Production 2.37E-02 0.00 91.75

Plastic Parts and Products (Surface Coating) 1.80E-02 0.00 91.75

Benzene

Page 1
Source Categories

Emissions 

(tons/yr) %

Cumulative 

%

Benzene

Plastics Materials and Resins Manufacturing [2] 9.46E+00 0.11 91.86

Potato Chips and Similar Snacks 1.25E-01 0.00 91.86

Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW) 3.59E+02 4.12 95.98

Secondary Lead Smelting 1.09E+01 0.13 96.11

Sewage Sludge Incineration 4.49E+00 0.05 96.16

Space Research and Technology 1.25E-01 0.00 96.16

Stationary Combustion Turbines 3.14E+00 0.04 96.20

Stationary Internal Combustion Engines 3.29E+02 3.78 99.98

Taconite Iron Ore Processing 2.35E-03 0.00 99.98

Tire Production 3.70E-02 0.00 99.98

Wood Preserving 1.38E+00 0.02 100.00

Total Emissions 8701.21 100.00

Foot Notes

[1] Cyclic Crude and Intermediate Production was titled Cyclic 

Crude and Intermediate Production (not subject to petroleum 

refining MACT) in the May 1999 Report

[2] Plastics Materials and Resins Manufacturing (Nov. 2002 

Inventory) was titled Polymers and Resins (I,II,IV) in the May 

1999 Report

Page 2
No. 56751.

protest 176338-K (New York).

#### James M. McCunn & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

At the trial it was stipulated that the facts and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *Browne Vintners Co., Inc.*(34 C. C. P. A. 112, C. A. D. 351) and that the quantities reported by the inspector as manifested not found were not in fact received by the importer. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the decision cited it was held that duty and internal revenue tax are not assessable upon such portions of the merchandise as were reported by the inspector as manifested not found. The protest was sustained to this extent.