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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Media and Entertainment.com, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended March 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Winston Johnson, principal executive and financial officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, 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.







By:  /s/ Winston Johnson

Winston Johnson

Principal executive and financial officer
No. 96-7985.

#### Luchkowec *v.*United States.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
# •

•

• ."

MEM)RANIXJM OF M:iREEMEm' FOR WASHINGIW'S IY\NGER:US WASTE :m::GRAM AIJIHORIZATIOO AOOENI:XJM 1 

### JULY 25, 1988

'!he OlImmt: Meroc>rarrlum of Agreenent between the state of

### Washin:Jtan

## amthe unitai $tat.es Envi.roranental Protection Region X, dated June 1986, is SUWleremted by this Adderrlum 1. All 

### terms defined in the existirg MelooIa!Yiium of 1lgreeIoont shall have the same for 

### purposes of this AdderrliJr;..'l :1. Avai.l.aDi:lity of Information 

### to the Public Ecx>lay

### ,agrees, subject 

### to reStrictioos ilT(X'SE'Cl by exi..st.i.Iq state law, to make thH fullest possible disclosure of records to the p.Jblic in a marmer equivalemt 

### to 40 

### ern Part 2. 'lh.is shall in:looe all infonnation available in**~'s** records 

## amfiles, subject

### to claims ofconfidentiality

## am specific:: 

### ·statutory exenptions. state law specifies procedures for provi<:lin:J**infQ1.'l!E1"~-.ion·** 

### to the p.lblic, ard these procedures closely parallel 40 

### ern Part 2. 'lbe.":procedures generally specify a formal request lOOd1anism, but do allow that**ms~** p.lblic will be able 

### to dJtai.n certain material on a routine basis, 

### wit.holJt'a .fonnal request. 'Ihese materials in:ltde state regulations, administ.::rative staffmanuals affectirg the p.lblic, stataoonts of**~.ntal** policy, ard final opinions or orders 

### in case adjudications. In sane 

### re:spects, state law is 

### oot as specific as 40 

### ern part 2, so Ecx>logy**agrees~** 

### "in particular, 

### to inplement the followin;J procedures: i, "EcOlogy agrees that, if a p.Jblic disclosure request results in a need 

### to resolve a claim ofbJsiness confidentiality, 

## am the claim 

### canoot be resolved within the 

### twenty day response ti.ttie, then

.ECOlogywill notify the requestor that the infonnation is not

.available because of failure 

### to resolve the bJsiness .,aJIlfidentiality claim.**2~** ECology agrees that notices ofdenial ofp.1blic disclosure shall in:looe d;SOJSSion of awlicable juiicial

## awea] procedures. state law does not establish a statute of limitations on appeal.s; so notices of denial will not disalSS statutes of limitations. "'Ecology agrees 

### to maintain a log or file of suc:h denials of



### requests for information. 3.. Ecx>logy agrees that, in situations fees for p.Jblic records :might oonnally be assessed, ifEcx>logy cletemines that the**~rarrlum** of July 25, 1988 Page 2 information WOlld be of primary benefit to the general p.Jblic, 

# C/\ then the fees maybe waived or reduce:i. Requests fran the press / an::l plblic interest graJpS may also be subject to waiver or reduction of fees.



## u. s. IroI'ECI'IOO**~,** REX;IOO X


### By: 1 

# (}ki!iu,fJUfF Z Director, Department of Ecolcxy

rate:**---:;;;...~~~-----**

lDN57V7 

### Title: Acting Regional Administrator



# C'\
#### Person & Weidhorn *v.*United States

No. 6881.

Entry No. 748302.

Invoice dated London, England, March 1, 1946.

Certified March 6, 1946.

Entered at New York, N. Y., March 28, 1946.

(Decided February 14, 1947)

*Siegel, Mandell & Davidson*for the plaintiff.

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

Lawrence, 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 *391C. 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 said merchandise, 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.
#### F. L. Kraemer & Co. *v.*United States

No. 7849.

Entry No. 724006, etc.

(Decided June 23, 1950)

*Sharretts & Hillis (Howard C. Carter*of counsel) for the plaintiff.

*David N. Edelstein,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

LawreNCe, Judge:

It has been agreed between the parties hereto that the issues herein relating to the merchandise the subject of these appeals are the same in all material respects as those decided in *United States*v. *Gothic Watch Co.,*23 Cust. Ct. 235, Reap. Dec. 7712, affirming the judgment in *Gothic Watch Co.*v. *United States,*19 Cust. Ct. 309, Reap. Dec. 7438, and that the record in Reap. Dec. 7712, *supra,*may be incorporated herein.

Upon the agreed facts, I find that the attempted appraisement embodied in the second return of value by the appraiser of the merchandise covered by each of the appeals for reappraisement enumerated in the annexed schedule, which is marked “A” and made a part of this decision, was illegal, null, and void, and that the appraiser’s original return of value in each case, as reported by him to the collector of customs, constituted his appraisal of the merchandise pursuant to section 500 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U. S. C. § 1500),. and was final and conclusive in the absence of any appeal pursuant, to section 501 of said act (19 U. S. C. § 1501).

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
# C_2016048EN.01004201.xml

| 8.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 48/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 48/42

---

Judgment of the General Court of 18 November 2015 — Nu Air Polska v Commission

(Case T-75/12) (1)

1

((Dumping - Imports of certain compressors originating in China - Partial refusal to refund the anti-dumping duties paid - Determination of the export price - Deduction of anti-dumping duties - Adjustment of the temporal effects of an annulment))

(2016/C 048/47)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Nu Air Polska sp. z o.o. (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: R. MacLean, Solicitor, and A. Bochon, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Stobiecka-Kuik, K. Talabér-Ritz and T. Maxian Rusche, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action for the partial annulment of Commission Decisions K(2011) 8826 final, C(2011) 8803 final and K(2011) 8801 final of 6 December 2011 concerning applications for a refund of anti-dumping duties paid on imports of certain compressors originating in the People’s Republic of China, and, in the event that the General Court should annul those decisions, for the maintenance in force of the effects of those decisions until the Commission has adopted the measures necessary to comply with the judgment of the General Court in this case.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls Article 1 of Commission Decisions K(2011) 8826 final, C(2011) 8803 final and K(2011) 8801 final of 6 December 2011 concerning applications for a refund of anti-dumping duties paid on imports of certain compressors originating in the People’s Republic of China in so far as that article does not grant Nu Air Polska sp. z o.o. a refund of the anti-dumping duties unduly paid beyond the amounts referred to therein; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls Article 1 of Commission Decisions K(2011) 8826 final, C(2011) 8803 final and K(2011) 8801 final of 6 December 2011 concerning applications for a refund of anti-dumping duties paid on imports of certain compressors originating in the People’s Republic of China in so far as that article does not grant Nu Air Polska sp. z o.o. a refund of the anti-dumping duties unduly paid beyond the amounts referred to therein;

| 2. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders the European Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 118, 21.4.2012.

1

---
**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


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


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**







I,
      Richard M. Shepperd, the President and Chief Executive Officer of Bioanalytical
      Systems, Inc. certify that (i) the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal
      year ended September 30, 2007 (the "Report"), fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
      and (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      Bioanalytical Systems, Inc. as of the dates and for the periods set forth
      therein.








By:  /s/  Richard
                M. Shepperd
              Richard
                M. Shepperd
              President
                and Chief Executive Officer
              Date:  December
                27, 2007
Before the Second Division,

May 29, 1951

No. 55595.

#### Akawo & Co., Ltd., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 465258-G, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Rao, J.

The protests were dismissed.
No. 39174.

#### Protests 920352-G, etc., of Ignaz Strauss & Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of *Kwong*v. *United States*(T. D. 49409) the wooden stands in question were held dutiable at 33)4 percent ad valorem under paragraph 412 as claimed.
### 7 Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA- Directorate Identifier: -AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If

they do not, click (or Tab) into and then out of the changed cell

.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection,

replacement)

Do not include oncondition costs here Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine,

propeller, appliance)

Work-hours

(include

access, testing,

and close-up) Labor

cost

(@$85/h

our) Parts Cost Total Costs

(labor +

parts) Number of

U.S.

Registered

Products Total Cost

for U.S. Fleet



### Modification 112.0 $9,520.0

0 $9,520.00 

### 6 $57,120.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00



### The known number of products in compliance:

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $57,120



### Costs covered under warranty ( if known ) $

On-Condition Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection,

replacement) Work-hours

(include access,

testing, and closeup) Labor cost

(@$85/hour) Parts Cost Cost per Product

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00



### Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs) 

### :
No. 46453.

#### Protests 769710-G, etc., of Akawo & Co. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
Exhibit
32.2











CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350)








In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Walgreen Co., an Illinois corporation
(the "Company"), on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended May 31, 2009 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Wade D. Miquelon,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge:





(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/ Wade D.
Miquelon


Wade D.
Miquelon


Chief
Financial Officer


Dated:  June
25, 2009





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Walgreen Co. and will be retained by Walgreen Co. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
No. 42129.

#### Protests 622541-G, etc., of Otto Roth & Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of Abstract 40880 the protests were sustained.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                       7,844,011
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                       1,937,351
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 59,131,989
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                    182,998,058
<ALLOWANCE>                                  2,426,453
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             266,988,793
<DEPOSITS>                                 183,403,615
<SHORT-TERM>                                 4,580,800
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          2,627,959
<LONG-TERM>                                 57,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        27,622
<OTHER-SE>                                  19,333,653
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             266,988,793
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              7,994,276
<INTEREST-INVEST>                            1,496,661
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               481,223
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             9,972,160
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           4,068,807
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,972,404
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        3,930,949
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  429,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                              (4,871)
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              2,529,979
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,725,748
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   1,725,748
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,177,497
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .43
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .42
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.03
<LOANS-NON>                                    102,063
<LOANS-PAST>                                    92,337
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             1,997,453
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            2,426,453
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                         2,426,453
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
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 Quarterly Report of Intellon Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Brian T. McGee, Senior Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial 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, to the best of my knowledge:



| |  |  | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and
| | - |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                       |  |  |  |                                                  
|---------------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------------------
|Date: October 28, 2009 |  |  |  | /s/ Brian T. McGee                               
|                       |  |  |  | Brian T. McGee                                   
|                       |  |  |  | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer



60
```

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 91 (Friday, May 9, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 26415]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-10146]

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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division

Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Open SystemC Initiative

    Notice is hereby given that, on March 25, 2008, pursuant to Section 
6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 
15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Open SystemC Initiative 
(``OSCI'') has filed written notifications simultaneously with the 
Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in 
its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of 
extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust 
plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. 
Specifically, Maple Design Automation Co., Ltd., Gwacheon, REPUBLIC OF 
KOREA; Texas Instruments Incorporated, Stafford, TX; and Virtutech, 
Inc., San Jose, CA have been added as parties to this venture.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and OSCI intends to file additional 
written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.
    On October 9, 2001, OSCI filed its original notification pursuant 
to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a 
notice in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on 
January 3, 2002 (67 FR 350).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on December 11, 
2007. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to 
Section 6(b) of the Act on January 28, 2008 (73 FR 4918).

Patricia A. Brink,
Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
 [FR Doc. E8-10146 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
```
EXHIBIT 32.1


                           SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION


     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Parque La Quinta Estates (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending March 31, 2006 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Bonita R. Alverez, President 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, 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; 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: May 2, 2006



                                        By: /s/ BONITA R. ALVEREZ
                                            ___________________________
                                                Bonita R. Alverez
                                                President
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****The Bureau of Reclamation :origins and growth to 1945**
 
Volumes: One | Two
 
SuDoc Number:I 27.2:OR 4/
Item Number:0660 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000623299
 
April 16, 2018
#### A. T. Bennett, *as Trustee, etc.,*v. The National Supply Company of Kansas. A. T. Bennett, *as Trustee, etc.,*v. Floyd D. Sanger. A. T. Bennett, *as Trustee, etc.,*v. C. A. Bezona.

No. 16,069.

No. 16,070.

No. 16,071.

Practice, Supreme *Court*— Assignments *of Error*— Motion *for a New Trial.*Judgment affirmed because the denial of the motion for a new trial was.not assigned as error.

Error from Elk district court; Granville P. Airman, judge.

Opinion filed June 5, 1909.

Affirmed.

*A. F. Sims, T. J. Hudson,*and *D. J. Sheedy,*for the plaintiff in error.

*Banks & Bertenshaw, A. T. Ayers,*and *McHenry & Organ,*for the defendants in error.

*Per Curiam:*

The judgments of which A. T. Bennett, as trustee, complains were rendered upon findings made by the court upon the evidence given and admissions made upon the trials.

Motions for new trials were filed and denied, but these rulings are not assigned as error in the petition in error; therefore no question arising upon the trial of the causes can be considered by this court. *(Binns v. Adams,*54 Kan. 615; *Gas Co. v. Dooley,*73 Kan. 758.)

In the brief the errors complained of are thus specified: (1) The finding against A. T. Bennett, trustee, and rendering judgment thereon; (2) the absence of evidence to support the finding; (3) the refusal to set aside garnishment of the funds belonging to A. T. Bennett, trustee; (4) overruling the motions for a new trial.

All these except the fourth are errors of law occurring on the trial. *(Struthers v. Fuller,*45 Kan. 735; *438*Cogshall v. Spurry,*47 Kan. 448; *Giles v. Austin,*54 Kan. 616.)

The fourth specification can not be treated as an amendment of the petition in error, nor can such an amendment be allowed, because the specification was not filed in this court until after the expiration of one year from the date of the judgment. *(Crawford v. K. C. Ft. S. & G. Rld. Co.,*45 Kan. 474; *Cogshall v. Spurry, supra.)*

The right to the fund garnisheed depended upon facts found by the court, upon the. trial, and can not be reviewed here for the reasons already stated — it was a question arising upon the trial.

The judgment in each case is affirmed.