alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 32


                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S. C SECTION 1350,
                                  AS ENACTED BY
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with Third Wave Technologies, Inc. (the "Company) Form 10-Q for
the period ended September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), John Puisis, Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, and James Herrmann, Principal Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002, 18
U.S.C Section 1350, that on the date of this certification:

    (1) The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (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 this Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Company.

                                               /s/ John Puisis
                                               ---------------------------------
                                               John Puisis
                                               Chief Executive Officer
                                               November 7, 2005

                                               /s/ James Herrmann
                                               ---------------------------------
                                               James Herrmann
                                               Principal Financial Officer
                                               November 7, 2005
No. 54403.

#### Air Express International Agency, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 132006-K (Tampa).

Ekwall, Judge:

Plaintiff herein claims that duty which was assessed on 90 alarm clocks should be refunded for the reason that said clocks were exported under customs supervision. The collector assessed duty at the rate of $1 each, plus a tax of 65 percent ad valorem and 3 cents per pound, as being in chief value of copper, under paragraph 368 of the Tariff Act of 1930 and I. R. C. 3425.

At the trial held at the port of Miami counsel entered into the following stipulation:

> 

It was further agreed that no marking duty was imposed and that the sole question in issue is whether the 90 clocks are subject to duty.

*495Section 558 (b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by section 24 of the Customs Administrative Act of 1938 (T. D. 49646; 19 U. S. C. 1940 ed. § 1558 (b)), is in the following language:

> (b) When articles are exported or destroyed under customs supervision after once having been released from customs custody, as provided for in subsection (c) of section 1304 of this title, such exportation or destruction shall not exempt such articles from the payment of duties other than the marking duty provided for in such subsection (c).

No briefs have been filed. Plaintiff contends in its protest that the goods were in customs custody in that they were covered by a warehouse bond. Inasmuch as the case of clocks here involved was withdrawn from warehouse for consumption and delivered to the importer this contention is without merit.

The statute is plain and unambiguous, and we find no facts in the case as presented which would entitle the plaintiff to the relief claimed. See *Franklin Sugar Refining Company*v. *United States,*202 U. S. 580, 50 L. ed. 1153; *Illinois Central Railroad Co.*v. *United States,*2 Cust. Ct. 422, C. D. 168; *United States*v. *Maine Central Railway Co.,*9 Ct. Cust. Appls. 192, T. D. 38015.

The protest is overruled. Judgment will be rendered for the defendant.
Customer Service Hotline: 1-800-438-2474

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION III

1650 Arch Street

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2029

January 31, 2013

Mr. David K. Paylor, Director

Virginia Department of Environmental Quality

629 East Main Street

P.O. Box 1105

Richmond, Virginia 23218

Dear Mr. Paylor:

On October 1, 2012, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) received 

a revision to the Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP) from the Virginia Department of 

Environmental Quality. This SIP revision amends regulation 9VAC5 Chapter 151 that contains 

the transportation conformity requirements for federal agencies undergoing transportation 

projects in order to incorporate federal revisions to transportation conformity requirements. EPA 

has determined that the submittal is administratively and technically complete, and is reviewing 

it to prepare a Direct Final Rulemaking. 

If members of your staff have any questions, they may direct them to Mr. Gregory Becoat, 

at (215) 814-2036, the principal contact for this rulemaking. 

Sincerely,

 /s/

 Diana Esher, Director

 Air Protection Division
**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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Capital Lease Funding, Inc.
      (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Paul H.
      McDowell, 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.








/s/
      PAUL
      H. McDOWELL


Paul
      H.
      McDowell


Chief
      Executive Officer


March
      7,
      2007






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 Capital Lease Funding, Inc. and will be
      retained by Capital Lease Funding, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
      Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
No. 42148.

#### Protest 986580-G of Andrew Makris & Bros. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of *Locatelli*v. *United States*(T. D. 49302), and *Locatelli*v. *United States*(T. D. 48284) the protest was sustained.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

MATTHEW ALLEN LAWTON,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 342 WAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 9th day of January, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 146 (Wednesday, July 30, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40814-40815]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-19976]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Project No. 2114-032]


Public Utility District No. 2 of Grant County; Notice of 
Availability of Draft Environmental Assessment

July 24, 1997.
    A draft environmental assessment (DEA) is available for public 
review. The DEA was prepared for the Public Utility District No. 2 of 
Grant County (licensee) application to replace the turbines at its 
Wanapum Development.
    In summary, the DEA examines the environmental impacts of two 
alternatives for replacing the turbines at the Wanapum Development: (1) 
Licensee's proposed action: replacement of 10 Kaplan turbines; and (2) 
no-action. These alternatives are described in detail on pages one and 
two of the DEA.
    The DEA recommends approval of the licensee's request to replace 
the Wanapum turbines as proposed. The DEA concludes that implementation 
of this alternative would not constitute a major federal action 
significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.
    This DEA was written by staff in the Office of Hydropower Licensing 
(OHL). As such, the DEA is OHL staff's preliminary analysis of FWS's 
recommendation for turbine replacement at the Priest Rapids Project. No 
final conclusions have been made by the Commission regarding this 
matter.
    Should you wish to provide comments on the DEA, they should be 
filed within 30 days from the date of this notice. Comments should be 
addressed to: Ms. Lois D. Cashell, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,

[[Page 40815]]

Washington, DC 20426. Please include the project number (2114-032) on 
any comments filed.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-19976 Filed 7-29-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Exhibit 21.1

AMTECH SYSTEMS, INC. AND ITS
SUBSIDIARIESSUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

Name
    
    Jurisdiction in which
      incorporatedTempress Systems, Inc.
    
    State of TexasTempress Holdings B.V.
    
    The NetherlandsTempress Systems B.V.
    
    The NetherlandsTempress Manufacturing B.V.
    
    The NetherlandsTempress Engineering B.V.
    
    The NetherlandsTempress Onroerend Goed B.V
    
    The NetherlandsP.R. Hoffman Machine Products, Inc
    
    State of ArizonaBruce Technologies, Inc
    
    State of MassachusettsBruce Technologies Europe GmbH
    
    Federal Republic of GermanyR2D Automation SAS
    
    France


75

---
Exhibit
10.10


 


SECOND AMENDMENT
TO CREDIT AGREEMENT


 


THIS AMENDMENT TO CREDIT
AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”) is entered into as of August 31, 2007, by and
between SUNPOWER CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation (“Borrower”), and WELLS
FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION (“Bank”).


 


RECITALS


 


WHEREAS, Borrower is
currently indebted to Bank pursuant to the terms and conditions of that certain
Credit Agreement between Borrower and Bank dated as of July 13, 2007, as
amended from time to time (“Credit Agreement”).


 


WHEREAS, Bank and
Borrower have agreed to certain changes in the terms and conditions set forth
in the Credit Agreement and have agreed to amend the Credit Agreement to
reflect said changes.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, for
valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby
acknowledged, the parties hereto agree that the Credit Agreement shall be
amended as follows:


 


1.                                      Section 4.9(a)
is hereby deleted in its entirety, and the following substituted therefor:


 


“(a)         Minimum Liquidity (defined as unencumbered
and unrestricted cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities acceptable
to Bank, which, if cash, is U.S. Dollar denominated, and, if other than cash,
consist of financial instruments or securities, acceptable to Bank, maintained
in United States domiciled accounts) equal to or greater than one and one half
(1.50) times the outstanding principal balance of the Line of Credit, including
the amount available to be drawn under outstanding Subfeature Letters of Credit
plus amounts drawn and not yet reimbursed thereunder, determined as of the end
of each calendar month.”


 


2.                                      Except
as specifically provided herein, all terms and conditions of the Credit
Agreement remain in full force and effect, without waiver or modification. All
terms defined in the Credit Agreement shall have the same meaning when used in
this Amendment. This Amendment and the Credit Agreement shall be read together,
as one document.


 


5.                                      Borrower
hereby remakes all representations and warranties contained in the Credit
Agreement and reaffirms all covenants set forth therein. Borrower further
certifies that as of the date of this Amendment there exists no Event of
Default as defined in the Credit Agreement, nor any condition, act or event
which with the giving of notice or the passage of time or both would constitute
any such Event of Default.


 


1

















 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the
parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be executed as of the day and year
first written above.


 


	
   

  	
  WELLS FARGO BANK,

  
	
  SUNPOWER CORPORATION

  	
     NATIONAL
  ASSOCIATION

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  By:

  	
  /s/ EMMANUEL T.
  HERNANDEZ

  	
   

  	
  By:

  	
  /s/ MATTHEW A.
  SERVATIUS

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Emmanuel T. Hernandez

  	
   

  	
  Matthew A. Servatius

  
	
   

  	
  Chief Financial Officer

  	
   

  	
  Vice President

  
						



 


2
**EXHIBIT32.01**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

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

**ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

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

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of PDF Solutions, Inc. (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on November 9, 2009 (the “Report”),I, John K. Kibarian, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:

 

(1) TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 
|   | /s/ JOHN K.  KIBARIAN                    |
|--------|------------------------------------------|
|   | John K. Kibarian                         |
|   | *President  and Chief Executive Officer* |
|   | *(Principal  Executive Officer)*         |

 

Date: November 9,2009

 

----
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 China Natural Gas, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Qinan Ji, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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:
August 10,
2009





/s/ Qinan JiQinan
      Ji, Principal Executive
Officer
**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**

|   | (1) | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d));                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/ ROBERT                    T. FABER |
|   | Robert                    T. Faber                                                                         |
|   | *President                    and Chief Executive Officer and**Chief                    Financial Officer* |

----
#### E. Fougera & Co., Inc. *v.*United States

No. 6618.

Entry No. 768583, etc.

Invoices dated London, England, May 3, 1941, etc.

Certified May 6, 1941, etc.

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

(Decided December 13, 1946)

*Lane & Wallace*and *Lane, Young & Fox*for the plaintiff.

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

Cole, Judge (Abstract):

These appeals for reappraisement of various items of merchandise concern the so-called British purchase tax, described in the law of the United Kingdom entitled, “Finance (No. 2) Act 1940 3 & 4 Geo. 6 Ch. 48.” The said tax was held not to be an item to be included in foreign value as defined in section 402 (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended by the Customs Administrative Act of 1938 (19 U. S. C. 1940 ed. § 1402 (c)). *United States*v. *Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp.,*33 C. C. P. A. 183, C. Á. D. 334.

*482. An agreed set of facts; embodied in the stipulation of submission, establish, that export value, section 402 (d) -of the'Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U. S. C. 1940 ed. ■§ 14Q2 (d)), is the proper basis for appraisement of the instant merchandise, and that such statutory values of the articles in question are the appraised values, less additions made by the importer on entry because of advances in similar cases.
USGSHomeContactUSGSSearchUSGS

Data Series 447
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1019

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus FRED A. LOTFIAN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District ofMaryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CA00-1835-PJM) Submitted: May 16, 2002 Decided: May 22, 2002 Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Fred A. Lotfian, Appellant Pro Se. Lynne Ann Battaglia, Tamera Lynn Fine, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Fred A. Lotfian appeals from the district court’s order entering judgment in favor of the United States in its action to recover amounts due on a promissory note executed in connection with a student loan. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Lotfian , No. CA-00-1835-PJM (D. Md. filed Dec. 7, 2001 & entered Dec. 10, 2001). We deny as moot the Government’s motion to require Lotfian to serve his informal brief. 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
#### Holzer & Co. (Hudson Shipping Co., Inc. — Broker) et al. *v.*United States

No. 7787.

Entry No. 737981/1-4, etc.

(Decided January 26, 1950)

*Siegel, Mandell & Davidson (Sidney Mandell*of counsel) for the plaintiffs.

*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, *529affirming tbe 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.
SCPW-13-0005642

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

 

STATE OF HAWAI#I, Respondent,

vs.

DeWITT LONG, Petitioner.

 

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

(CR. NO. 12-1-1613)

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE 

PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, McKenna, and Pollack, JJ.)

Upon consideration of petitioner DeWitt Long’s petition

for a writ of habeas corpus, filed on November 25, 2013, the

documents attached thereto and submitted in support thereof, and

the record, it appears that petitioner has alternative means to

seek relief and presents no special reason for this court to

invoke its jurisdiction at this time. See Oili v. Chang, 57 Haw.

411, 412, 557 P.2d 787, 788 (1976) (the supreme court “will not

exercise its original jurisdiction in habeas corpus proceedings

when relief is available in a lower court and no special reason

exists for invoking its jurisdiction”). Accordingly, 

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCPW-13-0005642

13-FEB-2014

08:05 AM
2

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for a writ of

habeas corpus is denied without prejudice.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, February 13, 2014.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr.

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Richard W. Pollack
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. Section 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report ofSouth Shore Resources Inc.(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period endedSeptember 30, 2008as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I,Michael Kabin, 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| |   

Dated this 12thday of November, 2008.

MICHAEL KABINMichael KabinChief Executive Officer

























---
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1




               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference into the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 and S-3 of our report dated November 19, 1999 (except for
Note 5, as to which the date is January 13, 2000) with respect to the
consolidated financial statements of Worldwide Xceed Group, Inc. (formerly
X-Ceed, Inc. and Subsidiaries) included in the Company's Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended August 31, 2000.



                              /s/ Holtz Rubenstein & Co., LLP
                              HOLTZ RUBENSTEIN & CO., LLP


Melville, New York
November 15, 2000