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





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. §1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Financial Industries Corporation (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, William
B. Prouty, President and 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 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
      12, 2008
            By:
            /s/ William B.
      ProutyWilliam
      B. ProutyPresident
      and Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                               12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                              31
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               101,323
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 101,354
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,234,701
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    203,000
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,336,347)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   101,354
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,800
<CGS>                                        1,622,384
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,622,384
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (160,306)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (35,185)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,779,890)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,779,890)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,779,890)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.60)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.60)


</TABLE>
#### THE FLORIDA BAR, Complainant, v. Warren S. KAFER, Respondent.

No. 53167.

Supreme Court of Florida.

May 31, 1978.

*863John A. Weiss, Asst. Staff Counsel, Tallahassee, for complainant.

Thomas V. Infantino of Felder & Ber-man, Winter Park, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Warren S. Kafer, a member of The Florida Bar, is petitioning for resignation from the Bar pending disciplinary proceedings pursuant to Rule 11.08(5), Article XI, Integration Rule of The Florida Bar. In his petition he lists seven grievance matters pending with the Ninth Judicial Circuit Grievance Committee. He admits guilt of serious violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility in these matters. He estimates that his account for clients’ monies held in trust is deficient in the sum of approximately $40,000, but he represents that he intends to repay in full all money owed to his clients from personal assets and future earnings within six months of the petition. He has waived confidentiality with respect to his petition and the grievances listed in it, and he represents that he has ceased the practice of law. Finally he asks this Court for leave to resign without right to readmission.

The Board of Governors asks that the petition be approved. We hereby approve it.* Petitioner will not be allowed to petition for readmission to the Bar at any time. *The Florida Bar Re: Leon H. Brush,*Supreme Court Case No. 51,479, 358 So.2d 1355, Opinion filed April 27, 1978.

The petition is approved.

It is so ordered.

OVERTON, C. J., and BOYD, ENGLAND, SUNDBERG, HATCHETT and ALDERMAN, JJ., concur.

*

We reject as unauthorized Kafer’s late-filed petition to resign with right to apply for reinstatement and to defer payments past six months.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

Independent Auditors' Consent

         We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements
No. 333-30655, 333-74747, 333-74715, 333-78521, 333-78567 and 333-83725 of THQ
Inc. on Forms S-8 and Registration Statements No. 333-32221, 333-60277,
333-70335, 333-85269, 333-92361 and 333-32526 on Forms S-3 of our report dated
February 24, 2000, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of THQ Inc. for
the year ended December 31, 1999.

DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Los Angeles, California
March 27, 2000
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA
No. 358 A1 2
FILED 13 JUNE 2013
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

v. BRYANT LAMONT BOYD

Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A

- 30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals , ___ N.C. App. ___, 7 3 0 S.E.2d 193 (201 2 ), on remand from this Court, ___ N.C. ___, ___ S.E.2d ___ (2012), vacating defendant’s conviction for

second

- degree kidnapping that resulted in part in a judgment entered on 1 4 April

20 1 0 by Judge Abraham P enn Jones in Superior Court, Orange County , and ordering a new trial on the charge of second

- degree kidnapping . Heard in the Supreme Court on 11 March 2013

.
Roy Cooper, Attorney General, by Robert C. Montgomery, Special Deputy Attorney General, for the State

- appellant. Staples S. Hughes, Appellate Defender, by Andrew DeSimone, Assistant Appellate Defender, for defendant

- appelle e.

PER CURIAM.

T he decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion, and this case is remanded to the Court of Appeals for consideration of the remaining issues.S TATE V

. B OYD
Opinion of the Court

- 2

- REVERSED AND REMANDED

.
FTC Disclosure Evaluation Reports

Below are links to selected disclosure-related studies or evaluations conducted by or on behalf of the Federal 

Trade Commission:

Consumer Perception of “Recycled Content” and “Organic” Claims

Federal Trade Commission, 2016

Effects of Exposure to Packages of Several Homeopathic Products on Consumer Take-Away and Beliefs

Manoj Hastak, Federal Trade Commission, 2012

Effects of a Bristol Windows Advertisement with an “Up To” Savings Claim on Consumer 

Take-Away and Beliefs

Manoj Hastak and Dennis Murphy, Federal Trade Commission, 2012

Consumer Research on Consumer Labels for Light Bulbs

Federal Trade Commission, 2009

Green Marketing Survey (methodology, questionnaire, results)

Harris Interactive, 2009

Consumer Perceptions of Heart-Health Claims for Cooking Oils and Vegetable Oil Spreads

R. Dennis Murphy, Pauline M. Ippolito, and Janis K. Pappalardo, Federal Trade Commission, 2007

Improving Consumer Mortgage Disclosures: An Empirical Assessment of Current and Prototype Disclosure 

Forms

James M. Lacko and Janis K. Pappalardo, Federal Trade Commission, 2007

Evolution of a Prototype Financial Privacy Notice: A Report on the Form Development Project

Kleimann Communication Group, 2006

Effects of Consumer Testimonials in Weight Loss, Dietary Supplement and Business Opportunity 

Advertisements (Survey materials)

Manoj Hastak and Michael B. Mazis, Federal Trade Commission, 2004

The Effect of Mortgage Broker Compensation Disclosures on Consumers and Competition: 

A Controlled Experiment (Appendices)

James M. Lacko and Janis K. Pappalardo, Federal Trade Commission, 2004

The Effect of Consumer Testimonials and Disclosures on Ad Communication for a Dietary Supplement

(Survey materials)

Manoj Hastak and Michael B. Mazis, Federal Trade Commission, 2003

A Generic Copy Test of Food Health Claims in Advertising (Appendix A, Appendix B)

Dennis Murphy, Theodore H. Hoppock, and Michelle K. Rusk, Federal Trade Commission, 1998

Life Insurance Cost Disclosure

Michael P. Lynch and Edwin Manfield, Federal Trade Commission, 1979
United States


Securities and Exchange Commission


Washington, D.C. 20549





FORM 8-K








CURRENT REPORT


Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the


Securities Exchange Act of 1934





Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): October 29, 2014














DIAMOND HILL INVESTMENT GROUP, INC.





(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)








Ohio000-2449865-0190407(State or other jurisdiction ofincorporation)(Commission File Number)(I.R.S. EmployerIdentification No.)


325 John H. McConnell Blvd., Suite 200, Columbus, Ohio43215(Address of Principal Executive Offices)(Zip Code)





Registrant's Telephone Number, Including Area Code:   (614) 255-3333








Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions:





 ̈ Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)





 ̈ Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)





 ̈ Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))





 ̈ Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))











---







Item 2.02    Results of Operations and Financial Condition





Registrant has reported its results of operations for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2014 , as described in Registrant's press release dated October 29, 2014 , a copy of which is filed herewith as Exhibit 99.1 and incorporated herein by reference.








Item 9.01.         Financial Statements and Exhibits





Exhibit No.Description99.1Press release issued by the Registrant dated October 29, 2014.





SIGNATURES





Pursuant to the  requirements  of the Securities  Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant  has duly  caused  this  report  to be  signed  on its  behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.





DIAMOND HILL INVESTMENT GROUP, INC.Date:October 29, 2014By:/s/ James F. LairdJames F. Laird, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary
260 La. 86

#### STATE of Louisiana v. George FAIRLEY.

No. 51373.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 23, 1971.

Paul Henry Kidd, Robert P. McLeod, Monroe, for defendant-appellant.

Jack P. F. Gremillion, Atty. Gen., Harry H. Howard, Asst. Atty. Gen., Robert W. Kostelka, Dist. Atty., Gilbert T. Brown, Jr., Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The defendant, George Fairley, was tried by a jury and convicted of the crime of simple burglary, La. R.S. 14:62. He was sentenced to serve three years in the Louisiana State Penitentiary at hard labor.

On this appeal, the accused is relying on one bill of exceptions to obtain a reversal of the conviction. By this bill, Fair-ley contends that no *Miranda*warnings were given and that his signed waiver was not free and voluntary, so therefore his inculpatory statements were improperly admitted.

*84We find no error in the trial court’s finding that the statements were not the product of coercion or duress, and that they were freely and voluntarily given after the defendant was fully advised of his constitutional rights as required by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). The trial court’s “Per Curiam” sets forth one factual basis for this finding. Such a factual determination by the trial judge is given great weight and will not be disturbed upon appeal unless clearly erroneous. State v. Hall, 257 La. 253, 242 So.2d 239 (1970); State v. Lacoste, 256 La. 697, 237 So.2d 871 (1970).

In this court, the defendant principally contends that he was not expressly informed, as required by *Miranda,*that if he were an indigent a lawyer would be appointed to represent him. Counsel contends that the accused was not advised of these rights, although the waiver form (and the testimony of the interrogating police officers) shows that the accused was instructed that if he were “unable to employ an attorney, the court will appoint one” for him, and that if he could not “hire” an attorney, the court could appoint one for him. We find no merit to this contention made.

Evidence warrants the finding that the accused had made an intelligent waiver of his right to remain silent and of his right to have counsel present at interrogation, before voluntarily making the statements in question. State v. Millsap, 258 La. 883, 248 So.2d 324 (1971).

For these reasons, we find the defendant-appellant’s contentions to be without merit. The conviction and sentence are affirmed.

SUMMERS, J., dissents for the reasons assigned in State v. Andry, 260 La. 79, 255 So.2d 81 rendered this day.
#### UNITED ELECTRIC COMPANY, a Florida corporation, Petitioner, v. LINDY’S OF ORLANDO, INC., Respondent.

No. 40330.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Dec. 9, 1970.

Certiorari denied. 239 So.2d 69.

ERVIN, C. J., and DREW, CARLTON, ADKINS and BOYD, JJ., concur.
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 1**  **1 -**  **62 2**  **5**

LARRY ONEAL PIERCE ,
P laintiff

– Appell ant ,

v.
TOM BERGAMINE; W.C. DEW; RITA COX , Defen d a nt s – Appell ees .

Appeal from the United States District Court for th e Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh

. James C

. Dever III , District Judge. ( 5 : 10

- c t

- 0 3 0 6 0

- D )

Submitted : April 28 , 2011 Decided: May 4 , 2011

Before DAVIS, KEENAN, and WYNN , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion

.
Larry Oneal Pierce , Appellant Pro Se

.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Larry Oneal Pierce appeals the district court ’ s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (200 6 ) complaint under 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(e)(2)(B) (200 6 ). We have reviewed the record and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we affirm the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. Pierce v. Bergamine , No. 5:10

- ct

- 03060

- D (E.D.N.C. Jan. 24, 2011) . We dispense with oral argumen t because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
LOGO OMITTED

VASQUEZ
& COMPANY LLP
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
801 South Grand Avenue, Suite 400 o Los Angeles, CA 90017 o Ph (213) 873-1790
                                                            Fax (213) 873 1777
                                                            www.vasquez50.com

December 19, 2013


Securities and Exchange Commission
100 F Street, N.E.
Washington, DC 20549


Ladies and gentlemen:

We have been furnished with a copy of the response to Item 4.01 of Form 8-K for
the event that occurred on October 6, 2011 to be filed by our former client,
Turbodyne Technologies, Inc. We agree with the statements made in response to
that item insofar as they relate to our Firm.

Very truly yours,

/s/ VASQUEZ & COMPANY LLP
-------------------------
Vasquez & Company LLP
Los Angeles, CA




           Registered with Public Company Accounting Oversight House
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Member of Private Companies Service Section and Center for
                           Public Company Audit Firms
#### In re ESTATE of Thomas Arthur LUCIANIA, Deceased.

No. 69-419.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

Sept. 19, 1969.

Appeal from County Judge’s Court, Broward County; Joe Easthope, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7250 

To amend title 23, United States Code, to expand eligibility for the surface 

transportation block grant program, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 18, 2020 

Mr. HASTINGS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To amend title 23, United States Code, to expand eligibility 

for the surface transportation block grant program, and 

for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Farm-to-Market Road 

5 Repair Act of 2020’’. 

6 SEC. 2. SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BLOCK GRANT PRO7 GRAM. 

8 Section 133 of title 23, United States Code, is 

9 amended— 

10 (1) in subsection (b)(1)— 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7250 IH

1 (A) in subparagraph (E), by striking 

2 ‘‘and’’ at the end; 

3 (B) in subparagraph (F), by striking the 

4 period at the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

5 (C) by adding at the end the following: 

6 ‘‘(G) roads in rural areas that primarily 

7 serve to transport agricultural products from a 

8 farm or ranch to a marketplace.’’; and 

9 (2) in subsection (c)— 

10 (A) in paragraph (3), by striking ‘‘and’’ at 

11 the end; 

12 (B) by redesignating paragraph (4) as 

13 paragraph (5); and 

14 (C) by inserting after paragraph (3) the 

15 following: 

16 ‘‘(4) for a project described in subsection 

17 (b)(1)(G); and’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Federal Trade Commission

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580

Bureau of Consumer Protection

Division of Advertising Practices

November 17, 2015

VIA EMAIL

[RECIPIENT AND ADDRESS]

RE: Weight-Loss Claims on Your Website

Dear [RECIPIENT]:

Staff of the Federal Trade Commission has reviewed marketing claims on your website 

[NAME/LINK] relating to weight loss. Your site contains claims of extraordinary weight loss 

that do not appear to be supportable by scientific evidence. FTC staff requests you review all 

claims you are making for your products and evaluate your support for those claims in light of 

the principles discussed in this letter. That includes expert and consumer testimonials. If your 

claims are not supported as set forth below, you should delete or revise them immediately. 

Please notify us within 48 hours via email to healthproducts@ftc.gov of the specific 

actions you will take to address our concerns. FTC staff has copied and preserved the pages of 

your website and will revisit it within 48 hours after you have notified us of the changes you 

have made.

Deceptive Advertising Claims are Illegal

It is unlawful to advertise that a product causes weight loss unless you possess wellcontrolled human clinical studies of the product, or a substantially similar product, substantiating 

that the claims are true. Such studies must be randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled, 

and conducted by researchers who are qualified by training and experience to conduct such 

studies. See, e.g., FTC v. Nat’l Urological Group, Inc., 645 F. Supp. 2d 1167, 1190, 1202 (N.D. 

Ga. 2008), aff’d, 356 Fed. Appx. 358 (11th Cir. 2009); FTC v. SlimAmerica, Inc., 77 F. Supp. 2d 

1263, 1274 (S.D. Fla. 1999); Schering Corp., 118 F.T.C. 1030, 1080, 1115-16 (1991).

Consumer testimonials are not sufficient evidence to support a weight-loss claim. 

In addition, if advertisements contain endorsements or testimonials, they must be honest 

and not misleading. For example, a claim that an endorser lost forty pounds must be supported

by evidence that the endorser actually lost forty pounds and by human clinical testing showing 

that your product can cause that much weight loss. If the endorser lost more than would be 

expected, you must clearly and conspicuously disclose the generally expected result from using 

your product. You also must disclose any connection or relationship between you and an 

endorser that may affect how a consumer would evaluate the endorsement. See Federal Trade 

Commission’s Guides Concerning Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.
Violations of the FTC Act may result in legal action in the form of a federal district court 

injunction or administrative order. An order may require you to pay back money you obtained 

from consumers. You can visit our Dietary Supplement webpage to read about some recent 

actions regarding false and unsubstantiated claims made for dietary supplements. 

Sincerely,

Karen Mandel

Attorney

Federal Trade Commission
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         908,000
<SECURITIES>                                22,914,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                9,637,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                    16,000
<INVENTORY>                                    184,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                       2,019,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,045,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              46,465,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     7,835,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  25,335,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                46,465,000
<SALES>                                     12,559,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            15,975,000
<CGS>                                       10,030,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               13,269,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              26,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,706,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,061,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,457,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,457,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.19
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.18


</TABLE>
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Corey Nickerson v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number s : 01

- 15

- 00764

- CR ; 01

- 15

- 00765

- CR; 01

- 15

- 00766

- CR

Trial court case number s : 1404004 ; 1416652; 1459622

Trial court: 176th District Court of Harris County

The clerk’ s record in the above

- referenced appeal s do not comport with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure because they do not contain the trial court’s certification of appellant ’ s right of appeal. S ee T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 25.2(d), 37.1.

The trial court clerk is directed to prepare, certify, and file in this Court a supplemental clerk’s record in each cause containing the trial court’s certification of appellant’s right of appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 34 .5(a)( 12). The supplemental record s should be filed on or before November 24, 2015

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 37.1.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Rebeca Huddle

 Acting individually

Date: November 5, 2015