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
  (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 as of the
dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.
 Date: September 10, 2007
    /s/ CHARLES A. RATNERName:
    Charles A. RatnerTitle:
    President and Chief Executive Officer/s/ THOMAS G. SMITHName:
    Thomas G. SmithTitle:
    Executive Vice President,
Chief Financial Officer and Secretary
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Department of Justice Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392]
 ACTION: Notice of registration.
 SUMMARY: Registrants listed below have applied for and been granted registration by-the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) as importers of various classes of schedule I or II controlled substances.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The companies listed below applied to be registered as importers of various basic classes of controlled substances. Information on previously published notices is listed in the table below. No comments or objections were submitted and no requests for hearing were submitted for these notices. Company
FR citation
PublishedSharp Clinical Services, Inc
83 FR 13521
March 29, 2018.Fisher Clinical Services, Inc
83 FR 13519
March 29, 2018.Wildlife Laboratories Inc
83 FR 14505
April 4, 2018.Catalent Pharma Solutions, LLC
83 FR 14504
April 4, 2018.Lipomed
83 FR 15627
April 11, 2018.Almac Clinical Services Incorp
(ACSI) 83 FR 15634
April 11, 2018.Clinical Supplies Management Holdings, Inc
83 FR 16901
April 17, 2018.
 The DEA has considered the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823, 952(a) and 958(a) and determined that the registration of the listed registrants to import the applicable basic classes of schedule I or II controlled substances is consistent with the public interest and with United States obligations under international treaties, conventions, or protocols in effect on May 1, 1971. The DEA investigated each company's maintenance of effective controls against diversion by inspecting and testing each company's physical security systems, verifying each company's compliance with state and local laws, and reviewing each company's background and history.
                    ( print page 28012) Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 952(a) and 958(a), and in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34, the DEA has granted a registration as an importer for schedule I or II controlled substances to the above listed companies. Dated: June 6, 2018. John J. Martin, Assistant Administrator.


[FR Doc. 2018-12884 Filed 6-14-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
#### Thomas WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-1090.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 27, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 32.1

Certification

Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United
States Code)

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350,
Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of SCOLR Pharma, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the Company), does hereby certify that:

To my knowledge, the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 (the Form 10-K) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|               |  |  |  |     |  |                        
|-------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | -----------------------
|               |  |  | 
|March 24, 2010 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Stephen J. Turner  
|Date           |  |  |  |     |  | Stephen J. Turner,     
|               |  |  |  |     |  | Chief Executive Officer

A signed original
of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Sonya Y. White et al., Appellants, v Southside Hospital et al., Defendants, and William M. Fuchs, Respondent.

[721 NYS2d 678]

—In an action, *inter alia,*to recover damages for *475wrongful death, the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Warshawsky, J.), dated March 16, 2000, as granted the motion of the defendant William M. Fuchs for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The respondent, Dr. William M. Fuchs, established a prima facie case of his entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. He presented uncontradicted evidence that he examined the decedent, Ophelia White, only once, solely for the purpose of a pre-employment physical and that he did not thereafter provide any treatment to her. Accordingly, no physician-patient relationship was created unless Dr. Fuchs affirmatively advised the decedent as to a course of treatment *(see, Heller v Peekskill Community Hosp.,*198 AD2d 265; *Hickey v Travelers Ins. Co.,*158 AD2d 112). The evidence that Dr. Fuchs advised the decedent of a positive tuberculosis test result and that she should obtain a second opinion is insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact that Dr. Fuchs affirmatively advised the decedent as to a course of treatment *(see, Durso v City of New York,*251 AD2d 8; *Violandi v City of New York,*184 AD2d 364; *cf., Forrester v Zwanger-Pesiri Radiology Group,*274 AD2d 374; *Heller v Peekskill Community Hosp., supra).*As liability for medical malpractice may not be imposed in the absence of a physician-patient relationship, the Supreme Court properly granted the motion of Dr. Fuchs for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him *(see, Zimmerly v Good Samaritan Hosp.,*261 AD2d 614). O’Brien, J. P., Friedmann, H. Miller and Schmidt, JJ., concur.
#### AIRCO, INC., et al. v. ALABAMA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION et al.

77-342.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

July 21, 1978.

James D. Brooks, Mobile, for AIRCO, Inc., et al., appellants and industrial inter-venors.

Maurice F. Bishop, Birmingham, for Honorable George C. Wallace, as Governor, and the State of Alabama, intervenors.

Carl L. Evans, Montgomery, for Alabama Public Service Commission, appellee.

John Bingham, of Balch, Bingham, Baker, Hawthorne, Williams & Ward, Birmingham, and Lange, Simpson, Robinson & Som-erville, Birmingham, and Steiner, Crum & Baker, Montgomery, for appellee, Alabama Power Co.

JONES, Justice.

This case involves the Alabama Public Service Commission’s grant of an emergency rate increase on January 20, 1977. The Circuit Court dismissed the appeal as moot, holding that no effective relief could be granted. We affirm.

On January 20, 1977, Alabama Power Company was granted a $47.2 million emergency rate increase (on an annual basis) which was to remain in effect until May 15, or until a permanent rate became effective. Charges were collected on this emergency rate from January 20 through April 27, 1977, and Industrial Intervenors paid approximately $15.2 million pursuant to those charges.

On April 26, 1977, the APSC issued its Order (effective April 28) setting perma*971nent rates for all customers. No appeal was taken from this Order.

When timely appeal was filed on the emergency rate Order, no supersedeas bond was posted. The Circuit Court dismissed the appeal as moot on January 28, 1978.

It is well established that there can be but one lawful rate in effect at any given time and that rate is the rate established by the APSC, as long as it remains unchanged. *T. R. Miller Mill Co. v. Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co.,*207 Ala. 253, 92 So. 797 (1921). Because there was no supersedeas bond posted, the charges were collected under a lawful rate and cannot be refunded. *Alabama Gas Corp.*v. *Wallace,*293 Ala. 594, 308 So.2d 674 (1975); and *State v. Alabama Public Service Commission,*293 Ala. 553, 307 So.2d 521 (1975) (involving General Telephone Company of the Southeast). See also *Foshee v. General Telephone Company of the Southeast,*295 Ala. 70, 322 So.2d 715 (1975). Thus, there is no effective remedy upon which relief can be granted. To render an opinion based solely upon the Commission’s alleged improper actions (without seeking a remedy therefrom) or upon its prospective improprieties would be to render impermissible advisory opinions. See *Smith v. Alabama Dry Dock & Shipbuilding Co.,*293 Ala. 644, 309 So.2d 424 (1975).

Therefore, the Order of the Circuit Court dismissing the appeal for mootness is due to be affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

All the Justices concur.
#### Richard Lee WASLEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-91.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Dec. 13, 1972.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### Ralph H. BEARDEN, Jr., Appellant, v. GREATER MIAMI BEACH MOTEL ASSOCIATION et al., Appellees.

Nos. 71-806, 71-933.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 21, 1971.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 21, 1972.

Ralph H. Bearden, Jr., and Joseph A. Ruszkowski, Miami, for appellant.

*74Fuller & Feingold, Miami Beach, Stuart Simon, County Atty., and St. Julien P. Rosemond, Asst. County Atty., for appellees.

Before PEARSON and HENDRY, JJ„ and LILES, WOODIE A., Associate Judge.

PER CURIAM.

The orders appealed denied the several appellants’ petitions to intervene. They are affirmed because the appellants have not brought a sufficient record to this court to demonstrate reversible error. See Morceau v. Meader, Fla.App.1965, 179 So.2d 242.

Affirmed.
#### Mary Rouse Duval CARTER, as Trustee, etc., Appellant, v. Sidney HOUGH, Appellee.

No. R-111.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Jan. 23, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
Exhibit 21.1  Subsidiaries

Trumps,  Inc.,  a  Texas  corporation,  100%  owned.
Tantric  Enterprises,  Inc.,  a  Texas  corporation,  100%  owned.
Tantra  Dance,  Inc.,  a  Texas  corporation,  100%  owned.
Tantra  Parking,  Inc.,  a  Texas  corporation,  100%  owned.
RCI  Entertainment  (Texas),  Inc.,  a  Texas  corporation,  100%  owned.
RCI  Entertainment  (Louisiana)  Inc.,  a  Louisiana  corporation,  100%  owned.
RCI  Entertainment  (Minnesota),  Inc.,  a  Minnesota  corporation,  100% owned.
Taurus  Entertainment  Companies,  Inc.,  a  Colorado  corporation,  93%  owned.
<PAGE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                       3,254,900
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,402,204
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,159,966
<PP&E>                                      61,787,303
<DEPRECIATION>                              17,796,504
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              58,100,845
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,205,118
<BONDS>                                     38,482,891
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  14,395,132
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                58,100,845
<SALES>                                      3,147,645
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,277,769
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,094,859
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               631,110
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             773,932
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                279,021
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            279,021
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   279,021
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Ernest FREEMAN v. The Honorable JUDGE PRESIDING IN the CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF ORLEANS, SECTION “A”, State of Louisiana.

No. 54476.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 5, 1974.

In re: Ernest Freeman applying for writ of mandamus and habeas corpus.

*243Writ denied. The complaint here is same as raised and denied in previous application to this court. (No. S387S), La., 284 So.2d 770.
#### Frances H. LITTLE et al. v. MISSISSIPPI CHEMICALS EXPRESS, INC. and United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company.

No. 54272.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 25, 1974.

In re: United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co., applying for Certiorari, or Writ of Review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Parish of Calcasieu. 285 So.2d 267.

Writ denied. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal there is no error of law in the judgment.
---

| | KPMG LLP                         | Telephone | (604) 691-3000
| | -------------------------------- | --------- | --------------
| | Chartered Accountants            | Fax       | (604) 691-3031
| | PO Box 10426 777 Dunsmuir Street | Internet  | www.kpmg.ca   
| | Vancouver BC V7Y 1K3             |           |               
| | Canada                           |           |               

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Board of Directors
  Great Basin Gold Ltd.

We consent to the use of our report dated February 24, 2006 with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Great Basin Gold Ltd. as at December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the related consolidated statements of operations, deficit and cash flows for
each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2005, included in this annual report on Form 40-F.

(signed) KPMG LLP

Chartered Accountants

Vancouver, Canada 
  February 24, 2006

---
<Page>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

    We hereby consent to the incorporation of our report dated November 5, 2003,
except for the fourth paragraph of Note 16, as to which the date is December 26,
2003, included in this Form 10-K, into the Company's previously filed
Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 33-40586, 33-43702, 33-47298,
33-73800, 333-9705 and 333-37927).

                                          GOLDSTEIN GOLUB KESSLER LLP

New York, New York

December 26, 2003








                                       55
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, I, Donald P. Lofe, Jr., Chief Financial Officer of The PMI Group, Inc. (Company), hereby certify that
the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2008 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                      |  |  |  |                           
|--------------------- |  |  |  | --------------------------
|Dated: March 16, 2009 |  |  |  | /S/    DONALD P. LOFE,
JR.
|                      |  |  |  | Donald P. Lofe, Jr.       
|                      |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer   



The foregoing
certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE>          UT
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from FPL's
condensed consolidated balance sheet as of
March 31, 2000 and condensed consolidated statements of income and cash flows
for the three months ended March 31, 2000 and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.

<CIK>                                  0000037634
<NAME>              Florida Power & Light Company
<MULTIPLIER>                            1,000,000
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                     DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-TYPE>                               3-MOS
<BOOK-VALUE>                             PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                  $7,893
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                $1,441
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                     $850
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                   $0
<OTHER-ASSETS>                             $412
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             $10,596
<COMMON>                                   $0
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                  $0
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                        $0
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>             $4,701
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      $0
<PREFERRED>                                $226
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                       $2,079
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                         $0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                  $0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>             $0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>              $0
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                  $0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                $0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                           $0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>             $3,590
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>              $10,596
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                  $1,338
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                       $60
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                 $1,127
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                 $1,187
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                    $151
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                         $(1)
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>             $150
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                   $40
<NET-INCOME>                               $110
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                $4
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>              $106
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                   $0
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                  $0
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                     $516
<EPS-BASIC>                              $0
<EPS-DILUTED>                              $0


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE JUNE 30,
1997 10-K OF GRIFFITH CONSUMERS COMPANY AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERNCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENT.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000935814
<NAME> GRIFFITH CONSUMERS COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           3,212
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   12,846
<ALLOWANCES>                                       673
<INVENTORY>                                      4,999
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                23,132
<PP&E>                                          34,635
<DEPRECIATION>                                  11,524
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 125,277
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           22,563
<BONDS>                                         31,634
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        20,691
<OTHER-SE>                                    (11,580)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   125,277
<SALES>                                        272,964
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               277,117
<CGS>                                          221,485
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  222,278
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                56,146
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   341
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,711
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (10,098)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (3,650)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6,448)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,448)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### Robert Earl REED, Petitioner, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Division of Corrections, Respondent.

No. 73-1419.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Dec. 19, 1973.

Habeas Corpus denied.
**AD Economic Evaluation**

Docket No . FAA - 20 15 - 2714 Directorate ID : 2014 - SW - 052 - AD Helicopter Model: A irbus Helicopters Model AS332C1, AS332L 1, AS332L2, EC225LP, AS 365N2, AS 365 N3, EC 155B, and EC155B1 helicopters with a ce rtain energy absorbing seat. Number of Helicopters (U.S. Operators): 52 Helicopters in the US Registry . Reason : The actions of this proposed Airworthiness Directive are intended to prevent objects from being stowed under the seat as these objects could reduce the energy- absorbing function of the seat, resulting in injury to the seat occupants during an accident. Costs : Parts per Helicopter $ Minimal Labor per Helicopter ( .25 work hour X $85 for inspection ) $ 21 Other (Explain) Total Cost per Heli copter $21 Total US Fleet Cost $1,092 Executive Order 12866 : Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action?” Yes ( ) No (  ) DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures : Is the AD significant? Yes ( ) Explain Below No (  ) Regulatory Flexibility Act : Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Yes ( ) No (  ) Project Engineer : Robert Grant