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

I, Damien R. Tanaka, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President of General
Dynamics, Inc., (the "Company"), hereby certify that, to the best of my
knowledge and belief:

1. The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB, of the Company for the three month
period ended March 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the "Quarterly Report"), fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;
and

2. The information contained in this Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

Date: May 25, 2006

/s/ Damien R. Tanaka

Damien R. Tanaka
Chairman of the Board,
President and
Chief Executive Officer
```
----

(2004/C 65 E/048)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0854/03

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(20 March 2003)

Subject:   Prudential supervision

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(2 May 2003)

----

(1)  Commission Press Releases IP/01/1880 and IP/03/97.

(2)  See judgement of the Court of 19 December 1991, Francovich and Bonifaci, joined cases C-6/90 and C-9/90, ECR(1991) p. I-5357.

(3)  See judgement of the Court of 5 March 1996, Brasserie du Pêcheur and The Queen v. Secretary of State for transport, ex parte: Factortame Ltd and others, joined cases C-46/93 and C-48/93, ECR(1996) p. I-1029.

----
#### Robert C. WESTRA, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-479.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

July 12, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE P-COM
INC. FORM 10-K/A FOR THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          60,216                  17,963
<SECURITIES>                                    27,929                  24,263
<RECEIVABLES>                                   73,404                  49,384
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (2,521)                   (580)
<INVENTORY>                                     58,003                  32,947
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               229,565                 132,251
<PP&E>                                          46,215                  26,933
<DEPRECIATION>                                (13,902)                 (6,348)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 305,521                 155,452
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           54,930                  41,440
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             4                       4
<OTHER-SE>                                     148,293                 112,475
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   305,521                 155,452
<SALES>                                        190,545                 101,853
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               220,702                 120,953
<CGS>                                          110,267                  60,362
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  129,235                  74,058
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                61,771                  37,971
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (2,315)                   (441)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 29,943                   9,830
<INCOME-TAX>                                    11,052                     956
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             18,891                   8,874
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                    18,891                   8,874
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.45                    0.23
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.43                    0.22
        

</TABLE>
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

In the Matter of: MORRY WAKSBERG,

M.D.,

 Debtor,

MORRY WAKSBERG, M.D.,

 Appellant,

 v.

LEVENE, NEALE, BENDER, RANKIN

& BRILL L.L.P.,

Appellees.

No. 09-56406

D.C. No. 2:08-cv-07393-MMM

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Margaret M. Morrow, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 15, 2011** 

Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

FILED

MAR 04 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 09-56406

The individual, Morry Waksberg, M.D., appeals from the district court’s

order dismissing his appeal from the bankruptcy court’s order granting Levene,

Neale, Bender, Rankin & Brill L.L.P.’s application for compensation in underlying

Chapter 7 proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We

review for an abuse of discretion. Fitzsimmons v. Nolden (In re Fitzsimmons), 920

F.2d 1468, 1471 (9th Cir. 1990). We vacate and remand. 

The district court’s dismissal of the appeal was based on its determination

that, despite its previous order to show cause detailing Waksberg’s procedural

obligations and its extension of time for compliance, Waksberg had never filed a

Statement of the Issues in the bankruptcy court. However, Waksberg filed a

Statement of the Issues in the bankruptcy court by the final deadline the district

court had imposed. Although the Statement’s caption contained the case number

for a related bankruptcy case, causing it to be filed in that separate case, it also

prominently bore the case numbers for the bankruptcy and district court cases on

appeal here. Accordingly, it cannot be said that Waksberg, who was proceeding

pro se at the time, failed to comply with Bankruptcy Rule 8006. See Brookfield

Communs. v. W. Coast Entm’t Corp., 174 F.3d 1036, 1046 (9th Cir. 1999) (a

district court necessarily abuses its discretion where it bases its ruling on a clearly

erroneous finding of fact).
3 09-56406

In light of our disposition, we need not reach whether the district court

abused its discretion by denying Waksberg’s motion for reconsideration. 

The parties shall bear their own costs on appeal. 

VACATED and REMANDED.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-40083

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

AMURABI MEDINA-CRUZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:14-CR-936-1

Before JONES, WIENER, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Amurabi MedinaCruz has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with 

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 

229 (5th Cir. 2011). Medina-Cruz has not filed a response. We have reviewed 

counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We 

concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

November 16, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-40083 Document: 00513762179 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/16/2016
No. 16-40083

2

issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw 

is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the 

APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 16-40083 Document: 00513762179 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/16/2016
WHERE"
~THEY'A

Do you want to vote absentee?
Here’s how to get started.

CONTACT YOUR
[ima fa] VOTING ASSISTANCE OFFICER
Exhibit 10.96

EXTENSION AGREEMENT

Bank
of America, N.A.,
    as Administrative Agent
Attn: Suzanne Paul
231 South LaSalle Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604

Ladies
and Gentlemen:

The
undersigned hereby agrees to extend, effective April 3, 2002, its Commitment and the Maturity Date under the Credit Agreement dated as of April 3, 2001 among
SOURCECORP, Incorporated, f/k/a F.Y.I. Incorporated, each of the Lenders party thereto, Bank of America, N.A., as Administrative Agent, and Banc of America Securities LLC, as sole lead arranger and
sole book agent (as the same may be amended or otherwise modified from time to time, the "Credit Agreement") for 364 days to April 2, 2005
pursuant toSection 2.1(d)of the Credit Agreement. Terms defined in the Credit Agreement are used herein as therein defined.

This
Extension Agreement shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the law of the State of Texas. The Extension Agreement may be signed in any number of counterparts, each of
which shall be an original, with the same effect as if the signatures thereto and hereto were upon the same instrument.

| |  | TEXAS CAPITAL BANK, NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION
| |  | ----------------------------------------
| |  | Name:                                   
| |  |                                         
| |  |                                         

|Agreed and Accepted:                               
|---------------------------------------------------
|SOURCECORP, INCORPORATED, f/k/a
F.Y.I. INCORPORATED
|By:                                                
|Name:                                              
|Title:                                             
|BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., as Administrative Agent     
|By:                                                
|Name:                                              
|Title:                                             

---

QuickLinks
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                          BD
<LEGEND>                           0
<RESTATED>
<CIK>                              0000909108
<NAME>                             0
<MULTIPLIER>                       1
<CURRENCY>                         U.S. DOLLARS
<PERIOD-START>                     MAR-01-1999
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  FEB-29-2000
<PERIOD-END>                       MAY-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                    1
<CASH>                             1,662,122
<RECEIVABLES>                      262,644
<SECURITIES-RESALE>                0
<SECURITIES-BORROWED>              0
<INSTRUMENTS-OWNED>                11,433,164
<PP&E>                             213,790
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                     14,655,640
<SHORT-TERM>                       0
<PAYABLES>                         737,823
<REPOS-SOLD>                       0
<SECURITIES-LOANED>                0
<INSTRUMENTS-SOLD>                 0
<LONG-TERM>                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>              0
<PREFERRED>                        0
<COMMON>                           8,877,956
<OTHER-SE>                         4,058,861
[TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY]     14,655,640
<TRADING-REVENUE>                  460,570
<INTEREST-DIVIDENDS>               60,046
<COMMISSIONS>                      244,784
<INVESTMENT-BANKING-REVENUES>      312,127
<FEE-REVENUE>                      519,603
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                 1,220
<COMPENSATION>                     233,875
<INCOME-PRETAX>                    525,302
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>         356,102
<EXTRAORDINARY>                    0
<CHANGES>                          0
<NET-INCOME>                       356,102
<EPS-BASIC>                      .04
<EPS-DILUTED>                      .04

</TABLE>
### IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS No. 10
- 07

- 00297
- CV IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF JOHN A. TEINERT, DEC EASED
From the County Court at Law Coryell County, Texas Trial Court No. 5115

ORDER
In 2007, Laurance Kriegel, an alleged descendant of John A. Teinert, appealed from the trial court’s refusal to appoint him as executor of Teinert’s Estate though the will was probated and the estate administered nearly thirty years ago. We dismissed
the appeal for want of jurisdiction in January of 2009. After a petition for review and motion for rehearing was denied by the Texas Supreme Court, we issued our mandate. However, within days of that issuance, Kriegel filed another petition for review with

t he Texas Supreme Court. We then withdrew our mandate. In early 2009, the Texas Supreme Court again denied Kriegel’s petition for review. Due to an oversight on ourIn the Matter of the Estate of Teinert Page 2

part, we did not reissue our mandate at that time. We discovered our oversight when
prep aring to destroy the file. On April 21, 2015, we issued our mandate. Kriegel has now filed a motion for rehearing, requesting that we instruct the Coryell County Court to issue letters testamentary to Kriegel in the Estate of Teinert. The Court lost juris diction to modify the trial court’s judgment many years ago.
See T EX
. R. A PP
. P . 19.1(a); 19.3. Further, the only jurisdiction we now have would be in relation to whether the mandate correctly required enforcement of the Court’s prior judgment. See id

. 19.3(a). We have no jurisdiction to modify or amend that judgment as sought by Kriegel. Accordingly, Kriegel’s motion for rehearing is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Scoggins Motion dismissed Order issued and filed May 14, 2015
#### Michael P. Lendino, Plaintiff, *v.*Vito Fiorenza, Defendant.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Queens County,

April 18, 1952.

*Bernard Katzen*for defendant.

*Julius J. Gardile*for plaintiff.

Hooley, J.

Motion to vacate notice of examination of defendant before trial.

There is no attack on the items of the examination. The motion is predicated on the proposition that the action is one for slander; that the alleged slanderous words used were not *116slanderous per se; that no special damages are pleaded and that, therefore, the complaint being defective, the plaintiff is not entitled to an examination before trial.

The plaintiff is a lawyer. The slanderous words used were that he was a crook.

While it appears that in the first department it has been held that the word “ crook ” is not slanderous per se *(Villemin*v. *Brown,*193 App. Div. 777; *Hofstadter*v. *Bienstoch,*213 App. Div. 807), the rule in this department is otherAvise. *(Weiner*v. *Leviton,*230 App. Div. 312.) In that case, Judge Scudder in writing for the court said in part (p. 314): “ The word ‘crook ’ seems to be a colloquialism in this country. Slang has given it, at least to most minds, a well-understood meaning, viz., that a ‘ crook is one who violates the criminal laws.’ * * * It is in my opinion synonymous with ‘ a criminal.’ ”

The court is of the opinion that a reference to a laAvyer as a “ crook ” even though not referring to him in his capacity as a laAvyer or professional man, is slanderous per se, and that, therefore, no special damages were required to be pleaded here.

It folloAvs that the motion is denied. Settle order on notice.
**Exhibit 31.1**

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Dennis J. Martin, certify that:

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue  statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to  make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such  statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by  this quarterly report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theregistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;
4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financialreporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for theregistrant, and have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is beingprepared;

b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused suchinternal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision,to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reportingand the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordancewith generally accepted accounting principles;

c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this quarterly report based on such evaluation;and

d) Disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the registrant's internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's mostrecent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;and 

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors(or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control overfinancial reporting.

Date: August 9, 2005

/s/ Dennis J. Martin

Dennis J. Martin
Metropolitan Area,Reports per 100K Population"Anchorage, AK Metropolitan Statistical Area",433"Fairbanks, AK Metropolitan Statistical Area",353,"This chart identifies Metropolitan Areas (Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas) with a population of 100,000 or more.  Metropolitan areas are defined by Office of Management and Budget Bulletin No. 15-01, ""Revised Delineations of Metropolitan Statistical Areas, Micropolitan Statistical Areas, and Combined Statistical Areas, and Guidance on Uses of the Delineations of These Areas"" (July 15, 2015).  This chart excludes reports provided by the Alaska Attorney General.",
#### Barbara BELASKY, Individually and as tutrix of the minor, Jennifer Belasky v. H. E. DONALDSON and Fireman’s Insurance Company of Newark, New Jersey.

No. 62867.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Aug. 31, 1978.

In re: Mark Foreman and Fred Von Ah-rens, applying for writs of certiorari and *1209review and for a stay order. Parish of East Baton Rouge.

Writ denied.
SNODGRASS

Certified Public
Accountants and Consultants

EXHIBIT 99.1

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

Board of Directors

First West Virginia Bancorp, Inc.

We have reviewed the accompanying
consolidated balance sheet of First West Virginia Bancorp, Inc. and its subsidiary as of September 30, 2007, and the related consolidated statements of income for the three-month and nine-month periods ended September 30, 2007 and 2006,
and the consolidated statement of changes in stockholders equity and the consolidated statement of cash flows for the nine-month periods ended September 30, 2007 and 2006. These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of
the Companys management.

We conducted our review in accordance with standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). A
review of interim financial information consists principally of applying analytical procedures to financial data and making inquiries of persons responsible for financial and accounting matters. It is substantially less in scope than an audit
conducted in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, the objective of which is the expression of an opinion regarding the financial statements taken as a whole. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.

Based on our review, we are not aware of any material modifications that should be made to the accompanying financial statements for them to be in
conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

We have previously audited, in accordance with the standards of
the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2006, and the related consolidated statements of income, changes in stockholders equity, and cash flows for the year then
ended (not presented herein); and in our report dated February 28, 2006 we expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements.



|                         
|-------------------------
|/s/ S. R. Snodgrass, A.C.
|Wheeling, West Virginia  
|November 8, 2007         

S.R. Snodgrass, A.C.

980 National Road Wheeling, WV 26003-6400 Phone: 304-233-5030 Facsimile: 304-233-3062