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

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Pedro (Pete) P. Rodriguez, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge, the Annual Report of Exar Corporation on Form 10-K for the period ended March 28, 2010 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
that information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Exar Corporation.

Date: June 10, 2010



|                                               
|-----------------------------------------------
|/s/    PEDRO
(PETE) P. RODRIGUEZ               
|Pedro (Pete) P. Rodriguez                      
|Chief Executive Officer, President and Director
|(Principal Executive Officer)
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 15-2526

___________________________

James Edward Thornberg

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

State Farm Fire and Casualty Company; Dale Gerdin; Carol Gerdin; John & Jane

Does 1-5

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis

____________

 Submitted: March 29, 2016

Filed: April 5, 2016

[Unpublished]

____________

Before GRUENDER, ARNOLD, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.
In this diversity action, James Thornberg appeals the adverse judgment entered

after the district court determined that his complaint was barred by the applicable 1

statute of limitations.

Upon careful de novo review, we conclude that Mr. Thornberg’s own

complaint, filed in 2014, established that his claims accrued in 1999 and thus were

untimely under the applicable six-year statute of limitations. See Strawn v. Mo. State

Bd. of Educ., 210 F.3d 954, 957 (8th Cir. 2000) (standard of review); see also Minn.

Stat. § 541.05 subdiv. 1 (six-year statute of limitations for certain civil actions). We

note that Mr. Thornberg was not entitled to equitable tolling based on fraudulent

concealment, as his complaintshowed he was aware of his claims in 1999. See Minn.

Laborers Health and Welfare Fund v. Granite Re, Inc., 844 N.W.2d 509, 514 (Minn.

2014) (fraudulent concealment tolls statute of limitations only until party discovers,

or has reason to discover, cause of action). We also note that--even assuming he was

entitled to statutory tolling based on an impaired mental state--his claims were

nonetheless time-barred, as such tolling is limited to five years. See Minn. Stat.

§ 541.15(a) (limitations period shall be suspended during periods of, inter alia,

plaintiff’s insanity, provided thatsuch period shall not be extended for more than five

years). Finally, we conclude that the district court properly denied Mr. Thornberg’s

motion to amend his complaint, and his motion to stay the court’s ruling. See Silva

v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 762 F.3d 711, 719-20 (8th Cir. 2014) (court may deny leave

to amend when proposed amendments would be futile);see also Toben v. Bridgestone

Retail Operations, LLC, 751 F.3d 888, 894 (8th Cir. 2014) (to obtain stay of ruling

on summary judgment motion, party must file affidavit affirmatively showing how

stay will enable him to rebut showing of absence of genuine issue of fact). 

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

The Honorable Susan Richard Nelson, United States District Judge for the

1

District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable

Jeffrey J. Keyes, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.

-2-
# C_2021431EN.01003701.xml

| 25.10.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 431/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.10.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 431/37

---

Judgment of the General Court of 8 September 2021 — Griesbeck v Parliament

(Case T-10/21) (1)

(Law governing the institutions - Rules governing the payment of expenses and allowances to Members of the Parliament - Parliamentary assistance allowance - Recovery of sums unduly paid - Burden of proof - Rights of the defence - Error of assessment - Proportionality)

(2021/C 431/44)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Nathalie Griesbeck (Ancy-sur-Moselle, France) (represented by: J.-L. Teheux, J.-M. Rikkers and G. Selnet, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: N. Görlitz, T. Lazian and M. Ecker, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of (i) the decision of the Bureau of the Parliament of 5 October 2020 which confirmed the decision of the Quaestors of 21 April 2020 rejecting the complaint directed against the decision of the Secretary-General of the Parliament of 18 October 2019 concerning the recovery from the applicant of a sum of EUR 111 872,18 unduly paid as parliamentary assistance, (ii) that decision of the Secretary-General of the Parliament, and (iii) the corresponding debit note of 24 October 2019.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Ms Nathalie Griesbeck to pay, in addition to her costs, those incurred by the European Parliament. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Ms Nathalie Griesbeck to pay, in addition to her costs, those incurred by the European Parliament.

---

(1)  OJ C 72, 1.3.2021.

---
#### KLEIN *v.*WARDEN OF MARYLAND PENITENTIARY

[App. No. 5, (Adv.).]

September Term, 1962

*622
      *Decided July 10, 1962.*

Before the full Court.

Per Curiam.

John J. Klein (applicant) was found guilty in a non-jury trial under five different indictments for robbery, perverted sex practice, larceny and assault, and sentenced to fourteen years in the Maryland Penitentiary. He was represented at the trial by a court-appointed attorney. He did not appeal. Subsequently he filed an application for relief under the Post Conviction Procedure Act, which was denied after a hearing at which he was represented by court-appointed counsel other than the counsel who had defended him at the trial for the crimes.

In his application to this Court for leave to appeal from the denial of relief, applicant made the following contentions (which he had also raised below) : (1) that he was arrested *623without a warrant; (2) that the evidence was insufficient to convict; (3) that perjured and conflicting testimony was used to convict; (4) that the evidence used to convict was seized illegally; (5) that applicant failed to appeal due to his ignorance and lack of funds; and (6) that his court-appointed counsel had not adequately represented him.

We have reviewed the record presented to us and find no merit in the first five of the above-mentioned contentions. We therefore reject them for the reasons set forth in Judge Duckett’s opinion below.

However, the sixth contention is that counsel, although appointed at a sufficiently early date prior to the trial of the criminal charges, had conferred with applicant for only five minutes, a half-hour before the trial was to begin, and that he had no concept of how to conduct applicant’s defense. We cannot ascertain from the record before us whether there is any substance to this contention. If in fact the allegations are true, it might amount to the deprivation of a fair trial. Cf. *Brown v.*Warden, 228 Md. 654, 179 A. 2d 419 (1962). We shall therefore remand the application for further proceedings, with the limitation that only the question of adequacy of representation by counsel be considered, and the facts determined in this regard.

*Application for leave to appeal denied as to contentions nos. 1 to 5, inclusive; leave to appeal granted as to contention no. 6 and case remanded for further consideration of that contention.*
# C_2021502EN.01001103.xml

| 13.12.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 502/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.12.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 502/11

---

Appeal brought on 27 February 2021 by José María Castillejo Oriol against the order of the General Court (First Chamber) delivered on 11 February 2021 in Case T-696/20, Castillejo Oriol v Spain and Commission

(Case C-145/21 P)

(2021/C 502/17)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Appellant: José María Castillejo Oriol (represented by: J. Jover Padró, lawyer)

Other parties to the proceedings: Kingdom of Spain and European Commission

By order of 6 October 2021, the Court of Justice (Ninth Chamber) dismissed the appeal as being in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded and ordered José María Castillejo Oriol to bear his own costs.

---
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      EXHIBIT 21

                              LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES

The following list contains the names and jurisdictions of organization of
Habersham Bancorp's direct and indirect subsidiaries. Habersham Bancorp owns
100% of the outstanding stock of each listed entity, except for BancMortgage
Financial Corp., Appalachian Travel Service and Advantage Insurers, Inc., which
are wholly owned subsidiaries of Habersham Bank.

Name and Jurisdiction

Habersham Bank, a Georgia state bank.
Security State Bank, a Georgia state bank.
The Advantage Group, Inc. a Georgia corporation.
BancMortgage Financial Corp., a Georgia corporation.
Appalachian Travel Service, Inc., a Georgia corporation.
Advantage Insurers, Inc., a Georgia corporation.



                                       69
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1
 
                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT
 
<TABLE>
<S>                                           <C>
Name of Subsidiary:.......................... ICOS Systems GmbH
Jurisdiction of Organization:................ Germany
Name Under Which Doing Business.............. ICOS Systems Computer Vertriebs
                                              GmbH
 
 
Name of Subsidiary:.......................... IKOS Systems, Ltd.
Jurisdiction of Organization:................ United Kingdom
Name Under Which Doing Business.............. IKOS Systems, Limited
 
 
Name of Subsidiary:.......................... IKOS Systems K.K.
Jurisdiction of Organization:................ Takatsu-ku, Kawasaki-shi, Kanagawa
Name Under Which Doing Business.............. IKOS Systems Kabushiki Kaisha
 
 
Name of Subsidiary:.......................... Virtual Machine Works, Inc.
Jurisdiction of Organization:................ Delaware
Name Under Which Doing Business.............. Virtual Machine Works, Inc.
 
 
Name of Subsidiary:.......................... IKOS (India) Pvt. Ltd.
Jurisdiction of Organization:................ India
Name Under Which Doing Business.............. IKOS (India) Pvt. Ltd.
</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEETS AND STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS OF THE COMPANY'S 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 1998, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000754591
<NAME> RAY ELLISON MORTGAGE ACCEPTANCE CORP.
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          20,679
<SECURITIES>                               103,132,149
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               595,683
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             114,910,435
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          601,956
<BONDS>                                    101,907,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        10,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  10,909,621
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               114,910,435
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            33,483,803
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               26,846,468
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          17,510,900
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              6,637,335
<INCOME-TAX>                                 2,138,100
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          4,499,235
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 4,499,235
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   449.92
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   449.92
        

</TABLE>
COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE

THIRD DISTRICT OF TEXAS

P.O. BOX 12547, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2547

(512) 463-1733

Date: May 17, 2013

Case Numbers: 03-13-00154-CV & 03-13-00155-CV

Trial Court Nos.: 12-1288-C277 & 12-0459-T277

Style: Carolyn Barnes v. Velocity Credit Union

You are hereby notified that appellant’s motion to consolidate (in cause number 03-13-00154-

CV only) was granted on the date noted above. Also, the enclosed opinion and judgment were 

sent this date to the following persons: 

The Honorable Ken Anderson

Judge, 277th District Court

405 Martin Luther King, Box 6

Georgetown, TX 78626

Mr. Mark A. Mayfield

Gardere, Wynne, Sewell, L.L.P.

600 Congress Avenue, Suite 3000

Austin, TX 78701

The Honorable Lisa David

Williamson County District Clerk

P. O. Box 24

Georgetown, TX 78627

Ms. Carolyn Barnes

419 Indian Trail

Leander, TX 78641
#### Robert William LACASSE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-520.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 14, 1973.

Appeal dismissed.
From: John Summerhays/R5/USEPA/US

To: "Schmidt Cortney" <CKSchmidt@vcsmc.com>, 

Cc: "Straw Ann" <ALStraw@vcnainc.com>, "Cox Dirk" <DACox@vcsmc.com>, 

FDindoffer@BODMANLAW.COM, "Gower Matthew" <MMGower@vcsmc.com>, Daniel 

Schaufelberger/R5/USEPA/US@EPA, Douglas Aburano/R5/USEPA/US@EPA, Jane Woolums/R5/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 10/15/2012 02:32 PM

Subject: Cost-Effectiveness and Emissions Calculations

Cortney and others:

Again, thank you for coming to Chicago and participating in a productive meeting.

Attached are three files. The first file provides emissions data for your facility in excel format. Of particular 

interest are the 30-day averages (computed on a 30 consecutive operating day basis) and the 12-month 

averages (computed on a calendar month basis). These averages are computed using data from 2006 to 

2008, which are the 3 most recent years of data that we have. The values 2 standard deviations above the 

mean, which with a normal distribution would be the 97.7th percentile, are 5.824 pounds per ton of clinker 

and 4.768 pounds per ton of clinker, respectively.

The second file provides sample calculations of cost effectiveness for two control options, also in excel 

format. The first worksheet provides cost estimates for an option based on the existing plant configuration, 

accounting for capital costs for modest structural changes to minimize material buildup and some 

production losses. The second worksheet address an option based on the existing configuration 

supplemented by a system for injecting lime. These worksheets are predicated on a 12-month NOx 

emission limits of 3.4 pounds per ton of clinker, which is about 30 percent below the mean plus two 

standard deviations value of 4.768 pounds per ton of clinker and about 25 percent below the overall 

average value of 4.52 pounds per ton of clinker. 

The third file is an excerpt from the EPA Control Cost Manual that addresses costing for selective 

noncatalytic reduction systems. Note especially the table on page 1-32 of this document (which is the 36th 

page of the file, or the 424th page of the full control cost manual). You will note numerous differences from 

the cost estimation techniques for gas absorbers, which is on the 532nd page of the full control cost 

manual.

SMC-Charlevoix SMC-Charlevoix Emissions Emissions 10-15.pd 10-15.pdfSMC-Charlevoix Costs - Sample Calculations.xlsx SMC-Charlevoix Costs - Sample Calculations.xlsxOAQPS CCM - SNCR.pd SNCR.pdf
#### Mary L. de GIVE, Appellant, v. FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF MERRITT ISLAND, a national bank, Appellee.

No. 70-472.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

July 31, 1970.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Brevard County; Roger F. Dykes, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
H. Res. 775 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

December 10, 2014. 

Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall 

be in order to consider in the House the bill (S. 2244) to extend the termination date of the Terrorism Insurance Program established under the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 

2002, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in the report of the Committee 

on Rules accompanying this resolution shall be considered as 

adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. 

All points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, 

are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment 

thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: 

(1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the 

chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Financial Services; and (2) one motion to commit with or without instructions. 
2 

•HRES 775 EH 

SEC. 2. It shall be in order at any time on the legislative 

day of December 11, 2014, for the Speaker to entertain motions that the House suspend the rules as though under 

clause 1 of rule XV. The Speaker or his designee shall consult with the Minority Leader or her designee on the designation of any matter for consideration pursuant to this section. 

SEC. 3. On any legislative day of the second session of 

the One Hundred Thirteenth Congress after December 11, 

2014— 

(a) the Journal of the proceedings of the previous day 

shall be considered as approved; and 

(b) the Chair may at any time declare the House adjourned to meet at a date and time, within the limits of 

clause 4, section 5, article I of the Constitution, to be announced by the Chair in declaring the adjournment. 

SEC. 4. The Speaker may appoint Members to perform 

the duties of the Chair for the duration of the period addressed by section 3 of this resolution as though under clause 

8(a) of rule I. 

SEC. 5. Each day during the period addressed by section 

3 of this resolution shall not constitute a calendar day for 

purposes of section 7 of the War Powers Resolution (50 

U.S.C. 1546). 
3 

•HRES 775 EH 

SEC. 6. Each day during the period addressed by section 

3 of this resolution shall not constitute a legislative day for 

purposes of clause 7 of rule XIII. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
#### TRI-PARISH BANK & TRUST CO. v. Leopold RICHARD, Jr., et al.

No. 53939.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 12, 1973.

In re: Leopold Richard, Jr. applying for certiorari or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Parish of St. Landry. 280 So.2d 850.

Writ denied. The judgment of the Court of Appeal is correct.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 784 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
   2d Session
H. RES. 784

 Designating December 20 of each year as a national day of remembrance 
                  for victims of anti-police violence.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 2, 2015

Mr. Stockman submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
            the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Designating December 20 of each year as a national day of remembrance 
                  for victims of anti-police violence.

Whereas, on December 20, 2014, NYPD officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos were 
        shot and killed in an anti-police attack.
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives supports the 
designation of a day of remembrance for victims of anti-police 
violence.
                                 <all>
```
#### William KINARD, Jr., Relator, v. Honorable W. Rogers TURNER, Judge, Criminal Court of Record, Division B, Orange County, Florida, Respondent.

No. 71-176.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

April 30, 1971.

Prohibition denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS ON THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-KSB
FOR THE YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 1996.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         377,855
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  973,848
<ALLOWANCES>                                   144,000
<INVENTORY>                                  1,220,454
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,651,607
<PP&E>                                       2,298,086
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,224,005
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,092,092
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          566,048
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        29,705
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,046,506
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,092,092
<SALES>                                      6,969,219
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             6,969,219
<CGS>                                        2,948,599
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,948,599
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               229,580
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                80,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,138
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (723,130)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (34,313)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (688,817)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (688,817)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.27)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.27)
        

</TABLE>