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




In
connection with the Quarterly Report of MangoSoft, Inc. and Subsidiary (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2009, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
Selig Zises, Interim Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:




(1) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




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





By:
                  
                  /s/
      Selig
      ZisesInterim
      Chief Executive OfficerAugust
      12, 2009




This
certification is made solely for purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, subject to
the knowledge standard contained therein, and not for any other
purpose.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.2

                             PAGEMART WIRELESS, INC.
                    COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS (LOSS)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                    THREE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999
                                                --------------------------------------------
                                                   NUMBER          PERCENT       EQUIVALENT
                                                  OF SHARES      OUTSTANDING       SHARES
                                                ------------    ------------    ------------
<S>                                             <C>             <C>             <C>
COMMON STOCK
   From Founders' Stock                            2,300,000          100.00%      2,300,000
   Stock Options Exercised                         1,167,063           95.78%      1,117,811
   Preferred Stock Converted to Common Stock      15,310,943          100.00%     15,310,943
   1994 Common Stock Offerings                    11,242,857          100.00%     11,242,857
   1995 Common Stock Offerings                     4,323,874          100.00%      4,323,874
   1996 Common Stock Offering                      6,000,000          100.00%      6,000,000
   Employee Stock Purchase Plan Shares Issued        127,399          100.00%        127,399
   Warrants Exercised                                130,513           78.40%        102,317
                                                ------------                    ------------
                                                  40,602,649                      40,525,201

WEIGHTED AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING                                               40,525,201

NET LOSS                                                                         (24,243,367)

NET LOSS PER SHARE                                                              $      (0.60)
                                                                                ============
</TABLE>
#### CHURCH OF METAPHYSICAL CHRISTIANITY, INC. v. DEMOND.

No. 38620.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June 1969.

Appeals dismissed without opinion.
#### STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. George BAIER, Respondent.

No. 40497.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Feb. 16, 1971.

Rehearing Denied March 15, 1971.

Certiorari denied.

CARLTON, Acting C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit
      10.7**








October
      15, 2004







Lyndon
      A.
      Smith, President


Employer
      Plan Services, Inc.


2180
      N.
      Loop West, #400


Houston,
      Texas 77018





Re:
            Line
                of Credit Loan


_______________________





Dear
      Mr.
      Smith:





The
      Promissory Note executed by Employer Plan Services, Inc. (“Borrower”) to Brokers
      National Life Assurance Company (“Lender”) dated October 15, 2002 in the
      principal amount of $200,000 is due to expire on October 15, 2004. Additional
      security for the payment of the note has been provided by the Borrower's
      stockholders, Lyndon A. Smith and Sally A. Dwyer (the “Guarantors”) in the form
      of a Commercial Guaranty executed by each of the Guarantors and dated October
      15, 2002. At your request, we have agreed to extend and renew the note for
      an
      additional term with payments to be made as follows: interest only on the
      outstanding principal balance until August 1, 2005; thereafter the note will
      be
      paid in 60 equal monthly installments of principal and interest until paid
      in
      full beginning August 15, 2005. All terms, provisions and conditions of the
      note, promises, agreements, undertakings, security agreements, or other
      documents or commitments and Commercial Guaranty, or any combination of those
      actions or documents, shall remain the same and shall continue in full force
      and
      effect until the outstanding principal balance and accrued interest shall be
      paid in full. The undersigned Guarantors, as owners of all of the issued and
      outstanding capital stock of the Borrower and as the sole members of the Board
      of Directors of the Borrower, hereby certify, agree to the terms of this letter
      agreement and do hereby represent and warrant that all corporate action
      necessary to enter into and execute this Letter Agreement has been taken, and
      that they are duly authorized to execute this Letter Agreement on behalf of
      the
      Borrower. If this letter correctly sets forth our agreements and understandings,
      please affix your signatures to a copy of this letter and return it to the
      undersigned.





Yours
      very truly,





BROKERS
      NATIONAL LIFE


ASSURANCE
      COMPANY




/s/
      Barry N. Shamas


Barry
      N. Shamas


Executive
      Vice President






















**ACKNOWLEDGMENT
      OF AGREEMENT:**





EMPLOYER
      PLAN SERVICES, INC.








By:
      /s/
      Lyndon A. Smith


____________________________


Lyndon
      A.
      Smith


President
      and Director








By:
      /s/
      Sally A. Dwyer


_______________________________


Sally
      A.
      Dwyer


Vice
      President and Director








GUARANTORS:








By:
      /s/
      Lyndon A. Smith


_______________________________


Lyndon
      A.
      Smith








By:
      /s/
      Sally A. Dwyer


_______________________________


Sally
      A.
      Dwyer








E-33
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002

I, Steven B. Solomon, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual
Report of CT Holdings, Inc. on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December
31, 2004, 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 10-KSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial
condition and results of operations of CT Holdings, Inc.

/s/ STEVEN B. SOLOMON
---------------------
Steven B. Solomon
Chief Executive Officer


April 13, 2005

I, Richard Connelly, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual
Report of CT Holdings, Inc. on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December
31, 2004, 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 10-KSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial
condition and results of operations of CT Holdings, Inc.


/s/ RICHARD CONNELLY
--------------------
Richard Connelly
Chief Financial Officer

April 13, 2005
Budget Dureau No. 41-5009 Aoproval Expires December 1,

1950

This inquiry is suthoriae wu. & Eouwerastor’s signature
susie ane Sak eicaconirs CONFIDENTIAL tfeutacnt, "The census re ea for purposes ef tasstion, Invest
aaa or regulation. Sas Li = Ls 1980)
hog U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE h, Checked by:
bh County Ps BUREAU OF THE CENSUS
a Date; __ —s « 19580

©. Reservation

1950 CENSUS OF POPULATION AND HOUSING

HOUSING DATA (OBSERVE AND RECORD)

ENDIAN RESERVATION SCHEDULE J. Type of house construction (Check one) k. Type of floor construc~
a. B.D. Number nD tion (Cheek oney
=  prave (1) tos 7) Stone or brick Pisce ne
© Sr deetiing salt tent 0 aruen 7) mua oF adove stone or mat
tt porseehiare ‘ath
— or [) None as Speci ty ner
reg ae =
1a teow Dh Tu be known ty any other ane To what tribe To what clan naan blood EANGUAGES In 1999 did be
‘Sq [Sheet | Line than... ee -eeeneeene nd doen be belong? | does he belong? Full blood Does he | Hoes he [Does he |Does he | Boos be |Boes he | attend of par-
Hl | fee Palt to foi |read | write {speak | rend any |erite [speak | ative infian
ii ber | ber jercs 74. |Enelish? | English?| English? | other ceremonies?
ii (eater totner® nume below) (Check one bos) Aanguager| Ianguage?| Language?! coyck one Dox)
i 2 3 ‘ 3 é 7 me se TM 9 ve 0
O None O wore fa | Chee | Chee | Ch vee | Cres | Ch vee | Cy ren] Sattenaes
1 ow Ci Participstet
Kar ame Fane Cites Or | Ow | Or |Oe | Or | CO | Gretteer
: T hewe 1 towe B60 ls] Ow | Om (Om [Om | Om| Saimin
Tae Tame Tue Bx | Ox» | Ow | One | Cm | Cm | Om | Canitner
Onan
D nme D tome iva | Cores | Cree | Cree | Cee | Ore | Ore] Seinen
—Kae wae wane ven One | Om | One [One | Ow | Ono | Cnettner .
' CO wone TT tone sey ree | Cres | Cres | Cree | Ove | Ores = Astentet
“vas wa as Sve [Ow | Om | On [On | On
Lie ud om Cres | Cores | Cree | Cres | Cres
, ia ss —| ane 2 CO fea in Pe ee Pee
Di eoe one Sat [Oe | Ow | Ore [Om | Cre | Ora] Cates
. Gi o Oo oO Copartictpated
vee cod Tae Slices we | Ow | One no vo | Clee | Cnettner
O nose O tone Bee [ore | eee | Cree | Core | te | re] armen
setpat
- =| Bu Done | Ome [Om | Om | Om | Om | G vesting
De Ty wine =e Di veo | Doves | Ch vee | Ch vee | Ch res | Crea | Ci sttonsee
ig ain a = o 5 Ci partieipates
co tie wane Cis |O» | On bad m bed wo | Cnettner
Timm Tite Sty) | Che | Ore | Ore | Ore | Ore | Ore | Seine
s aes Wee wer Sig. | Om | Om [Cm |Om | Om | Oxo | Cwetener
D none D mone on Dir0e | Chee | Cree | Cres | Cree | Chyee | Coattentes
f o (Cl Participated
co sees Tawe Sy [Gm | Om [Om [Om [Om | On | oni
NOUSENOLD CONTINED ON SECOND SuRET [—) SHEET or SHEETS

TR COAT FOTBE OFFER Ine O- Hum
II

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 113

To amend title 18, United States Code, to require that persons comply

with State and local firearms licensing laws before receiving a Federal

license to deal in firearms.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 21 (legislative day, JANUARY 5), 1993

Mr. MOYNIHAN (for himself and Mr. CHAFEE) introduced the following bill;

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To amend title 18, United States Code, to require that

persons comply with State and local firearms licensing

laws before receiving a Federal license to deal in firearms.

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

3 SECTION 1. COMPLIANCE WITH STATE AND LOCAL FIRE4 ARMS LICENSING LAWS REQUIRED BEFORE

5 ISSUANCE OF FEDERAL LICENSE TO DEAL IN

6 FIREARMS.

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 923(d)(1) of title 18,

8 United States Code, is amended—
2

•S 113 IS

1 (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of subpara2 graph (D);

3 (2) by striking the period at the end of sub4 paragraph (E) and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and

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

6 ‘‘(F) in the case of an application for a license

7 to engage in the business of dealing in firearms—

8 ‘‘(i) the applicant has complied with all re9 quirements imposed on persons desiring to en10 gage in such a business by the State and politi11 cal subdivision thereof in which the applicant

12 conducts or intends to conduct such business;

13 and

14 ‘‘(ii) the application includes a written

15 statement which—

16 ‘‘(I) is signed by the chief of police of

17 the locality, or the sheriff of the county, in

18 which the applicant conducts or intends to

19 conduct such business, the head of the

20 State police of such State, or any official

21 designated by the Secretary; and

22 ‘‘(II) certifies that the information

23 available to the signer of the statement

24 does not indicate that the applicant is in-
3

•S 113 IS

1 eligible to obtain such a license under the

2 law of such State and locality.’’.

3 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

4 subsection (a) shall apply to applications for a license that

5 is issued on or after the date of the enactment of this

6 Act.

Æ
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT SANTANDER BANK, N.A., Respondent

v. KING DRIVE CORP.; A LA CARTE ENTERPRISES, INC.; ANGINO & ROVNER, P.C. AND RICHARD C. ANGINO AND ALICE K. ANGINO, H/W, Petitioners : : : : : : : : : : : : : : No. 259 EAL 2015 Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER
PER CURIAM AND NOW , this 25th day of August, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is DENIED

.
#### Bruce A. RYALS, Appellant, v. Evan F. THOMAS, Appellee.

No. 71-712.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Feb. 24, 1972.

Jack A. Nants, Orlando, for appellant.

Jules S. Cohen, Orlando, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

On the basis of our review of the briefs, the record, and the oral argument of the parties, we are of the opinion that the appellant has not demonstrated error. The final judgment is, therefore, affirmed.

Affirmed.

REED, C. J., MAGER, J., and CARLTON, CHARLES T., Associate Judge, concur.
Writ of Mandamus Dismissed; Opinion issued March 27, 2013

S

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-13-00243-CV

IN RE TIMOTHY SCOTT HARRIMAN, Relator

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 5

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F94-01553-ML

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Bridges, Murphy, and Lewis 

Opinion by Justice Bridges

Relator contends the trial court failed to act on his motion for DNA testing. The facts and 

issues are well known to the parties, so we need not recount them herein. The relief requested by 

relator has been granted. Therefore, the issues presented in this petition are moot. See Dow 

Chem. Co. v. Garcia, 909 S.W.2d 503, 505 (Tex. 1995) (orig. proceeding). Accordingly, we 

DISMISS relator’s petition for a writ of mandamus. 

130243F.P05

/David L. Bridges/

DAVID L. BRIDGES

JUSTICE
#### Daniel POPPS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Dorene Mouilla POPPS, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 6769.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.

Aug. 17, 1978.

John H. Weinstein, Opelousas, for plaintiff-appellant.

Thistlethwaite & Thistlethwaite, by Hugh Wm. Thistlethwaite, Jr., Opelousas, for defendant-appellee.

Before CULPEPPER, WATSON and FORET, JJ.

FORET, Judge.

Ex proprio motu, we issue a show cause order questioning this court’s jurisdiction because the plaintiff’s appeal from a custo*1357dy judgment was not perfected within the thirty (30) days required by LSA-C.C.P. art. 3943. The appellant has not answered the rule.

We dismiss the appeal.

A formal judgment was read and signed on April 18, 1978, changing custody of the minor child from the defendant-in-rule to the plaintiff-in-rule. Since the matter was taken under advisement, notices of judgment were mailed to all counsel by the Clerk on April 18, 1978, as required by LSA-C.C.P. art. 1913. On June 13, 1978, defendant-in-rule, Daniel Popps, moved for and was granted a devolutive appeal returnable to this court on August 12, 1978. The appeal was timely lodged.

An appeal from a judgment involving custody must be taken within thirty (30) days from the applicable date provided in LSA-C.C.P. art. 2087(l)-(3). LSA-C.C.P. arts. 3943 and 3942, *Zaunbrecher v. Zaunbrecher,*338 So.2d 797 (La.App.3d Cir. 1976). Thus, the appellant had until May 29, 1978 within which to perfect his appeal. Since his appeal was not perfected until June 13,1978, his appeal must be dismissed.

For the reason assigned, the appeal of the appellant and defendant-in-rule is hereby dismissed at his cost.

APPEAL DISMISSED.
#### Coretha EDWARDS, as widow of Theodore Edwards, deed., etc., Plaintiff/Petitioner, v. Sam SPARKS et al., Defendants/Respondents. Coretha EDWARDS, as Administratrix of the Estate of Theodore Edwards, deceased, Plaintiff/Petitioner, v. Sam SPARKS et al., Defendants/Respondents.

No. 40571.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Feb. 4, 1971.

Certiorari denied. 241 So.2d211.

ERVIN, Acting C. J., and CARLTON, ADKINS, BOYD and McCAIN, JJ., concur.
#### James E. JACKSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-394.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Aug. 25, 1971.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 15, 1971.

Walter R. Talley, Public Defender, and Edwin T. Mulock, Asst. Public Defender, Bradenton, for appellant.

*703Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Warren H. Petersen, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. The evidence in this case was not sufficient to warrant an instruction on self-defense. See Hamilton v. State, Fla.App.1963, 152 So.2d 793.

PIERCE, C. J., and HOBSON, J., concur.

MANN, J., dissents with opinion.

MANN, Judge

(dissenting).

*Hamilton*is not in point. In that case, it was argued as *fundamental*error that the trial judge had failed to give an instruction *not requested by the defendant.*Here, prior to charging the jury, the trial judge asked defendant’s lawyer, “Do you wish a charge given on self-defense?” The lawyer said he did, and the judge replied, “All right. I wanted to give you an opportunity to request it.”

Jackson said he acted in self-defense because the woman he cut with a knife had first struck at him with the metal part of a shovel. As Judge Pierce said in Koontz v. State, Fla.App.2d 1967, 204 So.2d 224, “However disdainfully the trial Judge may have felt about the merits of such defense from a factual standpoint, however even we may feel about it, is beside the point. It was for the jury and the jury alone to pass upon it as a recognized defense to a criminal charge. And if there was ‘evidence introduced in support thereof, the defendant was entitled to have the jury instructed on the law applicable to his theory of defense’.” Id. at 227, citations omitted. If self-defense was appropriate to the case, the record shows a sufficient request. Defense counsel would, in fact, have been presumptuous in not treating the quoted colloquy as sufficient to preserve his rights on appeal. See F.A.R. 6.7, subd. g, 32 F.S.A.

The real question before us is whether an instruction on self-defense is warranted by the evidence in this case. There is sufficient evidence that the question came naturally to the trial judge’s mind, and the record adequately preserves the question for review. I would reverse.
EXHIBIT 32.1   CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
OF SARBANES  OXLEY ACT OF 2002  The undersigned, David H. Roche, President and Chief Executive Officer of Minn-Dak Farmers Cooperative, (the Company), does hereby certify that to his knowledge:  1.     The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended May 31, 2010 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and  2.     Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.  The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has caused this instrument to be executed this 14th day of July, 2010.  By:
     /s/ DAVID H ROCHEName: David H RocheTitle: President and 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.


---
**Exhibit 4.12**

----

Paul ReynoldsChief Executive BT Wholesale pp 7.15Faraday Building1**KnightriderStreetLondonEC4V 5BT 

10 April 2006

Dear Paul,

**Amendment to Director’s Service        Contract**

As has been previously discussed, it has been agreed to make some changes tothe pensions provisions in your Director’s Service Contractdated 26 November2001.

Paragraphs 6.3 and 6.4 will be added as follows:

“6.3 The Director may elect, while remaining inthe BT Pension Scheme (“BTPS”),to opt out of future pensionable service accrual under the BTPS from and including1 April 2006 and receive in lieu a cash allowance equivalent to 30% of the Salary.

6.4 If the Director elects to opt out of future pensionableservice accrual in accordance with Paragraph 6.3, the benefits under the BTPSwill be based on the Director’sPensionable Service (as defined in the BTPS) as at 31 March 2006 and Final PensionablePay (as defined in the BTPS) at the earlierof the date of leaving the employment of BT, death and retirement, except thatthe lump sum payable on his death in service will be four times the Salary atthe date of death.”

 

| **Larry Stone**Company Secretary      BT Group      BT Centre      81 Newgate Street      London EC1A 7AJ      United Kingdom | **tel****fax****mob****e-mail ** | +44 (0)20 7356 5237      +44 (0)20 7356 6135      +44 (0)7740 136290      larry.stone@bt.com**** | **BT Group plc**      Registered Office:      81 Newgate Street, London EC1A 7AJ      Registered in England and Wales no. 4190816**www.bt.com** |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----

To acknowledge your acceptance of this variation    of your Service Contract, will you please return the enclosed duplicate ofthis letter with the form of acceptance duly signed. 

 Yours sincerely

/s/ Larry Stone

 L W STONE 

 

Accepted andAgreed

| /s/ Paul    Reynolds | Dated  | 15.5.06 |   |
|----------------------|-------------|---------|--------|
|                      |             |         |   |
| Paul    Reynolds     |             |    |   |
|                 |             |    |   |

----
**Exhibit 23.2****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 No.333-109345, No. 333-109346, No. 333-14531, No. 33-54483, No. 33-64998, No. 33-65440, No. 33-68336,No. 333-04775, No. 333-04823, No. 333-62087, No. 333-62103, No. 333-95409, No. 333-41328, No.333-71502 and No. 333-97713) pertaining to employee equity compensation plans of Novell, Inc. ofour report dated November 16, 2004with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Novell, Inc. and subsidiariesincluded in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended October 31,2005./s/ Ernst & Young LLPBoston, Massachusetts