alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
*562*S.E.2d 346

#### Bennie E. LEAVELL, Jr., s/k/a Bennie Edward Leavell, Jr., Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH of Virginia, Appellee.

Record No. 1226-00-1.

Court of Appeals of Virginia.

April 16, 2002.

UPON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA

In accordance with the order of the Supreme Court of Virginia entered on November 15, 2001, the opinion previously rendered by this Court on July 3, 2001 is withdrawn and the *148mandate entered on that date is vacated. This Court’s orders entered on August 7, 2001 are also vacated.

As further directed by the order of the Supreme Court, and in accordance with the decision of that Court in *Commonwealth v. Southerly,*262 Va. 294, 551 S.E.2d 650 (2001), the case is hereby transferred to the Supreme Court of Virginia pursuant to Code § 8.01-677.1.

This order shall be published.
# C_2013358EN.01000101.xml

| 7.12.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 358/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.12.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 358/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.7038 — Nippon Express/Panasonic Corporation/Panasonic Logistics)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2013/C 358/01

On 28 November 2013, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32013M7038. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32013M7038. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Pharmacyclics, Inc., a Delaware
corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31,
2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I,
Robert W. Duggan, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer


of
the Company, certify, pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18
U.S.C. § 1350), that to my knowledge:





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





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





/s/Robert W.
      DugganRobert W.
      Duggan
              Chairman of
      the Board and Chief Executive Officer
              February 12,
      2010











CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Pharmacyclics, Inc, a Delaware
corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31,
2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I,
Rainer M. Erdtmann, Vice President, Finance and Administration and Secretary of
the Company, certify, pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18
U.S.C. § 1350), that to my knowledge:





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





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





/s/Rainer M.
      ErdtmannRainer M.
      Erdtmann
              Vice
      President, Finance and Administration
              and Secretary
      (Principal Accounting and Financial Officer)
              February 12,
      2010
# C_2013279EN.01000701.xml

| 27.9.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 279/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.9.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 279/7

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

26 September 2013

2013/C 279/04

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,3499 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 133,41 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4577 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,84180 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 8,6554 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2288 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,0625 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,809 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 299,87 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7028 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2280 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,4660 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,7210 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4390 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3909 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,4673 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6266 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,6947 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 454,27 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 13,4725 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,2622 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,6130 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 174,79 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,3391 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 58,497 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 43,4502 |
| THB | Thai baht | 42,130 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 3,0034 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 17,5347 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 83,8000 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,3499

JPY

Japanese yen

133,41

DKK

Danish krone

7,4577

GBP

Pound sterling

0,84180

SEK

Swedish krona

8,6554

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2288

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,0625

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,809

HUF

Hungarian forint

299,87

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7028

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2280

RON

Romanian leu

4,4660

TRY

Turkish lira

2,7210

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4390

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3909

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,4673

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6266

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,6947

KRW

South Korean won

1 454,27

ZAR

South African rand

13,4725

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,2622

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,6130

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 174,79

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,3391

PHP

Philippine peso

58,497

RUB

Russian rouble

43,4502

THB

Thai baht

42,130

BRL

Brazilian real

3,0034

MXN

Mexican peso

17,5347

INR

Indian rupee

83,8000

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
#### MISSISSIPPI WOOD PRESERVING CO. and Security Ins. Group v. Neal SMITH.

No. 47263.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Oct. 29, 1973.

Daniel, Coker, Horton, Bell & Dukes, Donald V. Burch, Jackson, for appellants.

Jim Phyfer, Doug Wade, Jackson, for appellee.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Lincoln County; J. Gordon Roach, Judge.

Before RODGERS, P. J., and SMITH, ROBERTSON, SUGG and BROOM, JJ.

Affirmed.
UN PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17
- 6059

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. DWAYNE SMITH , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Norfolk

. Raymond A. Jackson , District Judge. ( 2:12

- cr - 00171

- RAJ

- DEM

- 1 )

Submitted : April 26, 2018 Decided: May 2, 2018

Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and HARRIS , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

. Geremy C. Kamens, Federal Public Defender, Caroline S. Platt, Alexandria, Virginia, Kirsten Kmet, Assistant Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Norfolk , Virginia, for Appellant

. Dana J. Boente, United States Attorney, Joseph At tias, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Christopher Catizone , Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria , Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Dwayne Smith appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for a sentence reduction pursuant to Amendment 782 of the Sentencing Guidelines . He contends that the district court abused its discretion in denying his mot ion without providing an explanation. We affirm. We review for abuse of discretion a district court’s decision to reduce a sentence under § 3582 (c)(2)

. United States v. Muldrow , 844 F.3d 434, 437 (4th Cir. 2016). “[A] district court abuses its discretio n when it acts arbitrarily or irrationally, fails to consider judicially recognized factors constraining its exercise of discretion, relies on erroneous factual or legal premises, or commits an error of law.” United States v. Briley , 770 F.3d 267, 276 (4t h Cir. 2014) (internal quotation marks omitted). We need not decide whether the district court adequately stated the reasons for its decision to deny Smith’s motion because we conclude that the district court lacked the authority to reduce Smith’s sentence below the statutory minimum. See United States v. Allen , 450 F.3d 565, 568

- 69 (4th Cir. 2006). Thus, any error in the district court’s explanation of its denial of Smith’s motion was harmless. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
Exhibit



EXHIBIT 10.56



AMENDMENT TO THE ASHLAND INC. 
NONQUALIFIED EXCESS BENEFIT PENSION PLAN


WHEREAS, Ashland Inc. (“Ashland”), maintains the Ashland Inc. Nonqualified Excess Benefit Pension Plan (the “Plan”) for the benefit of employees eligible to participate therein; and
WHEREAS, Ashland is the sponsor of the Plan; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Article IV, Section 5, of the Charter of the Personnel and Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of Ashland Inc., said Personnel and Compensation Committee (the “Committee”) has retained authority to amend or transfer any of the benefit plans of Ashland and its subsidiaries and affiliates that are more than 50% owned by Ashland; and
WHEREAS, the Committee has approved the transfer of the sponsorship of the Plan from Ashland to Valvoline LLC; and
WHEREAS, the Chief Financial Officer of Ashland Inc. has been delegated the authority by the Committee to prepare and execute any and all amendments necessary to give effect to this decision of the Committee.   
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Plan is amended, effective September 1, 2016, as follows:


		
	I.
	The following sentence is added after the first sentence of Section 1:


“In accordance with a corporate reorganization, effective as of September 1, 2016, sponsorship of the Plan was transferred from Ashland Inc. to Valvoline LLC.”
		
	II.
	All references to “Ashland” and “Ashland Inc.” in the Plan after the recitals are hereinafter changed to “Valvoline” and “Valvoline LLC” respectively.


		
	III.
	In all other respects the Plan shall remain unchanged.




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Chief Financial Officer has caused this amendment to the Plan to be executed this 1st day of September, 2016.


      /s/ J. Kevin Willis
By:                                                       
Chief Financial Officer, Ashland Inc.
#### Donald S. ZUCKERMAN et al., Appellants, v. LUMIDOR INDUSTRIES, INC., et al., Appellees.

No. 71-980.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Oct. 1, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
II 

Calendar No. 652 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2055 

[Report No. 113–309] 

To allow for the collection of certain user fees by non-Federal entities. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 27, 2014 

Mr. BOOZMAN (for himself, Mr. BLUNT, Mrs. MCCASKILL, Mr. PRYOR, and 

Mr. WICKER) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

DECEMBER 12, 2014 

Reported by Mrs. BOXER, with amendments 

[Omit the part struck through and insert the part printed in italic] 

A BILL 

To allow for the collection of certain user fees by nonFederal entities. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Corps of Engineers 

5 Cooperative Joint Management Restoration Act’’. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2055 RS

1 SEC. 2. CHALLENGE COST-SHARING PROGRAM FOR MAN2 AGEMENT OF RECREATION FACILITIES. 

3 Section 225 of the Water Resources Development Act 

4 of 1992 (33 U.S.C. 2328) is amended— 

5 (1) by redesignating subsection (c) as sub6 section (d); and 

7 (2) by inserting after subsection (b) the fol8 lowing: 

9 ‘‘(c) USER FEES.— 

10 ‘‘(1) COLLECTION OF FEES.—The Secretary 

11 ‘‘(1) COLLECTION OF FEES.— 

12 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may 

13 allow a non-Federal public or private entity that 

14 has entered into an agreement pursuant to sub15 section (b) to collect user fees for the use of de16 veloped recreation sites and facilities, whether 

17 developed or constructed by that entity or the 

18 Department of the Army. 

19 ‘‘(B) USE OF VISITOR RESERVATION SERV20 ICES.—A public or private entity described in 

21 subparagraph (A) may use to manage fee collec22 tions and reservations under this section any 

23 visitor reservation service that the Secretary has 

24 provided for by contract or interagency agree25 ment, subject to such terms and conditions as the 

26 Secretary determines to be appropriate. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 2055 RS

1 ‘‘(2) USE OF FEES.—A non-Federal public or 

2 private entity that collects user fees under para3 graph (1) may— 

4 ‘‘(A) retain up to 100 percent of the fees 

5 collected, as determined by the Secretary; and 

6 ‘‘(B) notwithstanding section 210(b)(4) of 

7 the Flood Control Act of 1968 (16 U.S.C. 

8 460d–3(b)(4)), use that amount for operation, 

9 maintenance, and management at the recre10 ation site at which the fee is collected. 

11 ‘‘(3) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—The authority 

12 of a non-Federal public or private entity under this 

13 subsection shall be subject to such terms and condi14 tions as the Secretary determines necessary to pro15 tect the interests of the United States.’’. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 652 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2055 

[Report No. 113–309] 

A BILL 

To allow for the collection of certain user fees by 

D

non-Federal entities. 

ECEMBER 12, 2014 

Reported with amendments 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
05/06/2013 10:01 9072765291 HOZUBIN&MOBERLY PAGE 02 

tAW OFFICE Of 

HOZUBIN 

&MOBERLY 

310 l SlRI'LT, SUI11: 403 

ANUiORAGE,AJ< 9,51ll 

Ta: ('J()1) Z76-5Z91 

FAx: (1107) 27l;-5291 

- ~- t :·! .. n:r\.;T r; ~ 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION-: :~~.;..t_:;-+/ Tif''' 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS ·' -r~~l',--:·,~l;! ~..;._:,·._., 

In the Matter of: 

TGI FREIGHT 

WASHINGTON, DC .c i U."'f:1 f.:-\i .l.,:. -~~.) 

l

. ! ' --:> II. \; lJ i <.,...f f • ._: I 

} 

} 

)FAA Docket No. CP10NM0012 

)DMS NO. FAA-2010-1079 _______________________________ )Judge RICHARD C. GOODWIN 

NON-OPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND DEADLINE 

COMES NOW TGI FREIGHT, by and through its counsel of 

record, the Law Office of Hozubin & Moberly, and hereby 

requests a one-week extension in which to file its Post-Hearing 

Brief, currently due May 6, 2013. The undersigned is out of 

state on other matters and requests a one-week extension to May 

13, 2013. 

The undersigned certifies that counsel for the FAA does 

not oppose this request. 

DATED this 6th day of May, 2013. 

LAW OFFICE OF HOZUBIN & MOBERLY 

Attorneys for TGI Freight 

By:~~ ~ebecca J~ 

1'- Alaska Bar No. 9806016 
05/05/2013 10:01 9072755291 HOZUBIN&MOBERLY PAGE 03 

LAWOfflCEOF 

HOZUBIN 

&MOBERLY 

JlO I( S'I'RUT,StJITE40S 

ANOj'ORACE, AK 99~01 

TU: (90'1) 276--5297 

FAX: (907) 276~2n 

ORDER 

TGI Freight's request for a one-week extension is GRANTED. 

Its Post-Hearing Brief is due by May 13, 2013. 

DATED this day of May, 2013. 

Honorable Richard c. Goodwin 

u.s. Administrative Law Judge 

Non-Opposed Motion for Extension of Time 

In the Matter of TGI Freiqht 

Docket No. CP10NM0012 

Page 2 
05/06/2013 10:01 9072765291 HDZUBIN&MDBERLY 

LAW OI'FICE Of' 

HOZUBIN 

&MOBERLY 

a\11 J< S'OUZT, SVIm 40(1 

ANOIORAG!i, AK 99~01 

'l'£,l.! (907) 276-5291 

f'AX: {007) ;!ti;.S291 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on the 

~ day of May 2013 1 a true 

and correct copy of the foregoing 

was served on the following: 

Ori~inal Plus 1 Copy-VIA Faosimil~ 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, s.w. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000 

(202) 493-5142 - fax 

1 Copy=VIA Facsimile 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Adm1nistrative Law Judge 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building, Ground Floor, Room E12-320 

Washington, DC 20590 

(202) 366-7536 - fax 

One Copy-VIA Faosimil~ 

Howard L. Martin, Jr. 

Regional Counsel, Office of Regional Counsel, AAL~7 

Alaska Region 

Federal Aviation Administration 

222 West 7tn Avenue #14 

Anchorage, AK 99513-7587 

On& Copy=VIA Facsimile 

Cheryl M. Jones, Sr. Attorney 

Office of Regional Counsel 

Alaska Region 

Federal Aviation Administration 

222 West 7th Avenue #14 

Anchorage, AK 99513-7587 

LAW & MOBERLY 

9l00/942/pleact/Non-Opp re Extension 

Non-Opposed Motion for Extens1on of Time 

In the Matter of TGI Freiqht 

Docket No. CP10NM0012 

Page 3 

PAGE 04
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 95-50869

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RANDY JOE WHITE,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. W-94-CR-68

- - - - - - - - - -

August 2, 1996

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Randy Joe White appeals his jury conviction for being a

felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C.

§§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a). White argues that the district court

committed plain error in refusing to allow a defense witness to

testify because she was present during the Government’s

presentation of two witness’ testimony in violation of the

district court’s sequestration order. Because White and his

trial counsel had knowledge and consented to the witness’
No. 95-50869

- 2 -

presence in the courtroom after the district court imposed the

sequestration order, the district court did not commit plain

error in excluding the testimony. United States v. Kilijan, 456

F.2d 555, 560 (8th Cir. 1972). 

White also argues that the Government did not present

sufficient evidence to support his conviction for being a felon

in possession of a firearm. He contends that there was not

sufficient evidence that he possessed the firearm. Because White

failed to move for a judgment of acquittal at the close of the

evidence, his claim is reviewable only to determine whether there

was a manifest miscarriage of justice. United States v. Laury,

49 F.3d 145, 151 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 116 S. Ct. 162 (1995). 

We have reviewed the record and it is not “devoid of evidence

pointing to guilt” or “so tenuous that a conviction would be

shocking.” United States v. Pierre, 958 F.2d 1304, 1310 (5th

Cir.), (en banc), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 898 (1992).

AFFIRMED.
From: "Higgins, Cortney" <Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov> To: RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Karen Thundiyil/DC/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 12/08/2011 06:14 PM Subject: FW: E.O. 12866 Meeting on EGU MACT Rule

Hi, Attached is the handout from the meeting today.

Regards, Cortney

-----Original Appointment----- From: Echols, Mabel E. Subject: E.O. 12866 Meeting on EGU MACT Rule When: Thursday, December 08, 2011 1:00 PM-1:30 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada). Where: Room 10103 NEOB

This meeting was requested by Anthony Kavanagh, American Electric Power.
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y A lton Thomas Davis,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk September 27, 2010

0920 

# Order

September 27, 2010

141338 & (50)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 141338 COA: 288552 Genesee CC: 07-021158-FC ROSALIND LAURICE BROWN, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the applicati on for leave to appeal the May 6, 2010 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. The motion to
remand is DENIED.
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 Annual Report of QSGI INC (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Marc Sherman, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of 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 Act of 1934; and






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




Date: February 15, 2012

/s/Marc ShermanMarc Sherman

Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer


·
A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to QSGI INC. and will be retained by QSGI INC. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.







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 Annual Report of QSGI INC. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, David Meynarez, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of 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 Act of 1934; and






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




Date: February 15, 2012

/s/ DAVID MEYNAREZDavid Meynarez

Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer


*           A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to QSGI INC. and will be retained by QSGI INC. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Patricia PEREZ v. STATE of Florida.

No. 39347.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Feb. 1970.

Rehearing Denied March 23, 1970.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 229 So.2d 601.
#### Charles HALL v. STATE.

No. 36938.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Feb. 1968.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 203 So.2d 202.