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

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a)
and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of
the undersigned officers of Vital Products, Inc., a Delaware corporation
(the "Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:

The quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended January 31, 2010
(the "Form 10-Q") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the
information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


Date: March 22, 2010



        By: /s/ Michael Levine
        -------------------------------
        Michael Levine
        Chief Executive Officer and
        Principal Executive Officer


Date: March 22, 2010

        By: /s/ Henry Goldberg
        -------------------------------
        Henry Goldberg
        Chief Financial Officer,
        Principal Financial Officer and
        Principal Accounting Officer
| **Subsidiary**                                                                                    |   | **Jurisdiction                of Organization** |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------|
| Hartcourt                Capital, Inc.                                                                 |   | British                Virgin Island            |
| Hartcourt                China, Inc.                                                                   |   | British                Virgin Island            |
| Ai-Asia,                Inc.                                                                           |   | British                Virgin Island            |
| Hartcourt                Hi-Tech Investment (Shanghai) Co., Ltd                                        |   | People’s                Republic of China |
| Hartcourt                Education Investment Management Consulting (Shanghai) Co.,                Ltd |   | People’s                Republic of China |
| Hartcourt                Princely Education Technology Development (Beijing) Co.,                Ltd   |   | People’s                Republic of China |
| Shanghai                Jiumeng Information Technology Co., Ltd                                        |   | People’s                Republic of China |
| Shanghai                Huaqing Enterprise Development Co., Ltd                                        |   | People’s                Republic of China |
EXHIBIT 32(ii)

ACT OF 2002

In connection with the report on Form 10-QSB of Mistral Ventures, Inc. for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (Report), I, Kent Carasquero, do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

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

|(2) |  | The information contained in this Report fairly represents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the small business issuer at the end of the period covered by this Report and results of operations of the small business issuer for the period covered by this Report.
|--- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

/s/ Kent Carasquero

Kent Carasquero

Chief Financial Officer

May 14, 2007

This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the small business issuer for the purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. This certification shall not be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of this Report), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.

A signed original of this written statement required by §906 has been provided to the small business issuer and will be retained by the small business issuer and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Triple Crown Media, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarterly period ended December 31, 2006 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date therein specified (the Report), the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of his individual knowledge and belief:



|(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.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: May 14, 2008



|        |  |                                      
|------- |  | -------------------------------------
|Signed: |  | /s/ ROBERT S. PRATHER, JR.           
|        |  | Robert S. Prather, Jr.               
|        |  | President and Chief Executive Officer

The foregoing certification is being furnished pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being filed for purposes
of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, regardless of any general incorporation language in said filing.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

October 29, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
133579 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 133579 COA: 264825 Kent CC: 04-004787-FC PAUL ALLEN BERNARD, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 8, 2007 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.

t1022 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.

October 29, 2007

Clerk
#### Benjamin Electrical Engineering Works, Inc., Respondent, v Rampart Construction Associates, Inc., et al., Appellants.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Baer, Jr., J.), entered on January 24, 1991, deemed an appeal from a judgment of the same court and same Justice, entered on February 4, 1991, which granted summary judgment in favor of plaintiff Benjamin Electrical Engineering Works, Inc. ("Benjamin”) in the sum of $117,500, with interest, costs and disbursements, and said judgment is unanimously affirmed, with costs. The appeal from the January 24, 1991 order is dismissed as superceded by the final judgment.

As defendants concede, a stipulation made in open court is the equivalent of a contract whose provisions are binding and enforceable, and whose construction is governed by the same rules as would apply to any contract *(Spector v Sovereign Constr. Co.,*45 AD2d 673). Further, where the intention of the parties is determinable by construction of the parties’ written agreement, the question is one of law, and therefore appropriately determined on a motion for summary judgment *(Mallad Constr. Corp. v County Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn.,*32 NY2d 285). Here, in accordance with the express provisions of paragraph 5 (a) and (b) of the Stipulation of Settlement, upon defendant Rampart’s failure to timely cure the payment default, the entire amount owed to plaintiff Benjamin of $137,500, consisting of eleven monthly installments of $12,500 due September 1, 1990 through March 1, 1991, together with interest and an additional $30,000 in liquidated damages, became immediately due and payable to plaintiff Benjamin.

Contrary to defendants’ assertions, their payment obligations under the Stipulations of Settlement were not in any *371way conditioned upon plaintiff Benjamin’s cooperation in supplying information to the United States General Services Administration in connection with services rendered by defendant Rampart on an unrelated federal office building project *(Braten v Bankers Trust Co.,*60 NY2d 155, *rearg denied*61 NY2d 670).

We have reviewed the defendants’ remaining contentions, and find them to be without merit. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Rosenberger, Ross and Smith, JJ.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Dil Pazir Ahmed, Also Known as Dilpazir Ahmed, Appellant.

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Chetta, J.), rendered July 21, 1988, convicting him of attempted rape in the first degree, sodomy in the first degree (two counts), sexual abuse in the first degree (three counts), unlawful imprisonment in the first degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

*547The hearing court properly declined to suppress the complainant’s proposed identification testimony. Contrary to the defendant’s claim, the lineup procedure was not "unnecessarily suggestive and conducive to irreparable mistaken identification” *(Stovall v Denno,*388 US 293, 302) because he was one of only two Pakistanis in the lineup, and he was taller than the other Pakistani. There is no requirement that a defendant in a lineup be surrounded by individuals nearly identical in appearance *(see, People v Chipp,*75 NY2d 327, 336, *cert denied*— US —, 111 S Ct 99; *People v Rotunno,*159 AD2d 601). Although the other participants in the lineup were of Hispanic origin, they were similar in appearance to the defendant since each had a dark skin tone and dark brown hair. Moreover, although the complainant testified that she viewed the lineup participants standing, as well as sitting, she could not recall if the defendant appeared to be taller than the other participants *(see, People v Quick,*158 AD2d 625). In any event, any error that may have occurred by the admission of the complainant’s testimony concerning the lineup was harmless. The complainant testified that she had an unobstructed view of the defendant at close range during the course of the incident, which took place over a period of 20 to 25 minutes. Additionally, about one month after the incident, the complainant recognized the defendant in a supermarket, which observation eventually led to his arrest.

We also find that the defendant was not prejudiced by the trial court’s refusal to supplement its charge in the manner he requested on the issue of the identity of the perpetrator *(see, People v Beard,*157 AD2d 788, 789). "The charge as given adequately covered the issue” *(People v Beard, supra,*at 789). Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Lawrence and Eiber, JJ., concur.
NO. 07-10-00312-CV 

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

AT AMARILLO 

PANEL A 

SEPTEMBER 15, 2010 

RANDY LACKEY, APPELLANT 

v. 

ROBERT MCCOOL, APPELLEE 

 FROM THE 287TH DISTRICT COURT OF BAILEY COUNTY; 

NO. 7764; HONORABLE GORDON HOUSTON GREEN, JUDGE 

Before CAMPBELL and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ. 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Appellant, Randy Lackey, an inmate proceeding pro se, filed a notice of appeal in 

cause number 7764 in the 287th District Court of Bailey County, Texas.1 By letter dated 

July 29, 2010, Lackey was notified that, among other things, a filing fee of $175 had not 

been paid, noting that failure to do so within ten days could result in dismissal pursuant 

to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3(c). No fee having been received within the 

deadline, by letter dated August 18, 2010, Lackey was again advised of the outstanding 

 1 The clerk’s record has not been received in this cause and Lackey’s notice of 

appeal simply indicates that Lackey seeks appeal “in Cause # 7764 to The District 

Court, Bailey County, Texas, 287th Judicial District.” 
2 

filing fee and the consequences of failing to pay. He was also specifically notified of 

and given the opportunity to, in lieu of paying the filing fee, file an affidavit of indigence 

on or before September 8, 2010. See TEX. R. APP. P. 44.3; see also Higgins v. Randall 

County Sheriff's Office, 193 S.W.3d 898 (Tex. 2006) (holding that a court of appeals can 

dismiss an appeal for noncompliance only after allowing a reasonable time to correct a 

defect). Despite two notices and a reasonable time in which to comply with this Court's 

request, Lackey has failed to respond. Consequently, this Court is authorized to dismiss 

this appeal. 

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. 

 Mackey K. Hancock 

 Justice
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

The Board of Directors,
ARV Assisted Living, Inc.:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statement on Form
S-8 of ARV Assisted Living, Inc. of our report dated March 2, 2000, relating to
the consolidated balance sheets of ARV Assisted Living, Inc. and subsidiaries as
of December 31, 1999 and 1998 and the related consolidated statements of
operations, stockholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the
two-year period ended December 31, 1999, and the nine-month period ended
December 31, 1997, which report appears in the December 31, 1999, annual report
on Form 10-K of ARV Assisted Living, Inc.

                                             /s/ KPMG LLP


Orange County, California
March 30, 2000
EXHIBIT 23.1

 

 

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ CONSENT 

 

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No. 333-61101, as amended; No. 333-35051; and No. 333-88216 onForm S-3 of Hearst-Argyle Television, Inc., and in Registration Statements No. 333-75709 and No. 333-35043 on Form S-8 of Hearst-Argyle Television, Inc. of our report dated February 6, 2003, which expresses an unqualified opinion and includes anexplanatory paragraph relating to the change in method of accounting for goodwill and other intangible assets, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Hearst-Argyle Television, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2002. 

 

 

/s/    DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP 

 

 

New York, New York 

March 31, 2003
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 45 (Wednesday, March 7, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 13591]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-5478]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER12-1171-000]


CWP Energy; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate 
Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of 
CWP Energy's application for market-based rate authority, with an 
accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a 
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR Part 34, of future 
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, 
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's 
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone 
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that 
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with 
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 
CFR Part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of 
liability, is March 21, 2012.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet 
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an 
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the 
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the 
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in 
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in 
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link 
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification 
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with 
any FERC Online service, please email <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3a7c7f687975545653545f694f4a4a55484e7a5c5f4859145d554c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="591f1c0b1a16373530373c0a2c2929362b2d193f3c2b3a773e362f">[email protected]</span></a>. or 
call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: March 1, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-5478 Filed 3-6-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2086 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2086

   To suspend temporarily the duty on certain mini component stereo 
                                systems.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 29, 2009

 Ms. Klobuchar introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To suspend temporarily the duty on certain mini component stereo 
                                systems.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN MINI COMPONENT STEREO SYSTEMS.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00      (2009 HTS #         Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                        8527.91.5000)                                                      31/2011.......
                        mini stereo
                        system with 5-
                        disc multiplay
                        changer, AM/FM
                        tuner, docking
                        station, 250W
                        total power, dual
                        cassette decks, 2-
                        way speaker
                        system, etc......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in connection with the filing of Harry & David Holdings, Inc.s (the Company) Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 29, 2007, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned officers certifies 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 as of and for the periods
presented in the Report.
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: February 8, 2008



By:

/s/ WILLIAM H. WILLIAMSWilliam H. Williams President and Chief
Executive OfficerBy:

/s/ STEPHEN V. OCONNELLStephen V. OConnell Chief Financial
Officer and Chief Administrative Officer