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

                            CORD BLOOD AMERICA, INC.

      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 Cord Blood America, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Sandra D. Smith, Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting
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 to the best of
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.

Date: August 23, 2004


/s/Sandra D. Smith
--------------------------------------------
Sandra D. Smith
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
Exhibit 32.1

APD ANTIQUITIES, INC.

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 USC SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the periodic report of APD ANTIQUITIES, INC., a Nevada corporation (the Company), on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, CINDY K. SWANK, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:



(1)  the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods indicated.



This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.



Date:  November 14, 2006



By:/s/ Cindy K. Swank

Cindy K. Swank, President

Chief Executive Officer,

Chief Financial Officer
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan



### July 30, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice


### 133794 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly 

### PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. 

### Plaintiff-Appellee, Stephen J. Markman, Justices 

### v SC: 133794 COA: 275636 Jackson CC: 06-000159-FC DEMETREON ADAMS, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the Mach 6, 2007 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

t0723 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.

July 30, 2007

Clerk
III

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. RES. 173

To authorize representation of the Senate Committee on Armed Services

in the case of Philip Tinsley III v. Senate Committee on Armed Services.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

AUGUST 4, 1999

Mr. LOTT (for himself and Mr. DASCHLE) submitted the following resolution;

which was considered and agreed to

RESOLUTION

To authorize representation of the Senate Committee on

Armed Services in the case of Philip Tinsley III v. Senate Committee on Armed Services.

Whereas, in the case of Philip Tinsley III v. Senate Committee on Armed Services, Civil Action No. 99–951–A,

pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, the plaintiff has sued the United

States Senate Committee on Armed Services; and

Whereas, pursuant to sections 703(a) and 704(a)(1) of the

Ethics in Government Act of 1978, 2 U.S.C. §§ 288b(a)

and 288c(a)(1), the Senate may direct its counsel to defend Senate committees in civil actions: Now, therefore,

be it
2

SRES 173 ATS

1 Resolved, That the Senate Legal Counsel is directed

2 to represent the Senate Committee on Armed Services in

3 the case of Philip Tinsley III v. Senate Committee on

4 Armed Services.

Æ
**EXHIBIT 32.01**

**WRITTEN STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERPURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)**

The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer of New Frontier Media, Inc., a Colorado company (the “Company”), hereby certifies that, to his knowledge on the date hereof:

(a) the Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2007, filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

   Michael WeinerChief Executive Officer

June 14, 2007

----
III

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. RES. 17

To authorize the installation of appropriate equipment and furniture in the

Senate chamber for the impeachment trial.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 14, 1999

Mr. LOTT submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed

to

RESOLUTION

To authorize the installation of appropriate equipment and

furniture in the Senate chamber for the impeachment trial.

1 Resolved, That in recognition of the unique require2 ments raised by the impeachment trial of a President of

3 the United States, the Sergeant at Arms shall install ap4 propriate equipment and furniture in the Senate chamber

5 for use by the managers from the House of Representa6 tives and counsel to the President in their presentations

7 to the Senate during all times that the Senate is sitting

8 for trial with the Chief Justice of the United States presid9 ing.
2

•SRES 17 ATS

1 SEC. 2. The appropriate equipment and furniture re2 ferred to in the first section is as follows:

3 (1) A lectern, a witness table and chair if re4 quired, and tables and chairs to accommodate an

5 equal number of managers from the House of Rep6 resentatives and counsel for the President which

7 shall be placed in the well of the Senate.

8 (2) Such equipment as may be required to per9 mit the display of video, or audio evidence, including

10 video monitors and microphones, which may be

11 placed in the chamber for use by the managers from

12 the House of Representatives or the counsel to the

13 President.

14 SEC. 3. All equipment and furniture authorized by

15 this resolution shall be placed in the chamber in a manner

16 that provides the least practicable disruption to Senate

17 proceedings.

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 58 (Monday, March 26, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 17459]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7165]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XB107


Pacific Fishery Management Council (Pacific Council); Public 
Meeting

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of a public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Pacific Council will convene a meeting of the Ecosystem 
Plan Development Team (EPDT) which is open to the public.

DATES: The EPDT will meet on Thursday, April 12, 2012 from 9 a.m. to 5 
p.m., or when business for the day is completed.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Hilton Seattle Airport, 
Mercer B Room, 17620 International Boulevard, Seattle, WA 98188-4001; 
telephone: (206) 244-4800.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mike Burner, Staff Officer; telephone: 
(503) 820-2280.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Please note, this is not a public hearing; 
it is a work session for the primary purpose of drafting a report and 
recommendations to the Council on the Development of a Fishery 
Ecosystem Plan (FEP). The primary purpose of the meeting is to address 
Council requests from and since the November 2011 Council meeting, 
revise and expand sections of the Council's developing Fishery 
Ecosystem Plan, discuss the content and format of an annual ecosystem 
report, explore mechanisms for incorporating ecosystem science into 
stock assessments, and revisit the need and mechanisms for expanding 
protective measures for unexploited forage species. The EPDT may also 
develop recommendations for the June 2012 Council meeting.
    Although non-emergency issues not contained in the meeting agenda 
may come before the EPDT for discussion, those issues may not be the 
subject of formal EPDT action during this meeting. EPDT action will be 
restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any 
issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency 
action under Section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 
Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified 
of the intent to take final action to address the emergency.

Special Accommodations

    This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. 
Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids 
should be directed to Mr. Kris Kleinschmidt at (503) 820-2280 at least 
5 days prior to the meeting date.

    Dated: March 21, 2012.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-7165 Filed 3-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
#### Joan NICHOLS On Behalf of Herself and Her Minor Children, Sherman Patrick Nichols and Callie Dawn Nichols v. MID-AMERICAN VAN LINE and Wausau Insurance Company.

No. 88-C-1044.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 20, 1988.

In re Mid-American Van Line; applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 19459-CA; Parish of Franklin, 5th Judicial District Court, Div. “C”, No. 24564.

Prior report: La.App., 522 So.2d 1341.

Denied. We find no error of law in the opinion of the court of appeal.
#### Willie James SIMMONS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 86-1094.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

May 7, 1987.

*102James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Michael L. O’Neill, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Ellen D. Phillips, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.

SHARP, Judge.

Simmons appeals his five year sentence imposed for sexual battery1 after violation of probation. We vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing pursuant to the guidelines.2

The record in this case contains numerous errors. The most basic one is that Simmons initially pled guilty to attempted sexual battery,3*not*sexual battery. Therefore he could not be sentenced for, or adjudicated guilty of, sexual battery.

Simmons’ scoresheet was improperly calculated. “Victim injury” is not an element of attempted sexual battery and it is error to add points4 for it in an attempted sexual battery case. *Beasley v. State,*503 So.2d 1347 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987).5 Further, there is no record evidence of any victim injury in this case.

Based on this record, Simmons’ guidelines score should have totaled 149 rather than 189, as indicated on the score-sheet. With a total score of 149, the presumptive guidelines sentence is “any non-state prison sanction.”6 Since Simmons was being sentenced after violating probation, the trial judge could have sentenced him to the next higher bracket without giving any reasons for imposing an aggravated sentence.7 However, in this case, the trial judge imposed a sentence representing a five bracket upward departure, and he failed to give any written reasons for the departure. This is clear error. Fla.R. Crim.P. 3.701(d)(11); *State v. Jackson,*478 So.2d 1054 (Fla.1985).

Because of these errors we vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing; and we direct that the judgment be corrected to show an adjudication for attempted sexual battery rather than sexual battery.

VACATE SENTENCE; REMAND.

DAUKSCH and COBB, JJ., concur.

1

. § 794.011(5), Fla.Stat. (1984).

2

.. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701.

3

. §§ 794.011(5), 777.04(1), Fla.Stat. (1984).

4

. Forty points had been inserted for victim injury-

5

. *Cf. Holloman v. State,*482 So.2d 431 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985) (victim injury cannot be scored where it is not an element of the offense charged).

6

. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.988.

7

. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(14).
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5              
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1996
<CASH>                                         507,125
<SECURITIES>                                 1,834,324
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,431,279
<PP&E>                                         111,465
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (18,673)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,624,071
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,056,556
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        26,825
<OTHER-SE>                                     540,690
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,624,071
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,868,760
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        


</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of the DEATH OF Toyozo Whinney TAKAGI. Margaret L. TAKAGI, Petitioner, v. WILSON FOODS CORPORATION and the Workers’ Compensation Court, Respondents.

No. 57125.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma.

April 19, 1983.

*309Jeffrey Dasovich, Jan Eric Cartwright, Atty. Gen., Oklahoma City, for petitioner.

Murray E. Abowitz, Oklahoma City, for respondents.

MEMORANDUM DECISION

WILSON, Justice.

Upon consideration of the above styled and captioned cause the Court finds:

Certiorari was granted September 13, 1982.

The decision of the Court of Appeals, Division 2, is not in accordance with the applicable decisions of this Court.

It is well settled that it is not the province of the reviewing court to weigh the evidence in a workers’' compensation case, or to determine where the preponderance lies. Rather, it examines the record only to ascertain whether the order is supported by any competent evidence. *Graves v. Safeway Stores, Inc.,*653 P.2d 1236 (Okl.1982); *Wilkinson v. McGehee,*651 P.2d 671, 672 (Okl.1982); *In the Matter of the Death of Sade,*649 P.2d 538, 540 (Okl.1982); *Loggins v. Wetumka Gen. Hosp.,*587 P.2d 455, 457 (Okl.1978); *Sooner Const. Co. v. Brown,*544 P.2d 500, 502 (Okl.1975).

An examination of the record reflects that there is competent evidence to support the en banc order of the Workers’ Compensation Court that Petitioner did not suffer an accidental injury arising out of or in the course of his employment.

The opinion of the Court of Appeals, Division 2, should be vacated and en banc order of the Workers’ Compensation Court should be reinstated.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED THAT THE OPINION OF THE COURT OF APPEALS, DIVISION 2, BE VACATED, AND.THE EN BANC ORDER OF THE WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COURT BE REINSTATED.

SIMMS, V.C.J., and IRWIN, LAVENDER, DOOLIN, HARGRAVE and OPALA, JJ., concur.
#### Joel H. ANDERSON, Trustee for Joel Gregory Anderson and Lisa McCall Anderson v. AETNA LIFE & CASUALTY, Pioneer Bank & Trust Company, Liberty Bank & Trust Company and Republic Bank.

No. 88-C-2863.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 27, 1989.

Reconsideration Denied Feb. 24, 1989.

In re Anderson, Joel H.; — Plaintiff(s); applying for writ of certiorari and/or re*1257view; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 20039-CA; Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court, Div. “F”, No. 319375.

Prior report: La.App., 535 So.2d 1070.

Denied.

CALOGERO, MARCUS and LEMMON, JJ., would grant the writ.
Exhibit
      32.2





CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION. 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES -OXLEY ACT OF 2002









Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, the undersigned officer of LGA Holdings, Inc. (the
      "Company"), hereby certifies that the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB
      for
      the year ended June 30, 2006 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements
      of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of
      1934
      and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.




Dated:
      October 25, 2006






/s/
      Sara Williams


Sara
      Williams


Treasurer
      (principal financial officer)
**EXHIBIT32.2**

**CERTIFICATIONSPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of U.S. Premium Beef, LLC (the Company) onForm 10-Q for the period ended May 27, 2006 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Scott J. Miller, ChiefReporting and Compliance Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

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

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

 

|     |  |                                                                                                      |
|-----|--|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| By: |  | /s/ Scott J. Miller                                                                                  |
|     |  | Scott J. Miller*Chief Reporting and Compliance Officer	(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)* |

Date: July 10, 2006
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 13-2760

___________________________

Alan Cole Onstad

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

Mary Ann Wilkinson, Clerk, Circuit Court, Lee County, Arkansas; Richard L.

Proctor, Circuit Judge, Lee County, Arkansas; Lee County Arkansas

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees

____________

 Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Helena

____________

 Submitted: October 9, 2013

Filed: October 22, 2013

[Unpublished]

____________

Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.
Alan Onstad appeals the district court’s preservice dismissal, with prejudice, 1

of his amended 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint, essentially asserting that he was

wrongfully denied in forma pauperis (IFP) status in state court, which prevented him

from bringing a conditions-of-confinement case in state court. Upon careful de novo

review, we conclude that the dismissal was proper. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (in civil

action in which prisoner seeks redress from governmental entity or officer or

employee of governmental entity, court shall review complaint assoon as practicable

and dismiss it if it isfrivolous, malicious, failsto state claim, orseeks monetary relief

from defendant who is immune); see also Cooper v. Schriro, 189 F.3d 781, 783 (8th

Cir. 1999) (per curiam) (de novo review of § 1915A dismissal). Specifically, we

agree with the district court that Onstad’s complaint failed to state a claim upon

which relief could be granted. See Williams v. McKenzie, 834 F.2d 152, 153-54 (8th

Cir. 1987) (stating general rule that IFP litigant’s access to court is matter of

privilege, not of right); cf. Murray v. Dosal, 150 F.3d 814, 817 (8th Cir. 1998) (per

curiam) (noting that Supreme Court has never recognized unlimited rule that indigent

plaintiffs at all times and in all cases have right to relief without payment of fees). 

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny Onstad’s motion

for appointment of counsel.

______________________________

The Honorable D.P. Marshall Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern 1

District of Arkansas.

-2-
##### 



FIRST AMENDMENT TO MULTI-TENANT INDUSTRIAL LEASE  (TRIPLE NET)
 First
Amendment Landlord Tenant
 RECITALS:
 Triple
Net Lease Original Premise Lease
 Expansion Premises
  AGREEMENT :
  1. Expansion Premises .
 2. Monthly Operating Expense Charge .
 3. Rent.
 Year
    
    Annual Base Rent
    
    Monthly Basic Rent1*
    
    $
    1,632,888.00
    
    
    $
    136,074.00
    **2
    
    $
    1,608,075.60
    
    
    $
    134,006.303
    
    $
    1,732,648.90
    
    
    $
    144,404.084
    
    $
    1,783,985.10
    
    
    $
    148,663.765
    
    $
    1,838,165.70
    
    
     $
    153,180.486
    
    $
    1,893,787.90
    
    
    $
    157,815.667
    
    $
    1,949,169.70
    
    
    $
    162,430.818
    
    $
    2,007,764.10
    
    
    $
    167,313.689
    
    $
    2,067,911.70
    
    
    $
    172,325.9810
    
    $
    2,131,383.80
    
    
    $
    177,613.6511
    
    $
    2,194,759.20
    
    
    $
    182,896.60
 
 *
    
    Plus any partial month at the beginning of the Term.**
    
    Notwithstanding the forgoing Monthly Basic Rent for each of the months of October,
November and December of 1997 shall be $34,074.00. 4. Right of First Refusal.
 5. Verification of Rentable Square Feet of Premises .
 6. Management Fee .
 7. Landlords Repair Obligations .




---



##### 



8. Tenants Repair Obligations Basic Elements
 9. Brokers .
 10. Construction Allowance .
 11. Specific Improvements by Landlord .
 12. Specific Tenant Improvements .
 13. Continued Effectiveness of Lease .
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
 TENANT
    AURORA BIOSCIENCES CORPORATION,
a Delaware corporationBy:
    /s/ Deborah J. TowerName:
    Deborah J. TowerTitle:
    Sr. Director, Finance & AdministrationLANDLORD
    AEW/LBA ACQUISITION CO. II, LLC,
a California limited liability companyBy:
    LBA, Inc., a California corporation,its agent By:

/s/ Phil  BellingName:
    Phil BellingTitle:
    PrincipalBy:Name:Title: -2-