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

 

**CertificationPursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b)**

**Of theSecurities and Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report ofDynTek, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q for thequarter ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, the ChiefExecutive Officer, hereby certifies pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule15d-14(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. Section1350,that based on my knowledge:

 

(1)           the Report of the Company filed today pursuant toSection 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “ExchangeAct”), fully complies with the applicable requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Exchange Act; and

 

(2)           the information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 

 
| Dated: February 17, 2006 | /s/ Casper Zublin, Jr.  |   |
|--------------------------|-------------------------|--------|
|                     | Casper Zublin, Jr.      |
|                     | Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
November 29, 2000

22734

#### Southwood v. Shiroma

Affirmed
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 7, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-51035

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

SERGIO ORTEGA-JARA, also known as Sergio Jara,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas 

USDC No. 3:06-CR-373-ALL

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

Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Sergio OrtegaJara raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v.

United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal

offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is

GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>

1.4 EXHIBIT 32.2 - CFO 906 CERTIFICATION


 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 Interland, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-K for the period ending August 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Allen L. Shulman,
Chief Financial Officer, 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) 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: December 27, 2004


                                 /s/ Allen L. Shulman
                                 ____________________________
                                 Allen L. Shulman
                                 Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer,
                                 and General Counsel
#### Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company, a Corporation, Plaintiff in Error, v. C. J. Freeman, Defendant in Error.

A Writ of Error to a Judgment of the Court of Record for Escambia County.

Blount & Blount & Carter, for Plaintiff in Error;

John P. Stokes and R. P. Reese, for Defendant in Error.

Writ of Error dismissed on praecipe of counsel for plaintiff in error, January 22, 1915.
EXHIBIT 21


                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT


     The Company has four wholly-owned subsidiaries. All others listed are
either direct or indirect subsidiaries of the Bank.

SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY                        STATE OF INCORPORATION

Mid America Bank, fsb                              United States
MAF Developments, Inc.                             Illinois
Mid Town Development Corporation                   Illinois
Equitable Finance Corp.                            Illinois

SUBSIDIARIES OF THE BANK                           STATE OF INCORPORATION

Mid America Investment Services, Inc.              Illinois
Mid America Insurance Agency, Inc.                 Illinois
Mid America Finance Corporation                    Illinois
Mid America Mortgage Securities, Inc.              Illinois
N.W. Financial Corporation                         Illinois
Randall Road Development Corporation               Illinois
Centre Point Title Services, Inc.                  Illinois
Reigate Woods Development Corporation              Illinois
MAF Realty Co., L.L.C. - III                       Delaware
MAF Realty Co., L.L.C. - IV                        Delaware
Mid America Re, Inc.                               Vermont
SF Investment Corporation                          Nevada
SF Insurance Services Corporation                  Wisconsin
St. Francis Equity Properties, Inc.                Wisconsin
#### Labayog v. Saniatan

19330

9/26/96

Vacated and Remanded
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



     The undersigned  executive  officers of the Registrant  hereby certify that
this  Annual  Report  on Form 10-K for the year  ended  December  31,  2002 (the
"Report") 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 Report
fairly presents,  in all material respects,  the financial condition and results
of operations of the Registrant.



                             By:  /s/ Harry J. Bailey
                                  ----------------------------------------------
                                  Name:    Harry J. Bailey
                                  Title:   President and Chief Executive Officer



                             By:  /s/ Bradley L. Smith
                                  ----------------------------------------------
                                  Name:    Bradley L. Smith
                                  Title:   Senior Vice President and Principal
                                              Financial and Accounting Officer

Date: March 25, 2003
#### State v. McMillen

16760

2/2/96

Granted

- Hawai'i -, - P.2d -
#### State *ex rel.,*R. L. Sparkman, Petitioner, v. F. M. Robles, Judge Sixth Judicial Circuit of Florida, *et al.,*Respondents.

Original Proceeding for Prohibition.

James F. Glen, for Petitioner; I). C. Mullen, for Respondent.

Cause dismissed on praecipe of counsel for petitioner at costs of Petitioner.
# C_2019423EN.01004001.xml

| 16.12.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 423/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.12.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 423/40

---

Judgment of the General Court of 10 October 2019 — Biasotto v EUIPO — Oofos (OOF)

(Case T-453/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark OOF - Earlier EU word mark OOFOS - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2019/C 423/49)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Alessandro Biasotto (Treviso, Italy) (represented by F. Le Divelec Lemmi, R. Castiglioni and E. Cammareri, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by E. Markakis and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Oofos, Inc. (Reno, Nevada, United States) (represented by J. Klink, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 10 May 2018 (Case R 1270/2017-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Oofos and Mr Biasotto.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mr Alessandro Biasotto to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Alessandro Biasotto to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 352, 1.10.2018.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 594 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
H. Res. 594

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                      February 2, 2016.
    Resolved, That at any time after adoption of this resolution the Speaker 
may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 3700) to provide housing opportunities in the United States through 
modernization of various housing programs, and for other purposes. The first 
reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against 
consideration of the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to the 
bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair 
and ranking minority member of the Committee on Financial Services. After 
general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute 
rule. In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the 
Committee on Financial Services now printed in the bill, it shall be in order to 
consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute 
rule an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules 
Committee Print 114-42. That amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be 
considered as read. All points of order against that amendment in the nature of 
a substitute are waived. No amendment to that amendment in the nature of a 
substitute shall be in order except those printed in the report of the Committee 
on Rules accompanying this resolution. Each such amendment may be offered only 
in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated 
in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time 
specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an 
opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a 
demand for division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the 
Whole. All points of order against such amendments are waived. At the conclusion 
of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report 
the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been adopted. Any Member 
may demand a separate vote in the House on any amendment adopted in the 
Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the amendment in the nature of a 
substitute made in order as original text. The previous question shall be 
considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage 
without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without 
instructions.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
Breadcrumb

1. Home

2. Print 

3. Pdf 

4. Node 

5. Entity Print 

Horse Protection Act 2022 Show

Activity Reports

Last Modified: 

Print

The Appalachian Championships (102.45 KB)

HAWHA Fall Classic HP Activity Report (107.39 KB)

Dix River Fall Classic HP Activity Report (102.56 KB)

FAST Fall Showcase HP Activity Report (102.15 KB)

Walking for the Angels HP Activity Report (102.2 KB)

National Walking Horse Trainers' Show HP Activity Report (102.41 KB)

Walking in the Smokies HP Activity Report (103.61 KB)

Southern Championship Charity Show HP Activity Report (104.08 KB)

WHOA Rumble on the River HP Activity Report (103.48 KB)

Bluegrass Classic HP Activity Report (104.63 KB)

PPWHANC Tar Heel Classic HP Activity Report (103.18 KB)

VWRHOA Show HP Activity Report (105.28 KB)

EKWRHA Annual Celebration HP Activity Report (105.01 KB)

43rd Annual 3-Year-Old Futurity and Spring Show HP Activity Report (104.26

KB)

PRHTA Show HP Activity Report (105.31 KB)

HAWHA Fun Show HP Activity Report (103.8 KB)

The Ohio Classic HP Activity Report (103.72 KB)

7th Annual Get Your Pink On Show HP Activity Report (104.6 KB)

ANWARC HP Activity Report (105.41 KB)

46th Annual Chestnut Hill Charity HP Activity Report (103.94 KB)
KWHA Ladies Auxiliary Jubilee HP Activity Report (105.21 KB)

54th Annual Indiana Celebration Region 7 Championship Activity Report

(104.11 KB)

Lewisburg-Millcreek Lions Club Horse Show HP Activity Report (105.23 KB)

78th Annual Owingsville Lions Club Horse Show (104.82 KB)

Strides Against Cancer Horse Show (105.56 KB)

NMHA United We Stand Horse Show (104.35 KB)

Come-Unity Cooperative Care’s Tim Philpot Memorial Horse Show (104.74 KB)

TWHBEA World Versatility HP Activity Report (104.7 KB)

33rd Annual NSSHA Mid-Season Show HP Activity Report (103.74 KB)

44th International Pleasure & Colt Grand Championship HP Activity Report

(105.78 KB)

Illinois Racking & Walking Horse State Championship HP Activity Report (104.46

KB)

46th Annual Carter County Shrine Club Horse Show HP Activity Report (104.6

KB)

CKRHA Kentucky State Championship HP Activity Report (104.95 KB)

WHOA Show Series HP Activity Report (104.15 KB)

97th Annual State Fair of West Virginia Horse Show HP Activity Report (105.21

KB)

Celebration Super Sale HP Activity Report (103.69 KB)

84th TWH National Celebration HP Activity Report (105.58 KB)

VWRHOA Fall Show HP Activity Report (105.13 KB)

Kentucky Celebration HP Activity Report (105.45 KB)

WHAO Buckeye Fall Classic HP Activity Report (104.69 KB)

51st World Celebration HP Activity Report (104.75 KB)
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

WILLIE HOGAN,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D17-641

[April 26, 2018]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, 

Martin County; Elizabeth Ann Metzger, Judge; L.T. Case No. 

13000424CFB.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and J. Woodson Isom, Assistant 

Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Georgina 

Jimenez-Orosa, Senior Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for 

appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GERBER, C.J., DAMOORGIAN and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
November 25, 1997

19535

#### Fernandez v. Labor and Industrial Relations Appeals Bd.

Affirmed
23857

#### State v. Bundy

Affirmed
24017

#### State v. Unciano

Affirmed
Breadcrumb

1. Home

2. Print 

3. Pdf 

4. Node 

5. Entity Print 

Reagent Data Sheets (DATs)

Last Modified: 

Print

Sections

Bacteriology

Virology
3 P.3d 49

SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I

#### Suntera, The Solar Elec. Chariot Co., Inc. v. Quinn ....

22558

03/10/2000

Dismissed
#### Louis Martin et al., Plaintiffs, *v.*Hector C. Rossi et al., Defendants.

Supreme Court, Special Term, New York County,

May 27, 1959.

*Albert A. Jacobson*for plaintiffs.

*Henry Mayersohn*for defendants.

Henry Epstein, J.

This is a motion for a temporary injunction in an action by the plaintiffs to reform a written agreement entered into between the parties and for an accounting. In connection therewith the action seeks to compel the retransfer of stock, a lease and security thereunder and for other relief.

This motion seeks to enjoin the defendants, *pendente lite,*from transferring that stock, from in any way disposing of the assets of the defendant corporation, from transferring or disposing of that lease and security, from disposing of certain promissory notes, from making any alteration or improvements in the. premises held by the defendant corporation and from electing new officers or directors of the defendant corporation.

*199The action herein was commenced by the filing of a *lis pendens*and service of a summons and complaint in January of this year.

To obtain a temporary injunction, the plaintiffs must show irreparable injury suffered or reasonably to be expected. In order to receive this drastic relief the plaintiffs must show that an act is being done or threatened and imminent which is destructive of plaintiffs’ rights or cause material injury, as opposed to mere fanciful theoretical or possible injury. Not every apprehension of injury will move the court to exercise its discretionary power in the absence of irreparable injury or the threat thereof. This prerequisite the plaintiffs have failed to show. In addition the plaintiffs could have asked for this remedy at any time since January. Having failed to do so, they should not now be heard, particularly where no proof is offered of the necessity for the relief. Accordingly, the motion is denied. If, however, it later appears that the relief is necessary or that the defendant is delaying a prompt trial of the issues, the plaintiffs may seek relief by appropriate motion.
12/17/201 0 12:4 7 FA X 202493514 2 FA A * DM S 1001/00 3

Befor e th e U.S
. Departmen t o f Transportatio n Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n 

### -PARTWENTO F •ASPORTATIO N : rOPERATION S I n th e matte r

o f M & RHELICOPTER S Docke t No
. TB A FA A Cas e No
. 2009SO95043 4 

# M'p/ /
COMPLAINANT* S MOTTO N REQUESTIN G A N ORDE RT O IMPOS E A PROCEDURA L SCHEDUL E FQRflLTN G DISPOSITIV E MOTION S AN D DISCOVER Y Pursuan t t o 1 4 C.F.R
. § § 13.21 7 an d13.218 , Complainan t file s thi s motio n requestin g a

n order t o impos e aprocedural schedul e fo r th e filing o f

di.spositiv e motion s an ddiscovery i n thi s matter . I n suppor t o f thi s motion , Complainan t cite s th e necessit

y t o contro l th e procedural aspect s o f thi s cas e s o that

neithe r party files unnecessary o r redundan t pleading s tha t

squander s scarc e judicial resources . Complainan t note s that M& Rha s filednumerou s dispositiv e motion s withi n th e pas t fe w week s andthat

many o f thes e motion s are redundan t andprocedurall y defective , A procedural orde r wil l assis t th e partie s andth e trie r

o f fact in havin g thi s cas e presente di n a n orderly , relevant , an d concis e manner .12/17/201 0 12:4 7 FA X 202493514 2 FA A + DM S 1002/00 3

Accordingly , Complainan t request s tha t

th e AL J assigne dto thi s cas e issu e a procedural orde r

impo.sing on th e partie s reasonabl e limitation s o n th e filin g o f dispositiv e motion s an ddiscovery
. Respectfiill y submitted , Pete r J
. Lync h Assistan t Chie f Counse l

Date : December

10 , 201 0 

### By:< : 

# ^/v o

/(<T* ^ Laur aPont o -:T Attorne y Enforcement

Division , AGC-30 0 Offic e o f th e Chie f Counse l Federal Aviatio n Administratio n 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S.W
. Washington , D C 2059 1 Phone : (202)267-986 3 Facsimile : (202)267-510 612/17/201 0 12:4 7 FA X 202493514 2 FA A * DM S 12003/00 3

Certificat e o f

Servic e 1 hereb y certif

y tha t on thi s dat e I hav e place di n th e U.S
. mail , postag e prepaid , certifie dreturn-receipt , acop y o f Complainant' s Motio n Requestin g A n Orde r T o Impos e A Procedura l Schedul e Fo r Filin g Di.spositiv e Motion s An dDiscovery , i n FAA Cas e No
. 2009SO950434 , addresse dto :

Dr
. Michae l B
. Seli g Presiden t M & RHelicopters , LL C 204 5 Wcstgatc Dr. , Suite 20 5 Bethlehem , P A 1801 7 In addition , f

hereb y ccrlif

y tha t o n thi s dat e I hav e sen t

b y th e U.S
. mail , postag e prepaid , certifie dreturn-receipt , th e original andon e cop y o f th e foregoin g documen t

to : Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n 60 0 Independenc e Avenue , S.W
. Wilbur Wright Buildin g - Suit e 2W100 0 Washington , D.C
. 2059 1 Attn : Hearin g Docke t

Clerk , AGC-43 0

Dated : Decembe r

10 , 201 0
#### State v. Felder

16755

3/14/95

Affirmed
Technology Investment Plan (TIP) No.:______________ 

AD700 or AD672 No.:___________________ 

Acquisition Title:________________________________ 

Attachment 3 

 UNAVAILABILITY DETERMINATION 

(Modified from Attachment Two of AGAR Advisory No. 49) 

The Requiring Official must provide a written determination to the Contracting Officer for inclusion in 

the file. The determination should describe: 

1. The products or services required to meet the Agency’s needs; 

2. The dollar value of the acquisition, including any options. 

3. The applicable Section 508 Standards (36 CFR, Part 1194); 

4. The market research performed to locate commercial items that meet the applicable 

standards; 

5. Which standards can be met and which cannot; 

6. Which EIT is not available in the marketplace in compliant form and is not available in time 

to meet the needs of the Agency; 

7. The steps the Agency is taking to avoid the use of the non-compliant EIT, if practicable; and 

8. The alternate means of access the Agency will provide to allow the individuals with 

disabilities to use the information or data. 

Approval of Determination

Section 508 Standards do not apply to this investment (requirement) because of item # _____ above. 

Signed ________________________________ __________________________ 

 Program Requiring Official Date 

Signed ________________________________ __________________________ 

 Program Section 508 Representative Date 

Signed _____________________________________ __________________________ 

 AMS Section 508 Coordinator (Designee) Date 

Signed __________________________________ __________________________ 

 AMS Chief Information Officer Date
Annex 16

CHAPTER 1.3.DISEASES, INFECTIONS AND INFESTATIONSLISTED BY THE OIE

[...]

Article 1.3.3.

The following are included within the category of sheep and goat diseases and *infections*:

‒	Caprine arthritis/encephalitis

‒	Contagious agalactia

‒	Contagious caprine pleuropneumonia

‒	Infection with *Chlamydia abortus* (Enzootic abortion of ewes, ovine chlamydiosis)

‒	Infection with peste des petits ruminants virus

‒Infection with *Theileria lestoquardi*, *Theileria luwenshuni* and *Theileria uilenbergi*

‒	Maedi–visna

‒	Nairobi sheep disease

‒	Ovine epididymitis *(Brucella ovis)*

‒	Salmonellosis (*S.*abortusovis)

‒	Scrapie

‒	Sheep pox and goat pox.

[...]

___________________________

*WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission/September 2022*1
#### In re Robert W. HUGHES Disciplinary Proceeding.

No. 13900.

Supreme Court of Utah.

April 24, 1975.

Rex J. Hanson of Hanson, Wadsworth & Russon, Salt Lake City, for Robert W. Hughes.

Wendell E. Bennett of Strong & Hanni, Salt Lake City, for State Bar.

PER CURIAM:

This is a review of a disciplinary hearing, report and recommendation of the Utah State Bar Association, based on two complaints filed with that agency, alleging violation of Rule III, Canon 9, DR 9-102 (A and B) (1) and (3), of the Disciplinary Rules of the Bar.

The two complaints had to do with commingling of clients’ funds with petitioner’s personal funds. Such commingling was conceded. In a lengthy hearing, however, petitioner sought to explain away the infractions, and though there was some controverted testimony, the petitioner himself made it appear that his actions were culpable under the provisions of the Canon, and although we are not bound to the recommendation of the Bar Commission, in this case we think it not unreasonable to follow it to the effect: That petitioner be suspended from the practice of law for a period of one year and *thereafter until he shall reimburse the Utah State Bar*for the actual expenses incurred by it in connection with the disciplinary proceeding.