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

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of LitFunding Corp. a Nevada corporation
(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"),
Morton Reed, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifies to the best of
his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 Exchange 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.

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


/s/ Morton Reed
--------------------------
Morton Reed
Chief Executive Officer
August 19, 2004
#### Gilberto FLORES, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Colie RUSHTON, Warden, McCormick Correctional Institution; Gary Maynard, Director, South Carolina Department of Corrections, Respondents-Appellees. Gilberto Flores, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Colie Rushton, Warden, McCormick Correctional Institution; Gary Maynard, Director, South Carolina Department of Corrections, Respondents-Appellees.

Nos. 02-7636, 02-7637.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 16, 2003.

Decided Jan. 27, 2003.

Gilberto Flores, Appellant Pro Se.

*166Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

In these consolidated appeals, Gilberto Flores, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s orders adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation construing Flores’ 42 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) actions as filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000), and dismissing them without prejudice for failure to exhaust state remedies. The court also denied Flores’ motions for reconsideration. An appeal may not be taken to this court from the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding in which the detention complained of arises out of process issued by a state court unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). When, as here, a district court dismisses a § 2241 petition solely on procedural grounds, a certificate of appealability will not issue unless the petitioner can demonstrate both “(1) that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and (2) ‘that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling.’ ” *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 684 (4th Cir.) (quoting *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000)), *cert. denied,*534 U.S. 941, 122 S.Ct. 318, 151 L.Ed.2d 237 (2001). We have reviewed the record and conclude for the reasons stated by the district court that Flores has not made the requisite showing. *See Flores v. Rushton,*No. CA-01-3288-2-AJ; CA-01-3289-2-AJ (D.S.C. filed Aug. 16, 2002, entered Aug. 19, 2002; filed Sept. 11, 2002, entered Sept. 12, 2002; and filed Oct. 10, 2002, entered Oct. 11, 2002). Accordingly, we deny certificates of appealability and dismiss the appeals. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
**EXHIBIT 10.4**January 29, 2008 AWARD GRANT UNDER LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN     On January 29, 2008, the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of Quiksilver, Inc.(the “Company”) granted awards to the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and its President pursuantto the terms of the Company’s Long-Term Incentive Plan. The awards are for the performance periodbeginning November 1, 2007 and ending October 31, 2010 and provide for the payment of cash bonusesat the end of the performance period if the Company achieves specified levels of earnings per sharegrowth during the performance period.
I

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1612

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 4, 1996

Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

AN ACT

To broaden the scope of certain firearms offenses, and for

other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

S 1612 RFH

1 SECTION 1. FIREARMS OFFENSES.

2 (a) IN GENERAL.—Sections 924(c)(1) and 929(a)(1)

3 of title 18, United States Code, are each amended by strik4 ing ‘‘uses or carries’’ and inserting ‘‘possesses’’.

5 (b) AMENDMENT OF SENTENCING GUIDELINES.—

6 (1) IN GENERAL.—Pursuant to its authority

7 under section 994 of title 28, United States Code,

8 the United States Sentencing Commission shall re9 view and, if appropriate, amend the Federal Sen10 tencing Guidelines and the policy statements of the

11 Commission to provide an appropriate sentence en12 hancement with respect to any defendant who dis13 charges a firearm during or in relation to any crime

14 of violence or any drug trafficking crime.

15 (2) CONSISTENCY.—In carrying out this sub16 section, the United States Sentencing Commission

17 shall—

18 (A) ensure that there is reasonable consist19 ency with other Federal Sentencing Guidelines;

20 (B) avoid duplicative punishment for sub21 stantially the same offense; and

22 (C) take into account any mitigating cir23 cumstances that might justify an exception to

24 any amendment made under paragraph (1).

25 (3) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this sub26 section, the terms ‘‘crime of violence’’ and ‘‘drug
3

S 1612 RFH

1 trafficking crime’’ have the same meanings as in sec2 tion 924(c) of title 18, United States Code.

Passed the Senate October 3, 1996.

Attest: GARY SISCO,

Secretary.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-7072

DEREK LEE VINSON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

GARY ELLIS; LYNNE ANN BATTAGLIA,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge.

(CA-99-1549-JFM)

Submitted: January 20, 2000 Decided: January 28, 2000

Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Derek Lee Vinson, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Derek Lee Vinson appeals the district court’s orders dismissing as frivolous his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1999) complaint, denying his motion for reconsideration, denying his motion

for recusal, denying his motion to vacate the district court’s

memorandum and order of dismissal, and denying as moot his motion

for extension of time to file notice of appeal. We have reviewed

the record and the district court’s opinion and orders and find

that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal

on the reasoning of the district court. See Vinson v. Ellis, No.

CA-99-1549-JFM (D. Md. June 9, July 1, July 7, July 23 & Aug. 5,

1999). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
##### Table of Contents



UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 Washington, D.C. 20549
 FORM 8-K
 CURRENT REPORT
Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 March 19, 2008
 Valeant Pharmaceuticals International
  Delaware
    
    1-11397
    
    33-0628076(State or other jurisdiction of 
incorporation or organization)
    
    (Commission File Number)
    
    (I.R.S Employer
Identification No.)
 One Enterprise
Aliso Viejo, California 92656
 (949) 461-6000
  o
    
    Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)
 o
    
    Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)
 o
    
    Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))
 o
    
    Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))




---



TABLE OF CONTENTS  ITEM 2.02 RESULTS OF OPERATIONS AND FINANCIAL CONDITIONITEM 9.01 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND EXHIBITSSIGNATURESINDEX TO EXHIBITSEXHIBIT 99.1    Table of Contents  
 Item 2.02
    
    Results of Operations and Financial Condition
 www.valeant.com
  
 Item 9.01
    
    Financial Statements and Exhibits.
  99.1
    
    
    Information made available on the Companys website on March 19, 2008.




---



##### Table of Contents



SIGNATURES
  VALEANT PHARMACEUTICALS INTERNATIONALDate: March 19, 2008
    By:
    /s/ Peter J. BlottPeter J. BlottExecutive Vice President
and Chief Financial Officer




---



##### Table of Contents



INDEX TO EXHIBITS
 99.1
    
    
    Information made available on the Companys website on March 19, 2008.
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated February 21, 
1997 (February 28, 1997 and March 1, 1997 as to Note 3), appearing in this 
Annual Report on Form 10-K of Teleport Communications Group Inc. for the year 
ended December 31, 1996, in the following Registration Statements of Teleport 
Communications Group Inc.:

                        Form            File No.
                        ----            --------

                        S-8             333-07009
                        S-8             333-07011
                        S-8             333-07007
                        S-8             333-13987
                        S-8             333-15347


DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
New York, New York

March 26, 1997
VI

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1717

For the relief of Dona H. Shibata.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

APRIL 30, 1996

Mr. AKAKA introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Armed Services

A BILL

For the relief of Dona H. Shibata.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHIPMENT OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS AT GOV4 ERNMENT EXPENSE.

5 (a) ENTITLEMENT TO SHIPMENT.—Notwithstanding

6 any other provision of law, in the administration of sub7 chapter II of chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code,

8 with respect to Dona H. Shibata, a retired employee of

9 the United States—

10 (1) the said Dona H. Shibata shall be consid11 ered entitled under that subchapter to ship her

12 household goods from Japan to Las Vegas, Nevada,
2

•S 1717 IS

1 at the expense of the United States in connection

2 with her retirement from service as an employee of

3 the United States; and

4 (2) the maximum total weight of the household

5 goods that she is entitled under that subchapter to

6 ship from Japan to Las Vegas, Nevada, at the ex7 pense of the United States is the weight equal to the

8 excess of—

9 (A) 18,000 pounds, over

10 (B) the total weight of the household goods

11 (if any) that her husband, Sunao Shibata (also

12 a retired employee of the United States),

13 shipped from Japan to Hawaii at the expense

14 of the United States at the time of his retire15 ment from service as an employee of the United

16 States in 1985,

17 such total weight of 18,000 pounds being the maxi18 mum total weight of the household goods which her

19 husband, Sunao Shibata, was entitled to ship from

20 Japan to Hawaii at the expense of the United States

21 at that time.

22 (b) REIMBURSEMENT ALTERNATIVE.—In the event

23 that Dona H. Shibata or Sunao Shibata or both have, be24 fore the date of the enactment of this Act, incurred the

25 cost of shipping from Japan to Las Vegas, Nevada, house-
3

•S 1717 IS

1 hold goods which Dona H. Shibata would have been enti2 tled in accordance with this section to have shipped at the

3 expense of the United States if this Act had been in effect

4 at the time such goods were shipped, the Secretary of the

5 Army shall reimburse Dona H. Shibata and Sunao

6 Shibata for such cost in the actual amount of the cost

7 so incurred.

8 SEC. 2. PERIOD OF APPLICABILITY OF ENTITLEMENT.

9 Section 1 applies, in accordance with the provisions

10 thereof, with respect to a shipment that is commenced be11 fore, on, or within one year after the date of the enactment

12 of this Act.

Æ
#### WILLIAM CRAWFORD, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 1600, Docket 94-7004.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Argued April 28, 1994.

Decided April 29, 1994.

William D. Fireman, New York City (David B. Turret, Julien & Schlesinger, P.C., New York City, of counsel), for plaintiff-appellant.

Thomas A. Martin, New York City (Craig M. Bonnist, Putney, Twombly, Hall & Hir-son, New York City, of counsel), for defendant-appellee.

Before: LUMBARD, VAN GRAAFEILAND and WINTER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

William Crawford, Inc. appeals from Judge Lasker’s order granting summary judgment in favor of Travelers Insurance Company. The district court’s decision is affirmed for substantially the reasons stated by the district court. *See William Crawford, Inc. v. Travelers Insurance Co.,*838 F.Supp. 157 (S.D.N.Y.1993).
Exhibit 31.1
 Certification of Chief Executive Officer
Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) Under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
              By:
    /s/ PAUL M. BISAROPaul M. BisaroPresident and Chief Executive Officer

(Principal Executive Officer)
Amendment #10 to Master Services Agreement



 Exhibit 10.11.12 

AMENDMENT #10 
 TO 
 MASTER SERVICES AGREEMENT 

This Amendment (“Amendment”) effective February 12, 2010 (“Amendment Effective Date”) is between Synacor, Inc.
(“Synacor”) and Embarq Management Company, (“Client”) under which the parties hereto mutually agree to modify and amend the Synacor Master Services Agreement, dated December 4, 2006 (including the exhibits,
schedules and amendments thereto, the “Agreement”). All terms defined herein shall be applicable solely to this Amendment. Any defined terms used herein, which are defined in the Agreement and not otherwise defined herein, shall have the
meanings ascribed to them in the Agreement. 
 In consideration of the premises and mutual covenants herein and for other good and valuable
consideration, the sufficiency and receipt of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 
  

	1.0	Modification of Notice Period: The parties hereby agree that notwithstanding the required notice period set forth in Section 6.1 of the Agreement, Client
shall have until February 26, 2010 to provide Synacor written notice of its intent not to renew the Agreement. If no notice is received by Synacor on or before February 26, 2010, the Agreement will automatically renew in accordance with
its Section 6.1. 

  

	2.0	Scope of Amendment: This Amendment supersedes all proposals, oral or written, all negotiations, conversations, or discussions between or among parties relating
to the subject matter of this Amendment and all past dealing or industry custom. This Amendment shall be integrated in and form part of the Agreement upon execution. All terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain unchanged except as
expressly modified in this Amendment; and the terms of the Agreement, as modified by this Amendment, are hereby ratified and confirmed. Where the terms of the Agreement conflict with those of this Amendment, however, the terms of this Amendment
shall control. This Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same agreement. 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of the Amendment Effective Date. 

 

									
	SYNACOR, INC.	 		 	Embarq Management Company
					
	By:	 	 /s/ Ron Frankel
	 		 	By:	 	 /s/ Robert W. Smith II

					
	Name:	 	 Ron Frankel
	 		 	Name:	 	 Robert W. Smith II

					
	Title:	 	 President – CEO
	 		 	Title:	 	 Manager - Sourcing
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5120 

To require Presidential appointment and Senate confirmation of Foreign 

Intelligence Surveillance Court judges. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 27, 2018 

Mr. GAETZ (for himself and Mr. POE of Texas) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition 

to the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select), 

for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case 

for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the 

committee concerned 

A BILL 

To require Presidential appointment and Senate confirmation 

of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court judges. 

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 ‘‘Presidential Appoint5 ment of FISA Court Judges Act’’. 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5120 IH

1 SEC. 2. PRESIDENTIAL APPOINTMENT AND SENATE CON2 FIRMATION OF FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE SUR3 VEILLANCE COURT JUDGES. 

4 (a) PRESIDENTIAL APPOINTMENT AND SENATE CON5 FIRMATION REQUIRED.—Section 103 of the Foreign Intel6 ligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1803) is 

7 amended— 

8 (1) in subsection (a)(1)— 

9 (A) in the first sentence, by striking ‘‘The 

10 Chief Justice of the United States’’ and insert11 ing ‘‘(A) The President, by and with the advice 

12 and consent of the Senate,’’; and 

13 (B) by adding at the end the following new 

14 subparagraph: 

15 ‘‘(B) The President, by and with the advice and con16 sent of the Senate, shall publicly designate a judge des17 ignated under subparagraph (A) to serve as the presiding 

18 judge of the court established under such subparagraph.’’; 

19 (2) in subsection (b), by striking ‘‘The Chief 

20 Justice’’ and inserting ‘‘The President, by and with 

21 the advice and consent of the Senate,’’; and 

22 (3) in subsection (c), by striking ‘‘the Chief 

23 Justice in consultation with’’. 

24 (b) COMPLETION OF TERMS BY EXISTING DES25 IGNEES.—Notwithstanding the amendments by subsection 

26 (a), each judge serving on a court established under subVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:49 Mar 02, 2018 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H5120.IH H5120

SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 5120 IH

1 section (a) or subsection (b) of section 103 of the Foreign 

2 Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1803) on 

3 the date of the enactment of this Act may complete the 

4 term of such judge on such court. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with BILLS
AFS

- 13

- 3 9 6

- E July 14, 2013

Exemption No. 10824
Regulatory Docket No. FAA

- 20 1 3

- 0 4 9 4

Ms

. Margaret Dickens

Parent of Katherine Dickens

2055 Lee Davis Road

Utica, MS 39175

Dear Ms. Dickens :

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your request for exemption. It transmits our
decision, explains its basis, and lists the conditions and limitations of the exemption,
including the date it ends.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter received May 3 1 , 2013 , you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administrat ion (FAA)

on behalf of Katherine Dickens for an exemption from § 121.311(b)(2)(iii)(B) of Title 14,
Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)

. That exemp tion , if granted, would all ow Katherine to exceed the specified weight limit for an FAA

- approved child restraint system (CAReS,
manufactured by AmSafe Corporation ) during use of that child restraint system (CRS) aboard

a United States (U.S.) aircraft.

The FAA has determined that go od cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition

in the Federal Register because the requested exem ption would not set a precedent and any
delay in acting on this petition would be det rimental to Katherine

.

The FAA has issued grants of exempti on in circumstances similar in all material respects to
those presented in your petition. In Grant of Exemption No. 9834 (copy enclosed), the FAA
found that numerous p eople with physical challenges had previously completed flights using
restraint systems t hat addressed unique physical needs regarding safety, support, and security
in the same manner of operations as described in this petition. The FAA further found that the2

petition , if granted, would not set any new precedents regarding the use of restraint systems by
persons with disabilities.

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that

—

• they do not differ materially from those presented by the petitioner in the enclosed Grant
of Exemption No. 9834

.

• the reasons stated by the FAA f or granting the enclosed Grant of E xemption No. 9834 also
apply to the situation you present ; and

• a grant of exemption is in the public interest.

Our Decision

Under the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator

has del egated to me, I hereby grant Katherine Dickens an exemption from § 121.311(b). In
addition, any air carrier or commercial operator operating under part 121 while Katherine is
aboard its aircraft is granted an exemption from 14 CFR § 121.311(b) to the exte nt necessary

to allow h er to use an FAA

- approved CRS aboard a U.S. aircraft

.

All operations under this exemption must be conducted w ith at least one of Katherine ’s

parents or a caregiver accompanying her

. Katherine Dickens may only occupy a passenger

sea t with no passenger se ated behind her

. In addition, Katherine ’s parent or caregiver must
carry a copy of this exemption and advise the air carrier about the contents of the exemption at
least 48 hours before the date of each flight.

This exemption termin ates on July 31 , 201 8 , unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

Enclosure
##### 



Exhibit 31.1
  CERTIFICATION
    OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
    Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
    2002
    Form 10-Q
      Rules 13a-15(e) 15d-15(e))
              November 8, 2007

By:

/s/ STANLEY J. OLANDER, JR.Date



Stanley J. Olander, Jr.Chief Executive Officer and President
    (principal executive officer)
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.1

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

The Board of Directors
Southern Pacific Funding Corporation:

  We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No.
333-11075 and No. 333-11189) on Forms S-8 of Southern Pacific Funding
Corporation of our report dated January 29, 1998, relating to the consolidated
balance sheets of Southern Pacific Funding Corporation and subsidiaries as of
December 31, 1996 and 1997, and the related consolidated statements of
earnings, shareholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the
three-year period ended December 31, 1997, which report appears in the
December 31, 1997, annual report on Form 10-K of Southern Pacific Funding
Corporation. We also consent to the reference to our firm under the heading
"Selected Consolidated Financial and Other Data" in the Form 10-K.

                                          KPMG Peat Marwick LLP

Portland, Oregon
March 31, 1998