alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION 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) 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), the undersigned
officer of Sterling Bancorp, a New York corporation (the Company), hereby
certifies that: The
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended June 30, 2006 (the Report)
of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company. Dated:
August 9,
2006

/s/ Louis J.
  CappelliName: Louis
  J. CappelliTitle:
  Chairman and Chief Executive Officer The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely 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) and is not being filed as part of
the Report or as a separate disclosure document. 46
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>   5
<LEGEND>
                       The Standard Register Company

                          Financial Data Schedule


This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from The
Standard Register Company financial statements for the nine months ended
October 1, 1995, and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such 
financial statements.

</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>   1,000
       
<S>                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                      DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                                           OCT-01-1995
<CASH>                                                      29,212
<SECURITIES>                                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                              169,201
<ALLOWANCES>                                                 5,580
<INVENTORY>                                                114,424
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                           321,814
<PP&E>                                                     350,263
<DEPRECIATION>                                             139,961
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                             543,185
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                       84,866
<BONDS>                                                     14,306
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                            0
<PREFERRED>                                                      0
<COMMON>                                                    28,867
<OTHER-SE>                                                 380,309
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                               543,185
<SALES>                                                    652,785
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                           654,944
<CGS>                                                      424,890
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                              597,030
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                 0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                             2,552
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                             765
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                             57,914
<INCOME-TAX>                                                23,374
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                         34,540
<DISCONTINUED>                                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                  0
<CHANGES>                                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                                34,540
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                 1.21
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                 1.21
        

</TABLE>
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5062 

To extend and modify the temporary reduction of duty on 3,3NDichlorobenzidine dihydrochloride. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 27, 2012 

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend and modify the temporary reduction of duty on 

3,3N-Dichlorobenzidine dihydrochloride. 

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

3 SECTION 1. 3,3N-DICHLOROBENZIDINE DIHYDRO4 CHLORIDE. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.25.73 of the Har6 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

7 3,3N-Dichlorobenzidine dihydrochloride ([1,1N-biphenyl]- 

8 4,4N-diamino, 3,3N-dichloro-) (CAS No. 612–83–9)) is 

9 amended— 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5062 IH

1 (1) by striking ‘‘5.9%’’ and inserting ‘‘3.8%’’ in 

2 the general rate of duty column; and 

3 (2) by striking the date in the effective period 

4 column and inserting ‘‘12/31/2015’’. 

5 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

6 subsection (a) apply to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

7 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

8 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED NOVEMBER 6, 2015

NO. 03-14-00199-CV

Steven Gregory Sloat, Ed Bryan, Church of Scientology International,

David J. Lubow, and Monty Drake, Appellants

v.

Monique Rathbun, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 207TH DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, PEMBERTON, AND FIELD

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART -- OPINION BY JUSTICE FIELD

This is an appeal from the interlocutory order signed by the trial court on March 14, 2014.

Having reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was reversible 

error in the portion of the trial court’s order awarding attorneys’ fees to appellee. Therefore, the 

Court reverses the portion of the trial court’s order awarding attorneys’ fees to appellee, but 

affirms the portion of the trial court’s order denying appellants’ motions to dismiss. Appellants

shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and the court below.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

# Contact Person for More Information:

Lynn S. Fox, Assistant to the Board; 202-452-3204.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

You may call 202-452-3206 beginning at approximately 5 p.m. two business days before the meeting for a recorded announcement of bank and bank holding company applications scheduled for the meeting; or you may contact the Board's Web site at http://www.federalreserve.gov for an electronic announcement that not only lists applications, but also indicates procedural and other information about the meeting.

Dated: October 4, 2000.

Robert deV. Frierson, 

Associate Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 00-25910  Filed 10-4-00; 10:36 am]

BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
<PAGE>
                                                                      Exhibit 11


                        STERLING BANCORP AND SUBSIDIARIES
                 Statement Re: Computation of Per Share Earnings

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                           Three Months Ended       Nine Months Ended
                                              September 30,          September 30,
                                    -------------------------------------------------------
                                       2002             2001          2002            2001
                                    -----------     ------------  -------------    -----------
<S>                               <C>              <C>            <C>            <C>
Net income                        $  5,544,692     $  4,992,721   $ 16,041,602   $ 14,234,233
Less: preferred dividends               28,073           24,370         84,627         73,614
                                    -----------      -----------    -----------    -----------
Net income available for common
  shareholders and adjusted for
  diluted computation             $  5,516,619     $  4,968,351   $ 15,956,975   $ 14,160,619
                                    ===========      ===========    ===========    ===========

Weighted average common
  shares outstanding                 9,922,478       10,250,508     10,021,703     10,129,812
Add dilutive effect of:
    Stock options                      371,752          447,785        431,741        320,266
    Convertible preferred stock        232,648          235,333        233,481        236,577
Adjusted for assumed diluted       -----------      -----------    -----------    -----------
  computation                       10,526,878       10,933,626     10,686,925     10,686,655
                                   ===========      ===========    ===========    ===========



Basic earnings per share                 $0.56            $0.49          $1.59          $1.40
                                    ===========      ===========    ===========    ===========
Diluted earnings per share               $0.52            $0.46          $1.49          $1.33
                                    ===========      ===========    ===========    ===========
</TABLE>

                                       33
#32961275_v2 

### SERVICE LIST

robert.wirick@aa.com

howard.kass@aa.com sharon.pasley@fedex.com

sllunsford@fedex.com

dan.weiss@united.com

sascha.vanderbellen@delta.com

chris.walker@delta.com jyoung@yklaw.com (Counsel for Spirit Airlines) dkirstein@yklaw.com (Counsel for Spirit Airlines) marshall.sinick@ssd.com (Counsel for Alaska Airlines) agoerlich@ggh-airlaw.com(Counsel for Allegiant) rpommer@atlasair.com kevin.montgomery@polaraircargo.com peter.beckett@polaraircargo.com anita.mosner@hklaw.com (Counsel for United Parcel Service) jennifer.nowak@hklaw.com (Counsel for United Parcel Service) thomas.ting@suncountry.com joan.canny@amerijet.com jrichardson@johnlrichardson.com (Counsel for Amerijet) jhill@cooley.com (Counsel for Hawaiian and JetBlue) perkmann@cooley.com (Counsel for Hawaiian and JetBlue) matwood@cozen.com (Counsel for Kalitta Air) john.s.duncan@faa.gov cristinasa@state.gov
#### National Bank of New York City, Respondent, v ESI Group, Inc., et al., Appellants.

In an action to recover on certain promissory notes, the defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Levine, J.), dated September 7, 1988, which, upon an order of the same court dated August 17,1988, granting the plaintiffs cross motion for *454summary judgment, is in favor of the plaintiff and against them. The defendants’ notice of appeal from the order dated August 17, 1988, is deemed a premature notice of appeal from the judgment (CPLR 5520 [c]).

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The evidence adduced by the plaintiff in support of its cross motion for summary judgment established that each of the defendants was in default, either as a debtor or as a guarantor, with respect to several promissory notes. The defendants’ principal argument is that the representatives of the plaintiff had orally promised to extend the due date specified in the various notes. It is, however, well established that proof of such an oral promise may not serve as the basis for contradicting the express terms of the instruments themselves. "Defendants’ claim that plaintiff bank orally agreed to a[n] * * * extension of the note[s] beyond [their] due date contradicts the express terms of the instrument[s] * * * and is therefore unavailable because it would violate the parol evidence rule” *(American Bank & Trust Co. v Computer Prods.,*36 AD2d 525; *see also, Leumi Fin. Corp. v Richter,*17 NY2d 166, 173; *Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. v Duffy,*258 NY 600; *Jamestown Business Coll. Assn. v Allen,*172 NY 291; *Thomas v Scutt,*127 NY 133; *Marine Midland Bank v Kenney Plumbing,*125 AD2d 969; *Metropolitan Bank v Brennan,*48 AD2d 254; *Loeffler Co. v Port,*40 AD2d 900; *Franklin Natl. Bank v Wall St. Commercial Corp.,*21 AD2d 878, *affg*40 Misc 2d 1003; *Camardella v Eastern Parkway Roller Skating Rink,*271 App Div 985; 81 NY Jur 2d, Negotiable Instruments and Other Commercial Paper, § 758). The Supreme Court was therefore correct in granting summary judgment to the plaintiff on this issue.

We have examined the defendants’ remaining contentions, and find them to be without merit. Bracken, J. P., Kunzeman, Eiber and O’Brien, JJ., concur.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

WACO DIVISION

WSOU INVESTMENTS, LLC D/B/A 

BRAZOS LICENSING AND 

DEVELOPMENT,

Plaintiff,

v. 

MICROSOFT CORPORATION,

Defendant.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00454-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00455-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00456-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00457-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00458-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00459-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00460-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00461-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00462-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00463-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00464-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00465-ADA

WSOU’S NOTICE OF COMPLIANCE REGARDING EXCHANGE OF CLAIM TERMS 

FOR CONSTRUCTION

TO THE HONORABLE COURT:

Pursuant to the Court’s Version 3.2 of the Court’s Order Governing proceedings entered 

November 5, 2020, and in accordance with the Court’s Scheduling Order, Plaintiff hereby notifies 

the Court Plaintiff has served its proposed claim terms for construction on Defendant Microsoft 

Corporation via electronic mail on November 20, 2020. 

Case 6:20-cv-00465-ADA Document 37 Filed 11/20/20 Page 1 of 2
Date: November 20, 2020 Respectfully submitted,

By: /s/ Mark D. Siegmund_____ 

Mark D. Siegmund

State Bar No. 24117055

mark@waltfairpllc.com

Law Firm of Walt, Fair PLLC.

1508 North Valley Mills Drive 

Waco, Texas 76710

Telephone: (254) 772-6400

Facsimile: (254) 772-6432

Counsel for Plaintiff WSOU Investments, LLC

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

A true and correct copy of the foregoing instrument was served or delivered 

electronically via U.S. District Court [LIVE]- Document Filing System, to all counsel of record, 

on this the 20th day of November 2020.

/s/ Mark D. Siegmund

Mark D. Siegmund

Case 6:20-cv-00465-ADA Document 37 Filed 11/20/20 Page 2 of 2
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-20072 Conference Calendar

EDMOND B. HEIMLICH, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus HARRIS COUNTY TEXAS; ET AL., Defendants, HARRIS COUNTY TEXAS; JOHNNY B. HOLMES; WERNER VOIGT; TED POE; JOHN BOONE; BALDWIN CHIN; STUART W. BROWN; JUDY BEDDINGFIELD; ERNEST W. GODFREY, III; DENNIS RAY KUITHE; STATE OF TEXAS, Defendants-Appellees.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-96-CV-2556

-------------------- December 11, 2002 Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and JONES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Edmund B. Heimlich appeals the denial of a motion for relief from final judgment filed pursuant to F ED . R. C IV . P. 60(b). Heimlich argues that he was entitled to relief because the defendants were not immune from liability. The denial of a RuleNo. 02-20072 -2- 60(b) motion, however, does not bring up the underlying judgment for review and is not a substitute for appeal. In re Ta Chi Navigation (Panama) Corp. S.A. , 728 F.2d 699, 703 (5th Cir. 1984). He also argues that he is entitled to relief under Rule 60(b)(5) but that rule is inapposite. Heimlich’s argument that he was entitled to relief under Rule 60(b)(4) likewise fails inasmuch as he fails to show that the judgment against him was void. New York Life Ins. Co. v. Brown , 84 F.3d 137, 142 (5th Cir. 1996). Heimlich fails to show that the district court abused its discretion when it denied his motion. Aucoin v. K-Mart Apparel Fashion Corp. , 943 F.2d 6, 8 (5th Cir. 1991); Seven Elves, Inc. v. Eskenazi , 635 F.2d 396, 402 (5th Cir. 1981). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. Heimlich’s motion for retroactive recusal is DENIED.
Exhibit 32(1)



CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350



In connection with the Quarterly Report of 7-Eleven, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, James W. Keyes, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, that to my knowledge



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



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



/s/ James W. KeyesJames W. KeyesPresident and Chief Executive Officer7-Eleven, Inc.




Tab 4
Case 6:20-cv-00474-ADA Document 61 Filed 12/03/20 Page 1 of 8
Case 6:20-cv-00474-ADA Document 61 Filed 12/03/20 Page 2 of 8
Case 6:20-cv-00474-ADA Document 61 Filed 12/03/20 Page 3 of 8
Case 6:20-cv-00474-ADA Document 61 Filed 12/03/20 Page 4 of 8
Case 6:20-cv-00474-ADA Document 61 Filed 12/03/20 Page 5 of 8
Case 6:20-cv-00474-ADA Document 61 Filed 12/03/20 Page 6 of 8
Case 6:20-cv-00474-ADA Document 61 Filed 12/03/20 Page 7 of 8
Case 6:20-cv-00474-ADA Document 61 Filed 12/03/20 Page 8 of 8
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         954,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               16,976,000
<ALLOWANCES>                               (1,265,000)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            22,297,000
<PP&E>                                     174,691,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              47,346,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             166,052,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       21,662,000
<BONDS>                                     28,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    514,000
<COMMON>                                        65,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  41,382,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               166,052,000
<SALES>                                     47,176,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            47,176,000
<CGS>                                       35,694,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               42,276,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                20,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                62,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,761,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,222,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,289,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,933,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,933,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.30
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.28


</TABLE>
AO 120 (Rev. 08/10) 

TO: Mail Stop 8

Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

P.O. Box 1450

Alexandria, VA 22313-1450

REPORT ON THE

FILING OR DETERMINATION OF AN

ACTION REGARDING A PATENT OR

TRADEMARK

In Compliance with 35 U.S.C. § 290 and/or 15 U.S.C. § 1116 you are hereby advised that a court action has been

filed in the U.S. District Court on the following

G Trademarks or G Patents. ( G the patent action involves 35 U.S.C. § 292.):

DOCKET NO. DATE FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT

PLAINTIFF DEFENDANT

PATENT OR

TRADEMARK NO.

DATE OF PATENT 

OR TRADEMARK HOLDER OF PATENT OR TRADEMARK

 1

 2

 3

 4

 5

In the above—entitled case, the following patent(s)/ trademark(s) have been included:

DATE INCLUDED INCLUDED BY

G Amendment G Answer G Cross Bill G Other Pleading

PATENT OR

TRADEMARK NO.

DATE OF PATENT 

OR TRADEMARK HOLDER OF PATENT OR TRADEMARK

 1

 2

 3

 4

 5

In the above—entitled case, the following decision has been rendered or judgement issued:

DECISION/JUDGEMENT

CLERK (BY) DEPUTY CLERK DATE

Copy 1—Upon initiation of action, mail this copy to Director Copy 3—Upon termination of action, mail this copy to Director

Copy 2—Upon filing document adding patent(s), mail this copy to Director Copy 4—Case file copy

Case 6:20-cv-00458-ADA Document 2-1 Filed 06/02/20 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 15.

Southwestern Public Service Company:

We have made a review, in accordance with standards  established by the American
Institute  of  Certified  Public   Accountants,   of  the  unaudited   condensed
consolidated  interim  financial  information  of  Southwestern  Public  Service
Company and  subsidiaries  for the periods ended February 28, 1997, and February
29, 1996,  as  indicated in our report dated April 11, 1997;  because we did not
perform an audit, we expressed no opinion on that information.

We are aware  that our  report  referred  to above,  which is  included  in your
Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q for the  quarter  ended  February  28,  1997,  is
incorporated by reference in Registration  Statement Nos. 33-53171 and 333-05199
on Form S-3,  Registration  Statement No. 33-64951 on Form S-4, and Registration
Statement Nos. 33-27452 and 33-57869 on Form S-8.

We are also aware that the aforementioned report,  pursuant to Rule 436(c) under
the  Securities  Act of  1933,  is not  considered  a part  of the  Registration
Statement  prepared  or  certified  by an  accountant  or a report  prepared  or
certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.


Deloitte & Touche LLP

April 11, 1997
Dallas, Texas