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





**CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**


**PURSUANT
      TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**





SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I,
      Gerald
      McIlhargey, President and Chief Executive Officer of St. Joseph, Inc., certify,
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB/A of St.
      Joseph, Inc., for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006, fully complies with
      the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
      1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that information contained in this Annual
      Report on Form 10-KSB/A fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
      condition and results of operations of St. Joseph, Inc.




Date:
                April 17, 2007By:*/s/*Gerald McIlhargeyName:
                Gerald McIlhargeyTitle:
                President and Chief Executive Officer




27
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-12-00232- CV
In re Wayne Ernest Barker

ORI GINAL P ROCEEDI NG F ROM TRAVIS CO UNTY

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
Relator has filed a petition for writ of mandamus complainin g ab o u t the alleg ed failure of an administrative assistant in the Open Records section o f t h e T exas Depa rtment of Criminal Justi ce to comply with rela tor’s open rec ords reque st. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8. Having revie wed the petition, which does not include a rec ord or even an appendix, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus.

__________________________________________ David Pury ear , J ustice Be fore J ustices Pury ear , Henson a nd Goodwin Filed: May

1, 2012
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. 

ZTE CORPORATION, ZTE (USA) INC. 

AND ZTE (TX), INC.,

 Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

C.A. NO. 6:20-cv-00491-ADA

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR 

EXTENSIONS 

Before the Court is Defendants ZTE Corporation’s, ZTE (USA) Inc.’s and ZTE (TX), 

Inc.’s, (collectively “ZTE”), Unopposed Motion to Extend the respective party deadlines in 

view of WSOU’s November 6, 2020 filings (Dkt Nos. 34-37). Having considered the Motion, 

the Court is of the opinion that the Motion should be and hereby is GRANTED.

It is therefore ORDERED that:

To the extent necessary, and not eventually deemed moot by the parties, ZTE’s 

deadlines to file replies on transfer for convenience are extended to November 20, 2020.

ZTE’s deadlines to respond to the Amendment Complaint (with a new Motion to 

Dismiss or otherwise), in view of the Amended Complaint, Dkt No. 36 (supplemented by Dkt. 

No. 37), are extended to December 4, 2020.

WSOU’s deadlines to file responses to the new Motions to Dismiss, are extended to 

January 8, 2021.

Case 6:20-cv-00491-ADA Document 39-1 Filed 11/11/20 Page 1 of 2
SIGNED AND ENTERED this _______ day of ___________________, 2020.

________________________________

ALAN D. ALBRIGHT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 6:20-cv-00491-ADA Document 39-1 Filed 11/11/20 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2747 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2747

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 11, 2013

     Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, 
                     Education, Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To amend title 40, United States Code, to transfer certain functions 
 from the Government Accountability Office to the Department of Labor 
  relating to the processing of claims for the payment of workers who 
were not paid appropriate wages under certain provisions of such title.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Streamlining Claims Processing for 
Federal Contractor Employees Act''.

SEC. 2. TRANSFER OF ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF 
              LABOR.

    (a) Authority of Comptroller General To Pay Wages and List 
Contractors Violating Contracts.--Section 3144 of title 40, United 
States Code, is amended--
            (1) in the section heading, by striking ``of Comptroller 
        General''; and
            (2) in subsection (a)(1), by striking ``Comptroller 
        General'' and inserting ``Secretary of Labor''.
    (b) Report of Violations and Withholding of Amounts for Unpaid 
Contracts and Liquidated Damages.--Section 3703(b)(3) of title 40, 
United States Code, is amended by striking ``Comptroller General'' both 
places it appears and inserting ``Secretary of Labor''.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 10, 2013.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN DIVISION 

DANIEL FREEMAN, § 

PLAINTIFF, § 

§ 

V. § 

§ 

WYDEN STARK, LLC D/B/A § 

GQR GLOBAL MARKETS, § 

DEFENDANT. § 

iII 

2UIP4OV-i. AMID: 10 

CAUSE NO. 1:20-CV-589-LY 

FINAL JUDGMENT 

Before the court is the above entitled cause of action. On this date the court granted 

Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice. Accordingly, the court renders the 

following Final Judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58. 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the case is CLOSED. 

SIGNED this' day of November, 2021. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 1:20-cv-00589-LY Document 49 Filed 11/04/21 Page 1 of 1
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATIONS**I, Peter G. Savas, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Alseres Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  (b) [Not Applicable];  (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.        DATE: August 14, 2007 /s/          Peter G. Savas   **Peter G. Savas**   **Chief Executive Officer**
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.                  

###### Department of the Interior

###### Bureau of Land Management 

          - [MT-020-1010-AA] 

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Montana, Billings and Miles City Field Offices, Interior. 

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting. 

# SUMMARY:

The Eastern Montana Resource Advisory Council will have a meeting on November 16 at the Hampton Inn Conference Room, 5110 Southgate Drive, Billings, Montana starting at 8 a.m. Primary agenda topics include updates on coalbed methane development, Pompeys Pillar, Weatherman Draw, continued discussion on access, and an update on the fire season. 

The meeting is open to the public and the public comment period is set for 11 a.m. The public may make oral statements before the Council or file written statements for the Council to consider. Depending on the number of persons wishing to make an oral statement, a per person time limit may be established. Summary minutes of the meeting will be available for public inspection and copying during regular business hours. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Marilyn Krause, Public Affairs Specialist, Miles City Field Office, 111 Garryowen Road, Miles City, Montana 59301, telephone (406) 233-2831. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The purpose of the Council is to advise the Secretary of the Interior, through the BLM, on a variety of planning and management issues associated with public land management. The 15 member Council includes individuals who have expertise, education, training or practical experience in the planning and management of public lands and their resources and who have a knowledge of the geographical jurisdiction of the Council. 

Dated: October 4, 2000. 

Aden L. Seidlitz, 

Associate Field Manager. 

[FR Doc. 00-26424 Filed 10-13-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310-$$-P
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.                  

###### Export-Import Bank

# SUMMARY:

The Advisory Committee was established by P.L. 98-181, November 30, 1983, to advise the Export-Import Bank on its programs and to provide comments for inclusion in the reports of the Export-Import Bank of the United States to Congress.

*Time and Place:*                         Thursday, November 9, 2000, at 9:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. The meeting will be held at the Export-Import Bank in Room 1143, 811 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20571.                    

*Agenda:*                         This meeting will include a follow-up discussion of the Institute of International Economics study titled “The Future of the U.S. Ex-Im Bank”, issues raised in this study, and other matters.                    

*Public Participation:*                         The meeting will be open to public participation, and the last 10 minutes will be set aside for oral questions or comments. Members of the public may also file written statement(s) before or after the meeting. If any person wishes auxiliary aids (such as a sign language interpreter) or other special accommodations, please contact, prior to November 3, 2000, Nichole Westin, Room 1257, 811 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20571, Voice: (202) 565-3542 or TDD (202) 565-3377.                    

*For Further Information Contact:*                         For further information, contact Nichole Westin, Room 1257, 811 Vermont Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20571, (202) 565-3542.                    

John M. Niehuss,

General Counsel.

[FR Doc. 00-26490  Filed 10-13-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6690-01-M
Exhibit
23.2





Consent
of Counsel








The
statements of law and legal conclusions under "Item 1.Business" in Eagle Bulk
Shipping Inc.'s Annual Report on Form 10-K, for the year ended December 31,
2009, have been reviewed by us and are set forth therein in reliance upon our
opinion as an expert.





We hereby
consent to the incorporation by reference of such statements of law and legal
conclusions the following Registration Statements:









(1)
            Registration
      Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-145390), and




(2)
            Registration
      Statement (Form S-3 No.
333-157663);














/s/
Seward & Kissel LLP





New York,
New York


March 5,
2010
* 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. 98-40470

Summary Calendar

JERRY DON WILSON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

JASON HINDS,

Defendant-Appellee.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

(96-CV-517)

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

November 26, 1999

Before POLITZ, HIGGINBOTHAM, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Plaintiff-Appellant Jerry Don Wilson, Texas state prisoner #

590690, appeals a jury verdict in favor of prison guard Jason Hinds

in a civil rights actio n under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging an

excessive use of force in violation of the Eighth Amendment.

Wilson asserts that counsel for Hinds acted in the case before

the district court granted his motion to appear pro hac vice, that

the district court erred in allowing t he written testimony of

witness Robert G arza rather than requiring Garza to appear at

trial, and that the district court erred in not allowing him to use2

peremptory challenges or allowing him to object to the jury.

Wilson did not raise objections to these three alleged errors in

the district court and review is limited to plain error. H ighland

Ins. v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh , 27 F.3d 1027,

1031-32 ( 5th Cir. 1994)). Wilson has not shown clear or obvious

error affecting his substantial rights with respect to any of these

issues.

Wilson asserts that the district court erred by not allowing

the affidavits of inmates into evidence. Wilson does not cite to

the record or even state with specificity which affidavits were not

admitted. Accordingly, this issue is deemed abandoned on appeal.

Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner

, 813 F.2d 744, 748

(5th Cir. 1987).

Wilson asserts that the district court erred by instructing the

jury regarding qualified immunity because all of the evidence

showed that Hinds acted beyond the scope of his authority and that

there was no evidence to support the jury’s verdict that Hinds did

not use excessive force. Wilson’s assertions that Officer Hinds

was lying on the stand is not sufficien t to overturn the jury’s

credibility decisions and ultimate factual determination that Hinds

did not use excessive force. B altazor v. Holmes

, 162 F.3d 368, 373

(5th Cir. 1998). Officer Hinds’s testimony was also sufficient to

support the instruction on qualified immunity; however, any error

in the instruction would be harmless because the jury did not reach

the issue of qualified immunity.

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit ‘A’

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 120-1 Filed 07/17/23 Page 1 of 2
Filed Under Seal.

Exhibit A has been emailed to opposing counsel and the Court. 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 120-1 Filed 07/17/23 Page 2 of 2
#### GILMORE v. STATE.

No. 26282.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 25, 1953.

Tom R. Mears, Gatesville, for appellant.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BELCHER, Commissioner.

Appellant was convicted of the offense of unlawfully, operating a motor vehicle upon a public highway while intoxicated and assessed a fine of $100.

Witnesses for the state testified that they saw appellant operating his car upon a pub" lie highway in Coryell County, Texas, on November 24, 1952; that after a signal the appellant stopped his car; that they talked to him and observed his actions and speech; that they smelled alcohol on his breath; that in their opinion he was intoxicated; and that a small quantity of whiskey was found in his car.

Appellant’s testimony was that he went from" Gatesville to Hamilton; that about 1:30 or 2:00 P.M. he took a drink of whiskey — “Well, I took a couple of small swallows” in Hamilton; that this whs all the whiskey he drank that day; that he and Roy Scruggs arrived back in Gatesville about 6' P.M.; that he hit something with his "car on the street in Gatesville; then someone stopped him.

Appellant further testified that he had spells of being sick and was sick that day; that he had had a stroke and staggered when he walked; that “my driving was caused from being sick and not from being drunk.”

Appellant contends that the trial court erred in refusing to' give the following special charge to the jury which was tendered and exception reserved to such refusal:

“You.are instructed that should you find from the evidence, or have a' reasonable doubt thereof, that the defendant William Foster Gilmore had in fact taken-a drink ,of intoxicating liquor previous to the time of the operation of his car upon a public .highway as charged by the information, if he did so operaté said automobile, was not under the influence of intoxicating liquor as defined by Main Charge, you will acquit .the defendant and say by your verdict ‘Not Guilty’ ”.

This requested special instruction presents to the jury no independent fact by reason of which, if true, the accused should ■be acquitted. It presents nothing more than the issue of “not guilty” which was adequately presented in the court’s main charge. It ■ presented no affirmative defense. The trial-court’s charge on the burden of proof and presumption of innocence, together with the "application of the law to *301the facts, adequately protected appellant’s rights.

In Sharp v. State, 150 Tex.Cr.R. 169, 199 S.W.2d 159, 160, in considering a similar requested charge, this Court held that it “was nothing more nor less than a denial of guilt, and was not an affirmative defense.”

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed'.

Opinion approved by the Court.
1

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.

ZTE CORPORATION, ZTE (USA) 

INC., AND ZTE (TX), INC. 

Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-487

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-488

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-489

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-490

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-491

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-492

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-493

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-494

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-495

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-496

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-497

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

ORDER

WHEREFORE, the Court, having before it the Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative 

Transfer Venue filed by Defendant ZTE (USA) Inc. (the “Motion”) and Plaintiff’s response 

thereto, finds the motion should be denied. The Court hereby DENIES the Motion.

___________________________________

Hon. Alan D. Albright

Case 6:20-cv-00487-ADA Document 36-3 Filed 11/06/20 Page 1 of 1
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.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. RP00-249-002]

      ( print page 60181)    
Take notice that on September 29, 2000, Transwestern Pipeline Company (Transwestern), tendered for filing to become part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1, the following sheet to be effective September 15, 2000:

Second Revised Volume No. 1

2 Substitute Original Sheet No. 97

Transwestern states that this filing is made to comply with the Commission's September 15, 2000 order accepting, subject to conditions, the tariff sheets filed by Transwestern in this proceeding.

Transwestern states that copies of the filing were served upon Transwestern's customers and interested State Commissions.

Any person desiring to protest said filing should file a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed in accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

Davis P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-25844  Filed 10-6-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M