alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 13.01**

 

# **Certificationpursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350.**

# ** **

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

 

SECTION 906OF THE U.S. SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with theAnnual Report of Sadia S.A. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the fiscalyear ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the U.S. Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, GilbertoTomazoni, Chief Executive Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

 

(i)                             the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
| /s/ Gilberto Tomazoni           |   |
|---------------------------------|--------|
|                            |
| Name: Gilberto Tomazoni         |
|                            |
| Title:  Chief Executive Officer |

 

 

June 20,2008

 

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 has been provided to Sadia S.A. and will be retained bySadia S.A. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staffupon request.

 

----
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 Amended Annual Report of Desert Mining, Inc. a Nevada corporation (the Company), on Form 10-KSB/A for the annual period ending December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Randall B. Anderson, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 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 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and  (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.      /s/Randall B. Anderson Randall B. Anderson Chief Executive Officer Date: October 3, 2007
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF
INCOME ON PAGES TWO AND THREE OF THE COMPANY'S FORM 10Q FOR THE YEAR-TO-DATE AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                      23,310,269
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               16,409,659
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (468,000)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            48,715,724
<PP&E>                                      12,154,706
<DEPRECIATION>                             (1,367,233)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              79,013,376
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,870,852
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        62,695
<OTHER-SE>                                  68,723,830
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                79,013,376
<SALES>                                      1,616,257
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             8,454,292
<CGS>                                          534,352
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                6,812,450
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                25,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           (504,281)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,146,123
<INCOME-TAX>                                   804,010
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,342,113
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,342,113
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .18
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 13.01 Certificationpursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350.**

** **

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

** **

In connection withthe Annual Report of Sadia S.A. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the fiscalyear ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the U.S. Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Gilberto Tomazoni, Chief Executive Officer, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of theU.S. Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

 

**(i)   theReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theU.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and**

** **

**(ii)  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.**

 

 
| /s/ Gilberto Tomazoni           |   |   |
|---------------------------------|--------|--------|
| Name: Gilberto Tomazoni         |   |
| Title: Chief Executive  Officer |   |
|                            |   |
| November 11, 2005               |   |

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Sadia S.A. andwill be retained by Sadia S.A. and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

 

1

----
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1281 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1281

     To extend the authorization of the Highlands Conservation Act.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 1, 2017

Mr. Frelinghuysen introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
                   the Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To extend the authorization of the Highlands Conservation Act.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF HIGHLANDS CONSERVATION ACT.

    Section 4(e) of the Highlands Conservation Act (Public Law 108-421; 
118 Stat. 2377) is amended by striking ``2014'' and inserting ``2021''.
                                 <all>
```
#### Phoenix Electrical Contracting, Inc., Respondent, v Lehr Construction Corp., Appellant, et al., Defendant.

[631 NYS2d 146]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Tompkins, J.), entered April 15, 1994, after nonjury trial, in favor of plaintiff subcontractor and against defendant-appellant general contractor in the principal amount of $186,467.64, plus interest from November 3,1987, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to reduce the principal amount to $58,888.78, with interest from November 3, 1988, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Defendant Lehr, the general contractor on a renovation contract for premises occupied by defendant Rose Associates, should not have been held liable for delay damages allegedly sustained by plaintiff Phoenix, the electrical subcontractor, as a result of labor disruptions caused by Rose personnel or by design and engineering changes ordered by Rose’s architect and engineer after commencement of the project. "[Ajbsent a contractual commitment to the contrary, a prime contractor is not responsible for delays that its subcontractor may incur unless those delays are caused by some agency or circumstance *468under the prime contractor’s direction or control” *(Triangle Sheet Metal Works v Merritt & Co.,*79 NY2d 801, 802). The parties whose actions disrupted the project, and allegedly caused Phoenix to sustain delay damages, were not under Lehr’s direction or control.

There was no evidence that the parties, by their actions, considered the contract abandoned *(see, AEB & Assocs. Design Group v Tonka Corp.,*853 F Supp 724, 733 [SD NY 1994]). Nor did the number or character of the changes "alter or destroy the essential identity of the thing contracted for” *(National Contr. Co. v Hudson Riv. Water Power Co.,*192 NY 209, 217). Accordingly, Phoenix was entitled to recover only under its contract, and not for quantum meruit.

The late addition of a claim based upon change order 39 was prejudicial to Lehr and thus should not have been permitted *(see, Gonfiantini v Zino,*184 AD2d 368, 369), and in any event the proof submitted in support of this claim was inadequate.

The price reductions on certain change orders purportedly authorized by Phoenix’s Mr. Koter were made without actual authority, and apparent authority in Koter to make such reductions had to be traceable to conduct by Phoenix, the burden being on Lehr to prove such conduct as well as reasonable reliance *(Ford v Unity Hosp.,*32 NY2d 464, 472-473). The court correctly concluded that Lehr failed to meet this burden in both respects.

Interest on the judgment should run from November 3, 1988 rather than November 3,1987, and there is no reason why this conceded typographical error should not be corrected on appeal. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Kupferman, Ross and Williams, JJ. [As amended by unpublished order entered Nov. 21, 1995.]
**EXHIBIT 32.1****CERTIFICATION (1)**Pursuant to the requirement set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, asamended (the “Exchange Act”), and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code(18 U.S.C. Section 1350), Ronald W. Barrett, Chief Executive Officer of XenoPort, Inc. (the“Company”), and William G. Harris, Senior Vice President of Finance and Chief Financial Officer ofthe Company, each hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge: 1. The Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006,to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the “Periodic Report”), fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, and  2. The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.In WitnessWhereof, the undersigned have set their hands hereto as of the 7th day of March, 2007./s/ Ronald W. Barrett
DISMISS and Opinion Filed December 3, 2021 

# S

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-21-00620-CV RICKEY SHANNON, Appellant V. SM FAMILY HOLDINGS, LLC, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-20-04422-C MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Burns, Justi ce Goldstein, and Justice Smith Opinion by Chief Justice Burns Appellant appeals from the trial c ourt’s June 25, 2021 judgment. We questioned our jurisdiction over this appeal because it appeared the trial court was without plenary power to sign the judgment. See State ex rel. Latty v. Owens , 907 S.W.2d 484, 486 (Tex. 1995) (per curiam) (judgment signed after trial court’s plenary power expires is a nullity). At th e Court’s request, the parties filed letter briefs addressing the Court’s concern. The trial court signed a final judgmen t on January 11, 2021. Appellant filed a timely motion for new trial on February 4, 2021. The re cord before the Court does not contain a written order on the motion for new trial. Without having set aside the–2– January 11 judgment, the trial court signe d another judgment on June 25, 2021. The trial court’s plenary power, however, expi red on April 16, 2021, 105 days after the January 11 judgment. See T EX

. R. C IV

. P. 329b(e). Thus, the trial court’s June 25 judgment was a nullity. See Latty , 907 S.W.2d at 486. Although appellant filed a le tter brief, he failed to address the jurisdictional issue. Because the court acted beyond its plenary power in signing the June 25 judgment, the judgment is void. See id . This leaves the January 11 order as the final judgment of the trial court. When, as here, a judgment is rendered by a court after its plenary power has expired, an appellate court’ s jurisdiction is limited to setting aside the judgment and dismissing the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Latty , 907 S.W.2d at 486. Accordingly, we vacate the trial court’ s June 25, 2021 judgme nt and dismiss the appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(a); Latty , 907 S.W.2d at 486.

210620F.P05 /Robert D. Burns, III / ROBERT D. BURNS, III CHIEF JUSTICE–3– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT RICKEY SHANNON, Appellant

No. 05-21-00620-CV V. SM FAMILY HOLDINGS, LLC, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-20-04422- C. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Burns. Justices Goldstein and Smith participating.
In accordance with this Cour t’s opinion of this date, we VACATE the trial court’s June 25, 2021 judgment and DISMISS the appeal.

Judgment entered December 3, 2021 .
#### Kurz, Appellant, vs. Kuhn and others, Respondents.

*January 9*

February *5, 1929.*

*174For the appellant there was a brief by *Morgan & Johns*of Appleton, and oral argument by *John Morgan.*

For the respondents there was a brief by *Frank, Wheeler & Pelkey*of Appleton, and oral argument by *F. F. Wheeler.*

Rosenberry, J.

We shall dismiss without further consideration the claim made by the defendants that the plaintiff and the defendant Kuhn were engaged in a joint enterprise. That matter is fully discussed in *Sommerfield v. Flury, ante,*p. 163, 223 N. W. 408, decided herewith. Under the doctrine laid down in that case the relation between Kurz and Kuhn was that of guest and host.

There was a square conflict in the testimony, and a finding by a jury either for or against the plaintiff would have to be sustained. This is not a case where a standard of care has been prescribed either by statute or decision. What would a person in the exercise of ordinary care, being that care which the great mass of mankind under the same or similar conditions would exercise, do when confronted with *175a situation such as confronted the defendant Kuhn in this case? Before it can be determined whether or not the defendant Kuhn was negligent, some ascertainable standard of care must be set up. Such a standard of care can only be derived from common knowledge of what the great mass of people do under the same or similar circumstances. That standard in this case can be found only by a jury. If the jury believes the testimony of the defendant Kuhn and that what he did was what the great mass of mankind would do under the same or similar circumstances, it will find him not negligent. On the other hand, if it believes the testimony of the plaintiff Kurz that Kuhn was driving at the rate of thirty miles an hour or thereabouts and did not observe that degree of care which the great mass of mankind would observe under the same or similar circumstances, it may find the defendant negligent. The question of whether or not the defendant was negligent can be determined only by the application of some standard of care to the conduct of the defendant Kuhn as disclosed by the evidence. The jury must first find the facts and to those facts apply the instructions of the court as to the law.

Under these circumstances the judgment must be reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings according to law.

*By the Court.*— It is so ordered.
----

----

| (1)    | the      Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period      ended March 31, 2008 (the “Report”) 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 |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    |
| (2)    | the      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the      Company.                                                                                                                      |
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    |

| Date:  May      2, 2008 | /s/ William J.      Fehrman        |   |
|-----------------------------------|------------------------------------|--------|
|                              | William      J. Fehrman            |   |
|                              | President                          |   |
|                              | (principal      executive officer) |   |

----

----
No. 90-698.

#### Fields et al. *v.*Hallsville Independent School District et al.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 31.2

                      EQUITY GENERAL PARTNER CERTIFICATION
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Robert McKinney, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of National Property
Analysts Master Limited Partnership;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent
fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual
report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the 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 who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.

Date: November 12, 2004

By:   Feldman International Inc., its equity general partner

By:   /s/ Robert McKinney
      ------------------------------------------------------
      Name: Robert McKinney
      Title: President
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 Absolute Potential, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31,
2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Thomas F. Duszynski,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350 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 results of operations of the Company.



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



The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350 and is not being
filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference
into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language
in such filing.

|                          |    
|------------------------- | ---
|                          |    
|Dated:  December 30, 2011 | By:
|                          |    
|                          |