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

**CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

Pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) ofSection 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of theundersigned officers of Supreme Industries, Inc. (the “Company”), does herebycertify, to such officer’s knowledge, that:

The QuarterlyReport on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended July 1, 2006 (the “Form 10-Q”) of theCompany fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of 15(d), asapplicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the informationcontained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company as of, and for,the periods presented in the Form 10-Q.
| DATE: August 11, 2006 |   |                    | /s/ Herbert M. Gardner |   |
|-----------------------|--------|-------------------------|------------------------|--------|
|                  |   | Herbert M. Gardner      |
|                  |   | Chief Executive Officer |

 

The foregoingcertification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Form 10-Q pursuant toItem 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, UnitedStates Code) and, accordingly, is not being filed as part of the Form 10-Q forpurposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, andis not incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether madebefore or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporationlanguage in such filing.

----
file:///J|/INITENG/P09%20cases/p090004.eng.txt INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT CBI: PMN: 09-0004 Focus Ready Draft 12/15/2008 ENGINEER: Prothero \ CLM PV (kg/yr): SUBMITTER: USE: OTHER USES: MSDS: Yes Label: No

file:///J|/INITENG/P09%20cases/p090004.eng.txt (1 of 7) [3/15/2010 1:48:52 PM]file:///J|/INITENG/P09%20cases/p090004.eng.txt CRSS : Chemical Name: S-H20: 0.011 g/L @ VP: 1.0E-6 torr @ MW: Physical State and Misc CRSS Info: Neat: Liquid (est) Mfg: Solution/dispersion, Proc/Form: End Use: Destroyed. GPC NAVG MW: . The submitter provided two sets of GPC data. The first set, The second set,

Consumer Use: No SAT (concerns) (12/09/2008): Related Cases and Related Cases and Misc SAT Info: Eco: Analogs: Migration to groundwater: Negligible PBT rating: P3B2T1 . Health: 2 Dermal, Inhalation Eco: 3 Water (All releases to water with a CC = 1 ppb) OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE RATING: 1B NOTES & KEY ASSUMPTIONS: Generated by the 06/07/2005 version of ChemSTEER

file:///J|/INITENG/P09%20cases/p090004.eng.txt (2 of 7) [3/15/2010 1:48:52 PM]file:///J|/INITENG/P09%20cases/p090004.eng.txt

POLLUTION PREVENTION CONSIDERATIONS: P2 Claim:
EXPOSURE-BASED REVIEW: No

file:///J|/INITENG/P09%20cases/p090004.eng.txt (3 of 7) [3/15/2010 1:48:52 PM]file:///J|/INITENG/P09%20cases/p090004.eng.txt INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT CBI: PMN: 09-0004

file:///J|/INITENG/P09%20cases/p090004.eng.txt (4 of 7) [3/15/2010 1:48:52 PM]file:///J|/INITENG/P09%20cases/p090004.eng.txt RELEASE TOTAL OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURES ESTIMATE SUMMARY

file:///J|/INITENG/P09%20cases/p090004.eng.txt (5 of 7) [3/15/2010 1:48:52 PM]file:///J|/INITENG/P09%20cases/p090004.eng.txt INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT CBI: PMN: 09-0004

file:///J|/INITENG/P09%20cases/p090004.eng.txt (6 of 7) [3/15/2010 1:48:52 PM]file:///J|/INITENG/P09%20cases/p090004.eng.txt RELEASE TOTAL OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURES ESTIMATE SUMMARY

file:///J|/INITENG/P09%20cases/p090004.eng.txt (7 of 7) [3/15/2010 1:48:52 PM]
EXHIBIT 31.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Paul Burgess, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Science Dynamics
Corporation;

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 small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The small business issuer'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 small business issuer 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 small business issuer is made
known to us by others, particularly during the period in which this report is
being prepared;

         (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's
disclosure controls 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 small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small
business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth
fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or
is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and

5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of
the small business issuer'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 small business issuer'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 small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting.

August 22, 2005

/s/ Paul Burgess
-----------------------
Paul Burgess
Chief Executive Officer
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-03-00328-CR NO. 03-03-00329-CR

Robert Dickinson, Appellant

v. The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 403RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT NOS. 2022151 & 3021151, HONORABLE FRED A. MOORE, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

A jury found appellant Robe rt Dickinson guilty of aggravated robbery and possession
of a prohibited weapon. Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 29.03 (West 2003), § 46.05 (West Supp. 2004). For these offenses, the jury assessed prison terms of twenty-five and five years, respectively.

Appellant’s court-appointed attorney filed a brief concl uding that the appeals are
frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of A nders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presen ting a professional evaluation of the records demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. S ee also Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75 (1988); High v. State , 573
S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); C u rrie v. State , 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974);
Jackson v. State , 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State , 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex.2

Crim. App. 1969). A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant, and he was advised of his right to examine the appellate records and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.

We have reviewed the records and counsel’s brief and agree that the appeals are
frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the records that might arguably support the appeals.

The judgments of conviction are affirmed.

__________________________________________ David Puryear, Justice Before Chief Justice Law, Justices Kidd and Puryear
Affirmed Filed: January 15, 2004
Do Not Publish
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .gov**
A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
**Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

National Security Agency/Central Security Service

Search
Search

Search

-  About    -  Leadership             
  -  Mission & Combat Support             
  -  Cybersecurity             
  -  Signals Intelligence             
  -  Central Security Service             
  -  Locations             
  -  Research             
  -  Diversity, Equity, Inclusion & Accessibility             
  -  Cybersecurity Collaboration Center      -  Collaborative Partnerships             
    -  Enduring Security Framework             
    -  DIB Cybersecurity Services             
    -  Standards and Certifications             
    -  Artificial Intelligence Security Center 
-  Press Room    -  Press Releases & Statements             
  -  News & Highlights             
  -  Declassification & Transparency Initiatives             
  -  Cybersecurity Advisories & Guidance             
  -  Telework and Mobile Security Guidance             
  -  DoD Microelectronics Guidance             
  -  Research Publications 
-  Careers    -  Unique Pathways             
  -  Innovation 
-  History    -  National Cryptologic Museum             
  -  Cryptologic History             
  -  National Cryptologic Memorial 

HomeAcademicsK12 PartnershipK-12 Outreach Enrichment Talk Request Form

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
* 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. 97-50620 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ARTURO YANEZ-PENALOZA, a/k/a Arturo Yanez-Penazola, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. SA-97-CR-37-1

- - - - - - - - - - February 12, 1998 Before SMITH, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Arturo Yanez-Penaloza appeals from his sentence for illegal reentry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He contends that his sentence under § 1326(b)(2) constitutes a violation of due process because the indictment did not allege that he had a prior aggravated-felony conviction. His contention is foreclosed by this court’s opinion in United States v. Vasquez-Olvera , 999 F.2d 943, 946-47 (5th Cir. 1993).No. 97-50620 -2- Yanez-Penaloza’s motion for a stay of his appeal pending the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Almendarez-Torres , 113 F.3d 515 (5th Cir. 1996), cert. granted , 117 S. Ct. 1333 (1997), is DENIED. See Wicker v. McCotter , 798 F.2d 155, 157-58 (5th Cir. 1986).
JUDGMENT AFFIRMED; MOTION DENIED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information from condensed financial
statements for the period ending October 31, 1998 and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000350403
<NAME> GEOFF STANFORD
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1998
<CASH>                                           1,569
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   54,441
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     35,237
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                94,824
<PP&E>                                         272,269
<DEPRECIATION>                                 127,777
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 242,746
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           38,398
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           517
<OTHER-SE>                                      97,689
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   242,746
<SALES>                                        129,229
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               127,855
<CGS>                                          109,099
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  109,099
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,985
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,662
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,706
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,956
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,956
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.77
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.76
        

</TABLE>
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 Somerset International Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, John X. Adiletta, President, Chief Executive Officer, and Chief Financial Officer certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
 
 1.
Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2010, is not in compliance with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for the reasons discussed in Note 1B of the financial statements; and
 
 2.
The information contained such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2010 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the Company as of the dates presented and the 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.
 
 SOMERSET INTERNATIONAL GROUP, INC./s/ John X. AdilettaJohn X. AdilettaPresident, Chief Executive OfficerChief Financial Officer
 
 August 13, 2010
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                          5
<MULTIPLIER>                       1
<CURRENCY>             U. S. Dollars
       
<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                  DEC-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                         1
<CASH>                            166,344
<SECURITIES>                       13,333
<RECEIVABLES>                      33,294
<ALLOWANCES>                            0
<INVENTORY>                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>               20,936,431
<PP&E>                          1,015,581
<DEPRECIATION>                    323,936
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                115,205,971
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>          59,228,913
<BONDS>                        55,069,475
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   0
<PREFERRED>                    36,248,075
<COMMON>                       27,956,213
<OTHER-SE>                    (8,227,230)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  115,205,971
<SALES>                                 0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                  213,081
<CGS>                                   0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                           0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>              (8,408,430)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              3,523,973
<INCOME-PRETAX>               (8,195,348)
<INCOME-TAX>                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>           (8,195,348)
<DISCONTINUED>                  4,256,544
<EXTRAORDINARY>                         0
<CHANGES>                               0
<NET-INCOME>                  (3,938,805)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                      (0.28)
<EPS-DILUTED>                      (0.28)
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-1997
<CASH>                                           1,174
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,174
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   2,594
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,593
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         8,025
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     2,594
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,523
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6,523)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,523)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0065)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0065)
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-6693

ARCHIE W. COOPER,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

JAMES PEGUES, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE

STATE OF MARYLAND,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA02-2855)

Submitted: July 24, 2003 Decided: July 31, 2003

Before MICHAEL and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Archie W. Cooper, Appellant Pro Se. Ann Norman Bosse, OFFICE OF THE

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Archie W. Cooper seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000).

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge

issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)

(2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his

constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive

procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or

wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, , 123 S. Ct.

1029, 1040 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000);

Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 534 U.S.

941 (2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude

that Cooper has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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
- , 

L. MAR.C.'iN, JR 

-7..,rigadier General, USAF 

SP-3 (F.,'-&-) 

6(4 

-IRO APPROVED FOR 

PilIELEASE. 1 JULY 20 

• 

/"2•9-10.'", 'trA-10 

.(z44?-4-1 vy.. 4721.....:r /9G 7' 

- • - 7 

• , • .. , 

t..% eval71, 

t 

MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD 

/ - — 

Gt •••• 

25 October 1965 

I. During a 22 Oct discussion with me, Dr. Flax expressed the following 

views on. NRO and SAFSP responsibilities related to the MOL program: 

a. The DORIAN payload is an NRO payload, for which he holds me 

responsible for development, acquisition and test, including decisions 

as to the configuration of the payload. 

b. I am not to carry out this responsibility by simply providing the 

payload people to the MOL management, serving as the contracting officer, 

monitoring what is being done, with actual control of payload design, 

development and tests, etc. , being determined by the MOL organization 

using my payload people, with my acquiescense or coordination. I am 

fully responsible for this payload in the same sense that I responsible 

for the 206 payload,_ with three exceptions: (1) I may receive directives 

directly from General Schriever, after approval by Dr. Flax in each 

case, with an information copy simultaneously going to General Berg, 

under procedures Dr. Flax is working out; (2) I must comply with overall 

systems integration and overall systems engineering instructions from 

General Berg concerning the integration of the payload into the complete 

MOL system; L31 I must comply with vehicle-payload interface specifications provided to me by General Berg. 

c. Although he recognizes that a joint effort is necessary to carry out 

the studies directed to me in WHIG 0501 concerning manned/unmanned 

DORLAN capabilities, he holds me directly responsible for work, including the approaches taken and the validi:.y <Ind credibility of the results 

and includingti2e1-estipresentation., insofar -.-econnaissance 

aspects are concerned, and inc o.;: the reconnaissance 

study results are in hand which warrant such presentation. 

2. Dr. Flax stated that - s agreed that General Schriever will follow the 

overall MOL funding .for . black and white aspects, but that the funds 

for my use will be made a :- ble to me in the same manner presently 

employed for rnyother responsibilities,
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2

                             LETTERHEAD OF KPMG LLP

To the Board of Directors
Carver Bancorp, Inc.


We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statement on Form
S-8 of Carver Bancorp, Inc. of our report dated May 25, 2000, relating to the
consolidated statement of financial condition of Carver Bancorp, Inc. and
subsidiaries as of March 31, 2000, and the related consolidated statements of
operations, changes in stockholders' equity and cash flows for the year ended
March 31, 2000, which report appears in the March 31, 2000, annual report on
Form 10-K of Carver Bancorp, Inc. and subsidiaries.


                                            /s/ KPMG LLP


July 5, 2000