alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

                          CERTIFICATION OF CEO AND CFO
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of North American Palladium Ltd. (the
"Registrant") on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2003, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Andre
J. Douchane, as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, and
George D. Faught, as Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer of the
Registrant, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his
knowledge, that:

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

     (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Registrant.


/s/ Andre J. Douchane
-------------------------------------
By:     Andre J. Douchane
Title:  President and Chief Executive Officer
May 19, 2004


/s/ George D. Faught
-------------------------------------
By:     George D. Faught
Title:  Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer
May 19, 2004

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Registrant for purposes of
ss.18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
Exhibit 32.2
 Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  1.
    
    the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2008 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934; and2.
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
  By:
    /s/ Michael J. McCannMichael J. McCannChief Financial Officer
* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .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. 01-41431 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus SOLOMON EVERFIELD, JR., Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:01-CR-109-ALL

- - - - - - - - - - August 2, 2002 Before JONES, STEWART and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Solomon Everfield, Jr., has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Everfield was notified of counsel’s motion, but has not filed a response. Our independent review of the brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel isNo. 01-41431 -2- excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS
DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2.
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 Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Toll-Free Phone Line Project Committee will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Wednesday, March 18, 2015.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Linda Rivera at 1-888-912-1227 or (202) 317-3337.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Toll-Free Phone Line Project Committee will be held Wednesday, March 18, 2015 at 2:30 p.m. Eastern Time via teleconference. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit written statements for consideration. Due to limited conference lines, notification of intent to participate must be made with Linda Rivera. For more information please contact: Ms. Rivera at 1-888-912-1227 or (202) 317-3337, or write TAP Office, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Room 1509, National Office, Washington, DC 20224, or contact us at the Web site:                     *http://www.improveirs.org.*

The committee will be discussing Toll-free issues and public input is welcomed.

Dated: February 12, 2015.

Otis Simpson,

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

[FR Doc. 2015-03510 Filed 2-18-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENT FOR THE 6 MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1999, AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                         167,500
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  786,707
<ALLOWANCES>                                    21,950
<INVENTORY>                                  1,020,519
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,163,370
<PP&E>                                       2,301,037
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,102,714
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,591,510
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,337,257
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        24,096
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,752,181
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,591,510
<SALES>                                      2,608,139
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,608,139
<CGS>                                        1,939,893
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,939,893
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              35,156
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,060,967)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,060,967)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,060,967)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.46)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.46)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1

                                  EXHIBIT 11.1

             Statement Regarding Computation of Per Share Earnings

                   (In thousands, except for per share data)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                     Years Ended December 31,
                                                    ---------------------------
                                                      1994      1995      1996
                                                    --------  --------  -------
<S>                                                 <C>       <C>       <C>
Net income (loss)                                   $(1,618)  $(1,273)  $(9,654)

Common Stock:

  Primary Earnings Per Share
    Shares outstanding from beginning of
      period                                         11,771    15,211    19,049
    Dilutive effect of common stock equivalents         233      --        --
    Pro-rata shares--stock issuances                    563     3,166       690
                                                    -------   -------   -------
    Weighted average shares - primary                12,567    18,377    19,739
                                                    -------   -------   -------
    Primary earnings (loss) per common share        $   .13   $  (.07)  $  (.49)
                                                    -------   -------   -------

  Fully Diluted Earnings Per Share 
    Fully dilutive effect of common stock
      equivalents (in addition to primary shares)       147      --        --
    Weighted average shares - fully diluted          12,714    18,377    19,739
                                                    -------   -------   -------
    Fully diluted earning (loss) per common share   $   .13   $  (.07)  $  (.49)
                                                    -------   -------   -------
</TABLE>
Vincent A. Flanagan, MBA

7 170 Holly Ave, Cocoa FL 32927 321
- 652
- 1256 Vincent A. Flanagan petitions the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for an exemption from part 21, subpart H; and Sections 45.23(b), 61.113(a) and (b), 91.7(a), 91.9(b)(2), 91.103(b), 91.109, 91.119, 91.121, 91.151(a), 91.203(a)and(b), 91.207(a)(2) and (b),91.319(a)(1) 91.405(a)(b), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1)(2), and 91.417(a) and (b), 91.9(c) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). The proposed exemption would allow Vincent Flanagan to operate the PHANTOM 3 quad
-copter (drone) unmanned ai rcraft system (UAS) to conduct aerial videography and cinematography as part of existing environmental spill response for the purpose of acquiring before and after pictures/video of the clean

up. The Phantom 3 will also be used for gaining an aerial persp ective for customers and providing market research, aerial surveys, mapping, inspections and general videography/cinematography. I have over 10 years of flying remote control aircraft as a hobbyist without incident. I’ve been involved in the Aerospace ind ustry for over 20 years. I also have an FAA A&P certificate and am aware of the need to stay away from air traffic. The Phantom 3 weighs 2.8 pounds fully loaded and has a top speed of 35 mph. 1. The Phantom 3 will be inspected before and after each flig ht. 2. All batteries on the aircraft and transmitter will be fully charged before takeoff. 3. GPS acquisition and calibration will be performed before flight. 4. The “Return Home” point will be set on the aircraft. 5. DJI no fly zone software will be installed. 6. All manufacturer guidelines will be followed. 7. A map of the local area will be reviewed prior to any flight to double check for any local obstacles or restrictions. 8. The aircraft will be flown in a safe manner at all times. 9. Landing will occur at or before 20% battery life is reached. Sincerely, Vincent A. Flanagan, MBA Flanagan.vincent@yahoo.com 321
- 652
- 1256 7170 Holly Ave Cocoa FL, 32927
PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# NRO declassifies early ELINT satellite program

**NRO declassifies early ELINT satellite program**Announcement at Naval Research Lab Centennial celebrates historic partnershipSee Press Release

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT
Dismiss and Opinion Filed June 9, 2022

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-22-00179-CV

IN RE: ORDER FOR FORECLOSURE CONCERNING 2112 BRENHAM 

DRIVE MCKINNEY, TX 75072 UNDER TEX. R. CIV. PROC. 736 

AND FUTING YU

On Appeal from the 219th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 219-02818-2021

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Myers, Carlyle, and Goldstein

Opinion by Justice Myers

This is an appeal from the trial court’s order granting appellee Hidden Creek 

Community Association, Inc.’s application, under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 

736, for an order to proceed with a foreclosure sale of appellant Futing Yu’s 

property. See TEX.R.CIV. P. 736.1, 736.8. Because an order granting an application 

under rule 736 is not an appealable order, see id. 736.8(c), we questioned our 

jurisdiction over the appeal. Although we gave appellant an opportunity to show 

cause why the appeal should not be dismissed and cautioned that failure to respond 

by April 11, 2022 could result in dismissal of the appeal without further notice, 

appellant has not responded. Accordingly, on the record before us, we dismiss the 
–2–

appeal. See id.; see also Grant-Brooks v. FV-1, Inc., 176 S.W.3d 933, 933 (Tex. 

App.—Dallas 2005, pet. denied) (granting, on jurisdictional grounds, appellee’s 

motion to dismiss appeal from order granting rule 736 application).

220179f.p05 /Lana Myers//

LANA MYERS

JUSTICE
–3–

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

IN RE: ORDER FOR 

FORECLOSURE CONCERNING 

2112 BRENHAM DRIVE 

MCKINNEY, TX 75072 UNDER 

TEX. R. CIV. PROC. 736 AND 

FUTING YU 

No. 05-22-00179-CV 

On Appeal from the 219th Judicial 

District Court, Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 219-02818-

2021.

Opinion delivered by Justice Myers, 

Justices Carlyle and Goldstein 

participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal.

Judgment entered this 9

th day of June 2022.
# C_2005093EN.01002201.xml

| 16.4.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 93/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 93/22

---

Action brought on 3 March 2005 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Republic of Finland

(Case C-105/05)

(2005/C 93/41)

Language of the case: Finnish

An action against the Republic of Finland was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 3 March 2005 by the Commission of the European Communities, represented by D. Martin and I. Koskinen, acting as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The Commission claims that the Court should:

| 1. | declare that the Republic of Finland, in calculating social security contributions, has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 33(1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 (1) on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community; |
| --- | --- |

1.

declare that the Republic of Finland, in calculating social security contributions, has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 33(1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 (1) on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community;

1

| 2. | order the Republic of Finland to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

order the Republic of Finland to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Finland takes account in accordance with national legislation, the Law on Sickness Insurance (364/1963), when determining the social security contributions of a pensioner living in Finland, in addition to the pension income paid by Finland also that paid by other Member States. The Commission submits that the taking into account of pension income paid by another Member State when determining the basis of payment of social security contributions is contrary to Article 33(1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 and the case-law of the Court of Justice (Case C-389/99 Rundgren).

Rundgren

---

(1)  OJ, English Special Edition 1971 (II), p. 416.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                      5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                      U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS                    
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1997                 
<PERIOD-START>                  JAN-01-1997                 
<PERIOD-END>                    JUN-30-1997                 
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                        1.000
<CASH>                                             7,868,011
<SECURITIES>                                       4,358,484
<RECEIVABLES>                                     96,697,620
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (15,207,260)
<INVENTORY>                                                0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 101,571,264
<PP&E>                                             2,663,052
<DEPRECIATION>                                      (571,219)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   106,473,948
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              1,601,405
<BONDS>                                           90,636,396
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 80,188
<PREFERRED>                                                0
<COMMON>                                                   0
<OTHER-SE>                                        14,155,959
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     106,473,948
<SALES>                                            9,786,013
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   9,786,013
<CGS>                                                      0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                              0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   5,150,225
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 3,547,779
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    1,088,009
<INCOME-TAX>                                        (721,670)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                1,809,679
<DISCONTINUED>                                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                            0
<CHANGES>                                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                       1,809,679
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                          0.220
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          0.220
                                


</TABLE>
**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 ACTOF 2002**

 

Pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and(b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), theundersigned officer of Supreme Industries, Inc. (the “Company”), doeshereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that:

 

TheQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 29, 2008(the “Form 10-Q”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and theinformation contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company asof, and for, the periods presented in the Form 10-Q.

 

 
| DATE:  May 13, 2008 |   | /s/  Herbert M. Gardner  |
|--------------------------|--------|--------------------------|
|                     |   | Herbert  M. Gardner      |
|                     |   | Chief  Executive Officer |

 

 

Theforegoing certification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Form 10-Qpursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K and Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350,Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) and, accordingly, is not beingfiled as part of the Form 10-Q for purposes of Section 18 of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not incorporated byreference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the datehereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.

 

----
#### MARTIN V. HORNE v. MARY E. HORNE.

Where, upon a trial in the Court below, the plaintiff asked for a new-trial, and upon its being refused, appealed to this Court, and at the same time the defendant appealed; and in this Court, the judgment of the Court below was affirmed, dismissing the plaintiff’s action; in such case, the appeal of the defendant to this Court will be dismissed with costs.

This was an appeal bj the defendant in the preceding case; in which all the facts are sufficiently stated.

*Battle <& Son,*for appellant.

*Steele <& Walleer, Busbee dk Busbee,*contra.

Pearson, C. J.

The appeal must be dismissed at the cost of the defendant. The plaintiff asked for a new trial for error, which being refused, he appealed.

It is set out in the record *“*the defendant having stated the above points of exception, asked that the same may be placed upon record, that the ruling of the Court thereon might be reviewed, should it become necessary in the Supreme Court, and for that purpose prayed an appeal.” For what purpose does the defendant appeal ? If for the purpose of having a new trial, as she and the plaintiffiboth asked for a new trial, the inclination of this Court at the first was to allow a new trial, and thus satisfy both sides.

But, after consideration, we have concluded to dispose of the appeal for the plaintiff, and let the counsel for the defendant know that an appeal on her part was idle and mere nonsense, for if this Court affirms the judgment in the Court below, and refuses a new trial, that is the end of it. If this Court reverses the judgment of the Court below and grants a new .trial, all of the exceptions of the defendant will come on for consideration upon the second trial.

*535This Court is not at liberty to express any opinion in regard to the exceptions of the defendant. So the appeal has no effect except to charge the defendant with the cost of the appeal.

PeR OuRiam. Appeal dismissed.