alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 13.2

Certification of the Principal Financial Officer of

Videotron Ltd.

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 Annual Report of
Videotron Ltd. (the Company) on Form 20-F for the year ending December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Marie-Josée Marsan, Vice President, Finance
and IT and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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, as amended; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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

Date: March 15, 2010



/s/ Marie-Josée MarsanName:

Marie-Josée MarsanTitle:

Vice President, Finance and IT andChief Financial Officer


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States
Code) and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, November 01, 2016.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, November 01, 2016

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A17D0114. FITZGERALD SMITH, JR. v. NATION STAR MORTGAGE, LLC..

Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

2016CV273960
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
CONDENSED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE 12 MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1997, THE
CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED BALANCE SHEET AS OF JUNE 30, 1997, & THE CONSOLIDATED
CONDENSED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS FOR THE 12 MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1997 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          18,926
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,151
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     12,101
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                44,528
<PP&E>                                           3,499
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  48,260
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,795
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        33,246
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,071
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    48,260
<SALES>                                         59,146
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                           38,775
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   38,775
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                15,635
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 185
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,987
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,887
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,100
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,100
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .34
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .34
        

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

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                       3,000,020
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,475,279
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    481,592
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,956,891
<PP&E>                                       7,510,239
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,486,046
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,981,084
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,462,753
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       143,034
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,860,514
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,981,084
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,901,409
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,356,423<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0<F1>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           (160,544)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (5,544,161)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     6,017
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (5,550,178)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (5,550,178)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.40)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.40)
<FN>
<F1>Total costs includes research and development expenses and cost of revenues.
Because of the nature of the company's operations, management is of the opinion
that it is not meaningful to segregate these costs.
</FN>


</TABLE>
##### 



Exhibit 99.1

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 North Fork Bancorporation, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John
Adam Kanas, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S. C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that, to the best of my knowledge:



| | (1) |  | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                                        
| | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| | (2) |  | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

/s/ John Adam KanasJohn Adam Kanas
President and
Chief Executive Officer

May 14, 2003

This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to §906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

29
| Exhibit 32.1 |
|--------------|

|   | SARBANES-OXLEY SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION |
|--------|------------------------------------------|

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Wind Energy America Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Darrel G. Kluge, Chief Executive Officer and I, Alan L. Cross,  Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 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 for the periods reported in the Report.

| Dated: May 20, 2008 | /s/Darrel G. Kluge |
|---------------------|--------------------|

Darrel G. Kluge

Chief Executive Officer 

 

______/s/Alan L. Cross __________

Alan L. Cross

Chief Financial Officer
• 

REF ID:A71734 

NAVSECURITYSTA WASH 

25 ~J\RCH 

FROM: SUSLO LONDQN 251318Z 

TO: USCIB COORDINATOR 

ROUTINE 

8·62420 

}i:O 3 . 3 ( h) ( 2 ) 

P~ 86-36/50 USC 3605 

C 0 N F i ~ E N T I A b 

SECtlRITY INFORMATION 

007 

FOLLO~ING SENIOR APPOINTMENTS 9 EFFECTIVE 15 APR 9 WERE 

ANNOUNCED 24 MAR: · 

1 Ito BECOME DEPUTY DIRECTOR; I I AS ASST DI RECTOR; 

AS HEAD OF SUGAR DEPTo 

NAVSECSTA ROUTING: 

ACTION: AFSA 123peo•••••••o(12) 

AFSA 11 •••••••••••• (3) 

PARAPHRASE NOT REQUIRED. 

• 

CONSULT CRVPTOCENTER BEFORE DECLASSIFYJNGo 

2s131az MARCH 1,s2 

eclassified and approved for release by NSA on 

3-05-2014 ursuantto E.O. 13526
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL CRAWFORD,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 356 MAL 2021

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

CHRISTOPHER CRAWFORD,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 357 MAL 2021

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

CHRISTOPHER CRAWFORD,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 358 MAL 2021

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM[ 356 MAL 2021, 357 MAL 2021 and 358 MAL 2021 ]

- 2

AND NOW , this 17th day of November, 2021

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
REFf"jlilfyA67 544t1l 

VUI I 'J!f 

17 Dec•ber 1945 

SUBJECT• Application tor Patent Serial lo. 300,212 - w. P. Priedman 

!01. Director, Lepl Diri11ioD 

4D 331, The Pentagon 

WaslWlgton 25, D. c. 

BeepcmcUng to an oral 1nqu1rJ by llr. Ball, 14 Deo•ber 1945, relatiw 

to the aubjeot application, the A!'IV Security Ageno1 baa rio objection to 

iaaue of a pa.tent baaed upon aa1d application • 

.roR 'l'f1E CHIEP, ARM? SECURITY AGENC?s 

s. lullbaok 

Colonel, Signal Corps 

@'pproved for Release by NSA on 09-09-2013 pursuantto E.O. 1352e 

COP':
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S BALANCE SHEET AT JUNE 30, 1998, AND STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE
THREE AND SIX MONTH PERIODS ENDED JUNE 30, 1998 AND 1997, AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                             6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                             547
<SECURITIES>                                     9,618
<RECEIVABLES>                                      568
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      1,316
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                12,212
<PP&E>                                          17,621
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,067
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  25,872
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,108
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            20
<OTHER-SE>                                      21,744
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    25,872
<SALES>                                          1,424
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 3,171
<CGS>                                              722
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      722
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,056
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,718)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,718)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,718)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.18)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.18)
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-2020
JOSEPH R. JOHNSON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CIRCUIT CITY STORES, INCORPORATED; FIRST NORTH AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK, Defendants - Appellees.

No. 99-2021
JOSEPH R. JOHNSON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CIRCUIT CITY STORES; CIRCUIT CITY STORES, INCORPORATED; FIRST NORTH AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK, Defendants - Appellees.2 No. 99-2022
JOSEPH R. JOHNSON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CIRCUIT CITY STORES, INCORPORATED; FIRST NORTH AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK, Defendants - Appellees.Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (CA-98-1407-A, CA-99-695-A, CA-99-696-A) Submitted: November 18, 1999 Decided: November 23, 1999 Before WILKINS, HAMILTON, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Joseph R. Johnson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Amy Miles Kowalski, MCGUIRE, WOODS, BATTLE & BOOTHE, L.L.P., McLean, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on July 13, 1999, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on July 15, 1999. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986). 3 PER CURIAM: Joseph R. Johnson, Jr., appeals the district court’s order dismissing with prejudice his civil action under Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2)(C). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Johnson v. Circuit City Stores, Inc. , Nos. CA-98-1407-A; CA-99-695-A; CA-99-696-A (E.D. Va. July 15, 1999). * We deny Appellees’ motion to strike Johnson’s reply or in the alternative motion for leave to file a surreply. 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.

AFFIRMED
#### Drake, Appellant, vs. Scheunemann and another, Respondents.

*June 2*

June *22, 1899.*

*Appealable orders: Waiver.*

1. The right of appeal from an intermediate order ceases on the entry of judgment; it is thereafter subject to review on appeal from the judgment.

2. An order reinstating an appeal from justice court, which had been dismissed for want of prosecution, having been granted on terms, the acceptance of the terms imposed, and going to trial on the merits without objection, waives any error in the order.

*459Appeal from an order and a judgment of the superior court of Milwaukee county: J. C. Ludwig, Judge.

*Affirmed.*

The superior court acquired jurisdiction of the cause by appeal from a judgment rendered for plaintiff in justice’s court. On the last day of the fourth term of the court after the appeal was taken, to which term the cause had been regularly continued, it was dismissed on plaintiff’s motion for want of prosecution. At the next term of the court, on motion of defendants’ attorney, the appeal was reinstated on terms that they pay the fees of plaintiff’s witnesses upon the former appearances, assessed at $3.50. The order was duly excepted to. The fees were paid to, and receipted for by, plaintiff’s attorneys, who thereafter participated without objection in a trial of the cause upon the merits, resulting in a verdict and judgment for defendants, from which this appeal was taken solely to test the order reinstating the cause, an appeal from the order being joined with that from the judgment.

Eor the appellant the cause was submitted on the brief of *Ghcmles 8.*Garter, attorney, and *Garl W.*Briggs, of counsel.

*O. W. Bow, Jr.,*for the respondents.

Maeshall, J.

The order is not appealable if for no other reason, because it is subject to review on appeal from the judgment. The right of appeal from an intermediate order ceases on the entry of judgment. *American B. H., O. & S. M. Co. v. Gurnee,*38 Wis. 533; *Donkle v.*Milem, 88 Wis. 33.

The order was granted upon condition of the payment of plaintiff’s witness fees on the appearance at the time the cause was dismissed. Acceptance of the fees by plaintiff’s attorneys, and going to trial on the merits without objection, waived any error in the order. That has been repeatedly decided by this court, as evidenced by numerous cases cited by respondents’ counsel. *Cogswell v. Colley,*22 Wis. 399; *Webster-Glover L. & M. Co. v. St. Croix Co.*71 Wis. 317; *460*Smith v.*Coleman, 77 Wis. 343; *McKinnon v.*Wolfenden, 78 Wis. 237; *Laird v. Giffin,*84 Wis. 286; *Mills v. Nat. F. Ins. Co.*92 Wis. 90; *Cook v. McComb,*98 Wis. 526. That requires an affirmance of the judgment.

*By the*Court.— The judgment of the superior court is affirmed.
REF ID:A363486 

Orders, Btrf'erring it ia advisG<! 

to a. lld.litnr.; 

that applica.tior,, i.tter~ 10 for 

April 

patent 

1947, 

aerial 

aubjecti mmibe~ ~ 

551,172 was ~.lfvertently included in. the list or paten.ta requeBtoo 

to be ~ Ul'.l.del' the provisions or United states Code 35~ Section 42 

a1ld: should be etri~"l thel'Qf':rca. 

8,. ~.CK, Clliet ~,..;reh laboratories Di'ri#i01'1 

@'pproved for Release by NSA on 07-29-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a 

---------· -· -·----- ···----- .. ··-·- --- ---- --
\. 

Ir. Ianrler kt 282 

1. • ttached henwith !a propoal ot "Director ot Ituearch and Dnelopaent 

tor a •inale lt 6 D 'bads•t tor the Departaent ct the A.n;r • 

a. Pmd1q reaultll ot a atatt •'bld1' being •de 'b;y' .lS-14, the toll.owing &etivitiee are oom!derec! re•ea.roh.and deYel.oplent tor badgeta.17 pirpoaess 

.lll ot llll> ~ lteaearch 1-~at. ill Operations Divillion 

22 employeea :ln Anaqsia Section, ••thods Branch, Security Diviaion 

• • 

J. Ccmaeiits ud recom11.enda tiona on propose4 aingle R A D Badget tor the 

.l:n17 are desired bJ' 21 lov•b•r 1947. 

1 IDcl. 

/s/ Paul E. •ett 

PAUL I. IEIT 

.,7 

11D1ta27 Il • D ladget 

COPY 

Lt. Coloml, S:lpal Corpe 

J.ctina Depit,y Chief 

A:nq Security Agen07 

.kf; '" . 

1 

J :i 7Jt?-V" .£,/7 

E\--p p-r-o-ve_d..,....f,.....o-r R=-"'el-ea-s-e""""b_y....,.N....,..,S"""A..,.....-o-n ....,,..0...,..1-....,,.0....,,..9-.....,,2"""0.....,.1.....,.4-p-u-rs-u-a-nt-t-o-=E,..... 0,,....._-1,.....,,3-=5..,,......2a 

. •
tjp. $R I l 

REF ID:A67630 

Sf I T $A 

.l. IJDDf Chi~, hcurli:i7' DiY1•1as 

htemsce 241 

l
.. 

REF ID:A39740 

. ' 

• BEORili?- • 

April 1, 1936. 

Memorandum For Mr. William F. Friedman, Cryptana~st, and Mr~ Frank B. Rowlett, Jr. Cryptanalyst, 

War Plana and Training Division, 

Office of the Chief Signal Officer. 

Subject: Patent Application, Ser. No. 70,412, Filed March 23, 1936. 

Improvement in -~ptographs 

1. It has been determined that the invention forming the 

subject-matter of the above entitled application is important to the 

armament and defense of the United States, and it is therefore desired 

that the application be placed ~der Section 4894, R~vised.Statutes, 

as.am.ended, u.s.c., title 35, section 37. 

2. In pursuance with the foregoing and in accordance wit~ 

A. R. 850-50, Par. 6, Class (2), an appropriate assignment vesting title 

of the invention and application there£or in the United States is transmitted· herewith for execution. After execution said assignment· is to be 

returned through channels and transmitted to the Patents Section for 

necessary action. 

s. w. Stanley, 

Lieut. Col., Signal.Corps, 

Acting Executive. · 

.Peclassifi ed and approved for release by NSA on 11-20-2013 pursuant to E .0. 13526.· .,
exv10w6






EXHIBIT 10.6



Mindspeed Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”) has entered into an agreement with the following
persons, which is substantially identical to the form of of Indemnification Agreement, filed as
Exhibit 10.1 to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 27, 2011:




Dwight W. Decker




Robert J. Conrad



Raouf Y. Halim



Michael T. Hayashi



Ming Louie



Thomas A. Madden



Jerre L. Stead



Najabat H. Bajwa



Kurt F. Busch



Jing Cao



Allison K. Garcia



Gerald J. Hamilton



Thomas J. Medrek



Brandi R. Steege
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

November 21, 2016

No. 04-16-00649-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF B.G.M., ET AL., CHILDREN,

From the 73rd Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2016-PA-01163

Honorable Richard Garcia, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

This is an accelerated appeal of the trial court’s order terminating appellant’s parental 

rights. The appellant’s brief was originally due to be filed on November 16, 2016. On 

November 16, 2016, appellant filed a motion requesting an extension of time to file the brief.

The disposition of this appeal is governed by the standards set forth in Rule 6.2 of the 

Texas Rules of Judicial Administration. TEX. R. JUD. ADMIN. 6.2. Accordingly, this appeal is 

required to be brought to final disposition within 180 days of the date the notice of appeal is 

filed. Id. 

The motion is GRANTED, and appellant’s brief must be filed no later than December 6, 

2016. Given the time constraints governing the disposition of this appeal, further requests for 

extensions of time will be disfavored.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 21st day of November, 2016.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court