alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit
      32**




**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 SOLARGY SYSTEMS INC . (the "Company")
      on
      Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Carl Nurse as
      Chief Executive Officer and Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, certify,
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




(1)
      The
      Report may not fully comply 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 might not fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.





By:
            /s/
                Carl NurseCarl
                NurseChief
                Executive Officer and Chief Accounting OfficerOCTOBER
                22, 2008
iqVn^ "TVs;s v<\(x:v\ Co<N^gfy\'. ft*agc_ay^HSto^\o^

: ______mi^^5^s^_

lOraill"

XJ^^n^—V^^V^^-^^Syv^ V\\X (^Wjux.c^^_\_^oqu£_^ O-v^*- ^oV»

_ ^* <- v - ^ rW».Afiosta,£leir

_3__x \ a^c_e<N^ q-m\ _< v. (^^vV-V Vqool-x^v Vq VsMQ. wo^ \VC"g

(YV>^vOc XP*^S-*S Ga-u^cV QV-oJc-s Ol^v^ca q-jx--". VsVf-^ *>

>Q-^N-C_VZ^ *S-^AyvA OiioV f^xN&b^A: GjAN \N<.s«S> CSl-Vn^A VjONav-C^ \ S

_\^±__^jG_vsi owl \j_: •VS>^A.^\ QCiO^C^ -_^Kg\.C>LX<>^. ,Vo V^g- ^ m-^

KaS^COc- __i__»Q___v V^a-^R, \_t- <_vo r>>s.eV. y^Va ^_\ ^-JL

;______, _o_. u3<N\-g. \_ \\s^ fv.oX^c. \^g>yj. <y\y 7N^
X^Vj^--.\^*s»->r-W>ivo^-^-0-^s,-- - _ __ .... -

, rjll\.^ey>8!s^^

„0*3-_5^S?^SnNov_j Ai^ NT CC^\s^_\o_o^\y^£^._&*j*oalJ3&_..."^r£>_.

VolQoc nstma <f <; i3vv< vj^vSxx. (XjQ£&*±-*-=-*-*-

•tsL

^HuikJbft£mjck5_

.itBkWfiS

(Loft- (Lqj*. (V_o. os-m-frvr-u-'Cft,

• (
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.                  

###### Securities and Exchange Commission

Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities and Exchange Commission will hold a Closed Meeting on Thursday, April 16, 2015 at 2:00 p.m.

Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the Closed Meeting. Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters also may be present.

The General Counsel of the Commission, or her designee, has certified that, in her opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (7), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(3), (5), (7), 9(ii) and (10), permit consideration of the scheduled matter at the Closed Meeting.

Commissioner Stein, as duty officer, voted to consider the items listed for the Closed Meeting in closed session, and determined that no earlier notice thereof was possible.

The subject matter of the Closed Meeting will be:

Institution of injunctive actions;

Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings; and

Other matters relating to enforcement proceedings.

At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in the scheduling of meeting items.

For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed, please contact the Office of the Secretary at (202) 551-5400.

Dated: April 9, 2015.

Brent J. Fields,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2015-08630 Filed 4-10-15; 4:15 pm]

 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
CERTIFICATION

I, David C. Bloom, Chief Executive Officer of Chelsea
Property Group, Inc., the sole general partner of CPG Partners, L.P. ("the OP"),
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, do hereby certify as
follows:

|1. | The annual report on Form 10-K of the OP for the year ended December 31,
2003 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 such Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the OP.
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have executed this Certification this
18th day of March, 2004.

| | /s/ David C. Bloom
David C. Bloom
Chief Executive Officer
| | ---------------------------------------------------------

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906 has been provided to Chelsea Property Group, Inc. and will be retained by
Chelsea Property Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed February 19, 2015.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-14-00399-CR

BERNARDO ALVAREZ SERRANO, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 174th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1385567

MEMORANDUM OPINION

A jury convicted appellant of burglary of a habitation and found an 

enhancement allegation to be true. The jury sentenced appellant to confinement 

for ten years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal 

Justice. Appellant filed a notice of appeal.

Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal 

is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirement of Anders v. 
2

California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), presenting a professional 

evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be 

advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).

A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised 

of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford 

v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). At appellant’s request, the 

record was provided to him. As of this date, no pro se response has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief, and agree the 

appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error 

in the record. A discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of 

the state. We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief 

or a pro se response when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for 

review. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). 

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Boyce and McCally.

Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3767 Engrossed in House (EH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3767

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
    at 170 North Main Street in Smithfield, Utah, as the ``W. Hazen 
                    Hillyard Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. W. HAZEN HILLYARD POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 170 North Main Street in Smithfield, Utah, shall be known 
and designated as the ``W. Hazen Hillyard Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``W. Hazen 
Hillyard Post Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives November 16, 2009.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
111th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 3767

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
    at 170 North Main Street in Smithfield, Utah, as the ``W. Hazen 
                    Hillyard Post Office Building''.
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,132
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         5,000
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,132
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,132)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,132)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,132)
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .00


</TABLE>
<PAGE>




                                                                 EXHIBIT 23.1



                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement on
Form S-3 (Nos. 333-53717) of Doane Pet Care Company of our report dated March
22, 2002 with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Doane Pet Care
Company and Subsidiaries as of December 30, 2000 and December 29, 2001 and the
related consolidated statements of income, stockholder's equity and
comprehensive income, and cash flows for each of the years ended January 1,
2000, December 30, 2000 and December 29, 2001, which report is included in the
Annual Report of Doane Pet Care Company on Form 10-K for the year ended December
29, 2001.


                                                           /s/ KPMG LLP

Houston, Texas
March 29, 2002
ex10-1a.htm



Exhibit 10.1 (a)


 


 



March 13, 2013







Mr. Louis J. Cappelli, Chairman


Sterling Bancorp


650 Fifth Avenue


New York, New York   10019







Dear Mr. Cappelli:







This will confirm the following amendment to your Amended and Restated Employment Agreement, dated as of March 22, 2002, with our Company, which was last amended by letter agreement dated March 2, 2012:







The date in the third line of Paragraph 1 (captioned “Term”)


                      is amended to December 31, 2017.







The foregoing amendment was adopted by the Compensation Committee and approved by the Board of Directors at its March 13, 2013 meeting.







Kindly sign and return the enclosed copy to the Company in order to confirm your understanding and acceptance of the foregoing amendment.


 


 



	 	Sincerely, 






Sterling Bancorp




By:  /s/ Debra A. Ashton                     


Secretary







 







Agreed:







/s/ Louis J. Cappelli                      


Louis J. Cappelli
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 on Form 10-Q of Sonus Networks, Inc. (the "Company") for the period
ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Richard N. Nottenburg, President and Chief Executive Officer of
the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:



Date: November 5, 2009/s/ RICHARD N. NOTTENBURG Richard N. Nottenburg President and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)


---



QuickLinks
#### Lambright v. Lambright et al.

*Equity*— Equity *Rule 57*— Injunction *affidavits not in first person and not divided into paragraphs.*

A preliminary injunction will be dissolved when the affidavits are in the third person and are not divided into paragraphs, as required by Rule 57 of the Equity Rules.

Motion to dissolve preliminary injunction. C. P. Lawrence Co., Dec. T., 1921, No. 2, in Equity.

Plaintiff presented a bill in equity and prayed for and secured a preliminary injunction enjoining and restraining the defendants from disposing of certain moneys which the plaintiff claimed to be his, and which were deposited in the two defendant banks in the name of the other defendant.

The two injunction affidavits were exactly alike, and were as follows:

“State of Pennsylvania, County of Lawrence, ss.;

“Charles N. Lambright, being duly sworn according to law, deposes and says that he has been personally acquainted with William A. Lambright and Rhoda E. Lambright, his wife, for many years. He knows that William A. Lambright has been continuously employed by the Pennsylvania Railroad Company during these years and has regularly earned large wages, practically all of which have passed into the possession of his wife, Rhoda E. Lambright, and that out of these moneys she has deposited large sums of money in the First National Bank of East Palestine, Ohio, and Union Commercial Savings Bank of the same place in her own name and in the name of herself and her husband. He further knows that Rhoda E. Lambright deserted her husband on or about the 5th day of July, 1921, and that they have not lived together as husband and wife since said date.

(Usual *Jurat)*Chaeles N. Lambright.”

One of the defendants, Rhoda E. Lambright, filed the following motion to dissolve:

“Now, Nov. 9, 1921, comes Rhoda E. Lambright, one of the defendants, by her attorneys, Thomas W. Dickey and Harry K. Gregor, and moves the court to dissolve the injunction heretofore granted in this case for the reason that the injunction was not supported by proper affidavits, the affidavits filed being in violation of Rule 57 of the Rules of Equity as adopted by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, in that said affidavits are in the third person and not in the first person, and, also, not divided into paragraphs as required by said rule. Thos. W. Dickey,

Harry K. Gregory,

Solicitors for Rhoda E. Lambright, one of the defendants.”

*W. E. Porter*and *Wylie MeCaslin,*for plaintiff.

*T. W. Dickey*and *H. K. Gregory,*for defendants.

Nov. 9, 1921,

Emery, P. J.

Now, motion to dissolve the preliminary injunction granted at above number and term is granted, and the preliminary injunction heretofore granted is dissolved.

From William McElwee, Jr., New Castle, Pa.
No. 2,376.

#### A. HIMMELMANN, Appellant, *v.*J. W. SULLIVAN, Respondent.

Rbactice — Stipudation—A party -who Las procured a judgment to be entered in bis favor by means of one part of a verbal stipulation, is not at liberty to repudiate tbe other part; but, having received the benefit of the' stipulation, must bear the burdens -which it imposes on him.

Appeal from tbe District Court of tbe Fourth District, City and County of San Francisco.

Judgment was entered for plaintiff in pursuance of a stipulation entered into by counsel tbat tbe action in Ibis case should abide tbe result of tbe action of *Himmelmann*v. *Steiner,*and tbat execution should be stayed until tbe final determination of tbat action in tbe Supreme Court-

Pending tbe appeal in' tbat case, tbe plaintiff in tbis procured tbe Sheriff to sell tbe premises described in tbe complaint to satisfy bis judgment, and himself became tbe purchaser and obtained from tbe Sheriff a certificate of sale. Afterward, upon motion of defendant, tbe Court ordered tbe sale set aside, and tbe Sheriff to desist from executing or delivering any deed under tbe sale; from which order tbe plaintiff appeals.

*Hale & Edmonds,*for Appellant.

*Q. F. & W. H. Sharp,*for Despondent.

*126ErHODBS, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the Court:

Tbe judgment was entered upon a verbal stipulation made in open Court, by wbieb it was agreed that tbe action in tbis case should abide tbe determination of tbe action of *Himmelmann*v. *Steiner,*in wbieb were involved tbe same questions of law and of facts as in tbis case, and that execution should be stayed until tbe final determination of that action in tbe Supreme Court. Tbe question to be determined is whether tbe portion of tbe stipulation staying execution can be enforced.

Tbe question is not tbe same as that which was presented in *Borkheim*v. *North British,*etc. (38 Cal. 623). There the question was whether a judgment which was entered upon a previous verbal stipulation could be maintained; but tbe question here is whether a party who has procured a judgment to be entered in bis favor, by means of one part of a verbal stipulation, is at liberty to repudiate tbe other part. Tbe answer is obvious. If be affirms tbe stipulation by accepting and acting upon one of its provisions, which was made for bis benefit, be must abide by tbe other provisions which were made for tbe benefit of the other party. Having received tbe benefit of the stipulation, be must bear tbe burdens which it imposes on him.

Order affirmed.

[Tbe following cases were affirmed on authority of *Himmelmann*v. *Sullivan,*No. 2,376: *Himmelmann*v. *Goetjen,*No. 2,377; *Himmelmann*v. *King,*No. 2,378; *Himmelmann*v. *Johnson,*No. 2,379.]
Exhibit 23.1

Consent of Independent Certified Public Accountants

We have issued our reports dated March 7, 2003, accompanying the consolidated financial statements and schedule included in the Annual Report of Schlotzsky's,
Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said reports in the Registration Statements of Schlotzsky's, Inc. on Forms S-8 (File No.
333-57077, effective June 17, 1998 and File No. 333-37785, effective October 14, 1997 and File No. 333-03809, effective May 15, 1996).

GRANT
THORNTON LLP

Dallas,
Texas
March 7, 2003

---

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

NO. 03-10-00864- CR

Mark G ree n, App ellant

v. The State of Texas, App ellee

F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F TRAVIS CO UNTY, 299 TH JUDICI AL DISTRICT NO. D-1 -DC- 10- 9040 77, H ONO RAB LE CHARLES F . B AIRD, JUDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N Appellant Mark Gre en see k s to appea l a judgme nt of conviction for the offe nse of evading arr est. Sentence was imposed in open court on September 21, 2010, an d n o motion for new trial was filed. Acc ording ly , Gre en h ad 3 0 d ay s t o file his notice of appea l. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a) (1). Howeve r, his notice of appea l was not filed until Dec ember 8, 2010. Under the circ umstances, we lack jurisdiction to dispose of the purported appea l in any m an n er other than by dismiss ing it for want of jurisdiction. See Slaton v. State , 981 S.W .2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App.1998); Olivo v. State , 918 S.W .2d 519, 522-23 (Te x . Crim. App. 1996).The a ppeal is dismissed.

__________________________________________

Bob Pembe rton, J ustice Be fore J ustices Pury ear , Pemberton and Rose Dismissed for Want of J urisdiction Filed: F ebrua

ry 25, 2011 Do Not Publish

2
# Arkansas Air Guard Medics Provide Free Medical Care in Guatemala

/ Published Dec. 5, 2023

NORTH LITTLE ROCK, Ark. - Thirty-six Arkansas National Guardsmen from the 188th Wing at Ebbing Air National Guard base in Fort Smith and the 189th Airlift Wing at Little Rock Air Force Base in Jacksonville departed Dec. 1 for a seven-day mission providing free medical care in Guatemala City. 

“We are delighted to contribute to our state partnership with Guatemala by providing essential support and free medical care alongside Guatemalan physicians to help those in need,” said Col. Thomas DeGraff, commander of the 189th Medical Operations Squadron.Arkansas Air National and Guatemalan Air Force members participated in the opening ceremony for the “Amistad Por Guatemala” medical readiness exercise. Immediately following the ceremony, the doors to the Guatemalan Air Force Hospital “Nuestra Señora Virgen de Loreto” opened.

The Airmen expect to treat 200 to 500 people a day, providing dental, optometry, family medicine, and orthopedic care at the hospital in Guatemala City. Additionally, a public health officer is providing fetal health protection education.

Arkansas and Guatemala were paired in the Department of Defense National Guard Bureau State Partnership Program in 2002. They have enjoyed a mutually beneficial relationship in their 20 to 30 military-to-military exchanges each year.

The 30-year-old SPP program is guided by State Department foreign policy goals and has 88 partnerships with 100 nations around the globe.Through SPP, the National Guard conducts military-to-military engagements in support of defense security goals but also leverages whole-of-society relationships and capabilities to facilitate broader interagency and corollary engagements spanning military, government, economic and social spheres.