alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. §1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of HFFinancial Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period endedMarch 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the “Report”), I, Darrel L. Posegate, Executive Vice President,Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

 

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

 

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

 

 
|   | /s/  Darrel L. Posegate                                                                |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Darrel L. Posegate,  Executive Vice  President, Chief Financial Officer and  Treasurer |
|   |                                                                                   |
|   | Date:                                                                                  | May 13, 2004 |

 

 

*                                         Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to HF Financial Corp. and will be retained by HF Financial Corp. andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

1

----
Exhibit 21.1

                           TREESOURCE INDUSTRIES, INC.
                         Subsidiaries of the Registrant
                               As of July 12, 2001
                    Grouped by State/Country of Incorporation
Oregon
------
Burke Lumber Co.
Central Point Lumber Co.
Glide Lumber Products Co.
Greenweld North America Co.
Midway Engineered Wood Products, Inc.
North Powder Lumber Co.
Pacific Softwoods Co.
Philomath Forest Products Co.
Port Westward Pulp Co.
Trask River Lumber Co.
TreeSource, Inc.
Western Timber Co.
WTD Industries Co.

Washington
----------
Morton Forest Products Co.
Pacific Hardwoods-South Bend Co.
Sedro-Woolley Lumber Co.
Spanaway Lumber Co.
Tumwater Lumber Co.
Valley Wood Products Co.

Montana
-------
Columbia Falls Forest Products, Inc.

Guam
----
TreeSource International, Inc.
















                                      -71-
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

BLANCA MARTINEZ

,

Appellant

,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

,

State

. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 1 9

- 00 26 6

- C R

Appeal from the

County Court at Law No. 2

of El Paso , Texas

(TC# 20190C0339 4 )

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the Appellant’s third m otion for extension of time within which to

file the brief until April 15

, 20 20

. NO FURTHER MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO

F ILE THE APPEL L ANT ’ S BR IEF WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that the Hon. Justo Fernandez

- Gonzalez , the Appellant’s attorney,

prepare the Appellant ’s brief and forward the same to this Court on or before April 15 , 20 20

.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 17th day of March , 20 20

.

PER CURIAM

Before Alley , C.J., R odriguez and Palafox , JJ.
EXHIBITS 23.2



CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Forms S-8 (File Nos. 333-144870, 333-176733 and 333-183882) and Form S-3 (File No. 333-190397) of Lakeland Industries,
Inc. of our report dated April 22, 2014 relating to our audit of the financial statements of Lakeland Brasil S.A. as of January
31, 2014 and 2013 which appears in this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Lakeland Industries, Inc. for the year ended January 31,
2014.



|/s/ ACAL CONSULTORIA E AUDITORIA S/S | 
|------------------------------------ | 
|Rio de Janeiro, RJ                   | 
|August 13, 2014                      |
Exhibit A

Case: 2:18-cv-00478-GCS-EPD Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 05/15/18 Page: 1 of 6 PAGEID #: 10
Case: 2:18-cv-00478-GCS-EPD Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 05/15/18 Page: 2 of 6 PAGEID #: 11
Case: 2:18-cv-00478-GCS-EPD Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 05/15/18 Page: 3 of 6 PAGEID #: 12
Case: 2:18-cv-00478-GCS-EPD Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 05/15/18 Page: 4 of 6 PAGEID #: 13
Case: 2:18-cv-00478-GCS-EPD Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 05/15/18 Page: 5 of 6 PAGEID #: 14
Case: 2:18-cv-00478-GCS-EPD Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 05/15/18 Page: 6 of 6 PAGEID #: 15
Order entered January 30, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00962-CR

No. 05-14-00963-CR

ALLEN HO, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 3

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F13-58092-J, F13-58094-J

ORDER

The Court REINSTATES the appeals.

On January 21, 2015, we ordered the trial court to make findings regarding why 

appellant’s brief had not been filed. On January 26, 2015, we received appellant’s brief, together 

with an extension motion. Therefore, in the interest of expediting the appeals, we VACATE the 

January 21, 2015 order requiring findings.

We note that the clerk’s records do not contain the trial court’s certifications of 

appellant’s right to appeal nor has the Court separately received them. Accordingly, we 

ORDER the trial court to prepare and file, within FIFTEEN DAYS of the date of this order, 
certifications of appellant’s right to appeal that accurately reflect the trial court proceedings. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a), (d); Cortez v. State, 420 S.W.3d 803 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013).

We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order, by electronic transmission, to the 

Honorable Gracie Lewis, Presiding Judge, Criminal District Court No. 3; Felicia Pitre, Dallas 

County District Clerk; and to counsel for all parties.

/s/ ADA BROWN

JUSTICE
EXHIBIT J 

Case: 1:18-cv-00357-TSB-KNM-MHW Doc #: 237-12 Filed: 03/02/19 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #:

19802
Election Results Voting Age Populations 

10 Governor I 10 Att. General I 08 President I 06 Att. General I 06Auditor I 04 President 

District Kasich 1 Strickland 1 DeWine I Cordray I McCain I Obama I Mont. I Dann I Taylor I Sykes I Bush I Kerry PVI White I Hispanic I Black I Asian I Am Indian 

5- Latta 51.2o% 1 44.67% 1 54.24% 1 39.13% 1 51.33% 1 46.93% 1 49.90% J 50.08% l 58.39% 1 41.58% 1 58.76% 1 40.79% R+7 92.84% 1 3.46% 1 3.37% 1 uo% 1 o.23% 

County Population % of District 

Defiance 39,037 5.41% 

Fulton 42,698 5.92% 

Hancock 71,850 9.96% 

Hardin 23,906 3.32% 

Henry 28,215 3.91% 

Lucas 234,075 32.46% 

Mercer 27,271 3.78% 

Paulding 19,614 2.72% 

Putnam 34,499 4.78% 

Van Wert 28,744 3.99% 

Willi ams 37,642 5.22% 

Wood 124,450 17.26% 

Wyandot 9,030 1.25% 

Total 721,031 

REV _00000027 

Plaintiffs' Trial

Exhibit

P607

Case No. 1:18-cv-00357

Case: 1:18-cv-00357-TSB-KNM-MHW Doc #: 237-12 Filed: 03/02/19 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #:

19803
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION

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)

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), each of the undersigned officers of Unit Corporation a Delaware corporation (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers
knowledge, that:

The Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006 (the Form 10-K) of the Company fully
complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as
of December 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005 and for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004.

Dated: March 1, 2007



|    |  |                          
|--- |  | -------------------------
|    | 
|By: |  | /s/     LARRY D.
PINKSTON
|    |  | Larry D. Pinkston        
|    |  | Chief Executive Officer  

Dated: March 1, 2007



|    |  |                                      
|--- |  | -------------------------------------
|    | 
|By: |  | /s/    DAVID T. MERRILL              
|    |  | David T. Merrill                     
|    |  | Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer

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 Form 10-K or as a separate disclosure document.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to Unit Corporation and will
be retained by Unit Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff on request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK>                                       0000881695
<NAME>              PALOMAR MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
<RESTATED>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       9,425,268
<SECURITIES>                                 2,432,375
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,297,263
<ALLOWANCES>                                   407,038
<INVENTORY>                                  8,825,197
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            24,849,353
<PP&E>                                       7,686,447
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,884,399
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              50,364,484
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       24,999,244
<BONDS>                                     16,816,528
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        244
<COMMON>                                       397,506
<OTHER-SE>                                   8,132,962
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                50,346,484
<SALES>                                     15,698,468
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            15,698,468
<CGS>                                       14,369,464
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               14,369,464
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           3,260,549
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (43,521,015)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (43,521,015)
<DISCONTINUED>                            (32,646,687)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (67,167,702)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.15)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.15)
        

</TABLE>
#### ARKANSAS STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION *v.*Harold C. JENSEN et al

73-286

508 S.W. 2d 737

Opinion delivered April 29, 1974

[Rehearing denied June 3, 1974.]

*Thomas B. Keys*and *Philip N. Cowan,*for appellant.

*Comer Boyett, Jr.*and *Dale Price,*for appellee.

Frank Holt, Justice.

This appeal results from an eminent domain action in which appellant moved to strike the testimony of appellees’ expert value witness, Terrell Huff. Appellant’s motion to strike, *inter alia,*reads:

> Plaintiff [appellant] further moves to strike that portion of his testimony in which he values the improvements on the farm as to depreciated values because it was arbitrarily based on 15% depreciation on property and improvements where the proof shows that some of the improvements and equipment were older than others.

> THE COURT: Overruled.

The expert’s valuation, upon cross-examination, must demonstrate a foundation in fact or a reasonable and fair basis rather than mere surmise. *Ark. State Hwy. Comm’n.*v. *Jensen,*253 Ark. 795, 489 S.W. 2d 5 (1973), *Arkansas State Hwy. Comm’n.*v. *Steen,*253 Ark. 910, 489 S.W. 2d 781 (1973), *Ark. La. Gas*v. *Hardgrave,*252 Ark. 257, 478 S.W. 2d 772 (1972), and *Ark. State Hwy. Comm’n.*v. *Carruthers,*246 Ark. *4791035, 441 S.W. 2d 84 (1969).

We must agree with appellant’s objection as to the arbitrariness of the expert’s depreciation of 15% on all improvements which were included in the taking. The improvements involved were varied — a potato house, ironclad building, machine shed, dairy barn, two dwellings, three wells, three pumps, and another dwelling used for storage. On cross-examination the witness testified that after determining the replacement value on each improvement, these figures were added and a straight 15% depreciation was taken by him on their total value. Although we are sensitive to the difficulties in determining depreciation, we cannot approve of this method as a precedent for it obviously has no fair and reasonable basis. Appellees cite no authority for the method so used. Some of the improvements varied in age as well as type and condition. Appellees’ witness, on cross-examination, testified that “I did not depreciate each building as I worked it out. Some of these buildings would have a higher depreciation and some a lower depreciation.” The value of each item was separately established by the expert value witness — so also should the depreciation as to each item. The burden was upon appellees’ expert witness to justify, upon cross-examination, the reasonableness of his method of depreciation.

We have considered appellant’s other two contentions and find them without merit.

Reversed and remanded.
AO 450 (Rev. 11/11) Judgment in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL ACTION

The court has ordered that (check one):

u the plaintiff (name) recover from the

defendant (name) the amount of

dollars ($ ), which includes prejudgment

interest at the rate of %, plus post judgment interest at the rate of % per annum, along with costs.

u the plaintiff recover nothing, the action be dismissed on the merits, and the defendant (name)

recover costs from the plaintiff (name)

.

u other:

.

This action was (check one):

u tried by a jury with Judge presiding, and the jury has

rendered a verdict.

u tried by Judge without a jury and the above decision

was reached.

u decided by Judge on a motion for

.

Date: CLERK OF COURT

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

9/30/19

 Southern District of Ohio

Alfredo Fuentes

3:18-CV-187

Commissioner of Social Security

✔ Judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant; Rejecting Report and Recommendations of U.S.

Magistrate Judge; Plaintiff's objections sustained; Remanding case to the Commissioner pursuant to

sentence four of 42 U.S.C. §405(g) for further administrative proceedings

✔ Walter H. Rice

Report and Recommendations
EXHIBIT
21.1





SUBSIDIARIES
OF REGISTRANT










P.A.M.
Transport, Inc. (Arkansas Corporation)





P.A.M.
Dedicated Services, Inc. (Ohio Corporation)





P.A.M.
Logistics Services, Inc. (Arkansas Corporation)





T.T.X.,
Inc. (Texas Corporation)





Choctaw
Express, Inc. (Oklahoma Corporation)





Choctaw
Brokerage, Inc. (Oklahoma Corporation)





Allen
Freight Services, Inc. (Missouri Corporation)





Decker
Transport Co., Inc. (Ohio Corporation)





Transcend
Logistics, Inc. (Indiana Corporation)





East
Coast Transport and Logistics, Inc. (Arkansas LLC)





McNeill
Express, Inc. (Arkansas Corporation)





S & L
Logistics, Inc. (Texas Corporation)





P.A.M.
International, Inc. (Ohio Corporation)





P.A.M.
Canada, Inc. (Canadian Corporation)
United States Department of Transportation 

Essential Air Service 

OST^2008-d2l7 

DearDOT, 

I live in Kake and have been pleased with the service provided by Wings 

of Alaska. Wings has worked with the community to provide efficient 

and comfortable year-rouhd service to our community. Wiiigs caravan 

service is much needed by providing the ability to carry 3,000 pounds of 

payload, meaning they can get 9 passengers and all their baggage on the 

flight. This is important as our services are limited and getting our 

baggage, cargo, and mail is essential to our community. Weather has 

always been a challenge and it's reassuring to know that Wings of 

Alaska has the Medallion Shield, earned by operating well above safety 

standards set by the State.V 

Please reselect Wings of Alaska td serve Kake for the iaext 2 years!
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 Da-Lite Screen Company, Inc. (the Company) for the period ending September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report), I, Richard E. Lundin, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to and for purposes of 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.



/s/ Richard E. LundinRichard E. LundinChief Executive OfficerNovember 1, 2005




22
Jfourtft Court of

ismn Antonio,

January 7,2015

No. 04-14-00491-CV

William M. Collins and Patricia Collins,

Appellants

v.

Dr. Oliver Williams,

Appellee

Trial Court Case No. 13648

ORDER

The Court has reviewed the record and briefs in this appeal and has determined that oral

argument will not significantly aid it in determining the legal and factual issues presented in the

appeal. See Tex. R. APP. P. 39.8. Therefore, all requests for oral argument are denied, and the

cause is advanced for ON BRIEFS submission on February 4, 2015, to the following panel:

Justice Angelini, Justice Barnard, and Justice Martinez. All parties will be notified of the

Court's decision in this appeal in accordance with Tex. R. App. P. 48.

Either party may file motion requesting the Court to reconsider its determination that

oral argument will not significantly aid the Court in determining the legal and factual issues

presented in the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 39.8. Such motion should be filed within ten (10)

days from the date of this order.

It is so ORDERED on January 7, 2015.

Karen Angclini/yustice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, have hereunto set my hand and a/fixed the seal o/thc said court on this January 7, 2015.
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.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Disaster Declaration #17299 and #17300; Colorado Disaster Number CO-00136]

# AGENCY:

U.S. Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

Amendment 1.

# SUMMARY:

This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of Colorado (FEMA-4634-DR), dated 12/31/2021.

*Incident:*                         Wildfires and Straight-line Winds.                    

*Incident Period:*                         12/30/2021 through 01/07/2022.                    

# DATES:

Issued on 01/13/2022.

*Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         03/01/2022.                    

*Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         09/30/2022.                    

# ADDRESSES:

Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for the State of Colorado, dated 12/31/2021, is hereby amended to establish the incident period for this disaster as beginning 12/30/2021 through 01/07/2022.

All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

Barbara E. Carson,

Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.

[FR Doc. 2022-01342 Filed 1-24-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8026-03-P
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

══════════

No. 15-0944 

══════════

THE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS, PETITIONER, 

v. 

C.W.H., RESPONDENT

══════════════════════════════════════════

ON PETITION FOR REVIEW FROM THE

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TWELFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

══════════════════════════════════════════

JUDGMENT 

THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS, having heard this cause on petition for review from 

the Court of Appeals for the Twelfth District, and having considered the appellate record, briefs, 

and counsels’ argument, concludes that the court of appeals’ judgment should be affirmed. 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: 

1) The court of appeals’ judgment is affirmed; 

2) The cause is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent 

with the Court’s opinion; and 

3) Each party shall bear its own costs in this Court. 

Copies of this judgment and the Court’s opinion are certified to the Court of Appeals for 

the Twelfth District and to the 145th Judicial District Court of Nacogdoches County, Texas, for 

observance. 

October 20, 2017 

**********
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 Palomar Medical Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Joseph P. Caruso, and I, Paul S. Weiner certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to our knowledge:





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





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





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

















By: /s/ Joseph P. Caruso


Joseph P. Caruso


President and Chief Executive Officer



















By:/s/ Paul S. Weiner


Paul S. Weiner


Chief Financial Officer