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








**Certification
      of Chief Executive and Financial Officer of**


**Monument
      Resources, Inc. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350**








I,
      A.G.
      Foust, certify that:





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Monument Resources,
      Inc.
      (the “ **Company** ”)
      for
      the period ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
      Commission on the date hereof (the “ **Report** ”),
      I,
      A.G. Foust, Chief Executive and Financial Officer of the Company, certify
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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, 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.








By: /s/
      A.G. Foust


Name:
      A.G. Foust


Title: Chief
      Executive and


Financial Officer


Date:  May
      7,
      2007
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed February 22, 2017.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D16-958

Lower Tribunal No. 09-13516

________________

Cornelius Watson,

Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida,

Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Jason E. Bloch,

Judge.

Cornelius Watson, in proper person.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Gabrielle Raemy Charest-Turken,

Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before SALTER, FERNANDEZ and SCALES, JJ.

PER CURIAM.
Appellant Cornelius Watson appeals an order of the Miami-Dade Circuit

Court, which determined that Watson’s motion for a speedy disposition of his

probation violation case under the Interstate Agreement on Detainers was moot. At

a hearing on March 3, 2016, the State withdrew its affidavit of probation violation

and asked the court to unsuccessfully terminate Watson’s probation. Defense

counsel stipulated to the motion, as the motion was consistent with Watson’s

written request. The trial court granted the motion and terminated Watson’s

probation as unsuccessfully completed. We affirm the trial court’s finding of

mootness. A.V.S. v. State, 139 So. 3d 944 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (Mem).

Affirmed.

2
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 43 (Wednesday, March 5, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 10022]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-5456]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the District of Columbia 
Advisory Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, that a meeting of 
the District of Columbia Advisory Committee to the Commission will 
convene at 10:00 a.m. and adjourn at 12:00 p.m. on Thursday, March 13, 
1997, at the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Conference Room 540, 624 
Ninth Street NW, Washington, DC 20425. The purpose of the meeting is to 
provide an orientation for new Committee members, and plan project 
activities for FY 1997.
    Persons desiring additional information, or planning a presentation 
to the Committee, should contact Committee Chairperson Steven Sims, 
202-862-4815, or Ki-Taek Chun, Director of the Eastern Regional Office, 
202-376-7533 (TDD 202-376-8116). Hearing-impaired persons who will 
attend the meeting and require the services of a sign language 
interpreter should contact the Regional Office at least five (5) 
working days before the scheduled date of the meeting.
    The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the 
rules and regulations of the Commission.

    Dated at Washington, DC, February 28, 1997.
Carol-Lee Hurley,
Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.
[FR Doc. 97-5456 Filed 2-28-97; 4:58 pm]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
No. 12-5166.

#### Lamb *v.*Michigan.

Cir. Ct. Wayne County, Mich. Certiorari denied.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

December 28, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 129256 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 129256 

 COA: 255727 

Wayne CC: 03-013975-01 

MARVEL DANIEL,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 21, 2005 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, it appearing to this Court that the 

case of People v Robinson (Docket No. 126379) is pending on appeal before this Court 

and that the decision in that case may resolve an issue raised in the present application for 

leave to appeal, we ORDER that the application be held in ABEYANCE pending the 

decision in that case. 

d1221 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

December 28, 2005 

Clerk
EXHIBIT
32
  CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002
   In
connection with the quarterly report of ILX Resorts Incorporated (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the three months ending March 31, 2009, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I (We),
Joseph P. Martori, Chief Executive Officer, and Margaret M. Eardley, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 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/ Joseph P.
Martori
 Joseph P.
Martori
 Chief
Executive Officer
 May 15,
2009
   /s/ Margaret M.
Eardley
 Margaret
M. Eardley
 Chief
Financial Officer
 May 15,
2009
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-Q
SEPTEMBER 30, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997             MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996             APR-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996             SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                               0                     436
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0                      97
<PP&E>                                               0                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0                     533
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0                     172
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             0                     361
<OTHER-SE>                                           0                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0                     533
<SALES>                                              0                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0                       0
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (23)                   2,426
<INCOME-TAX>                                       (8)                     825
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (15)                   1,601
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    (8)                     825
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (23)                   2,426
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .00                     .26
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .00                     .26
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Francis D. Gerace, President and Chief Executive Officer of Multi-Color Corporation (the
Company), certify pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:



|(1) | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended December 31, 2004 (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.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: February 14, 2005



By:

/s/ Francis D. GeraceFrancis D. GeracePresident and Chief Executive Officer
No. 12-5071.

#### Contreras *v.*Cate, Secretary, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Hogan Lovells US LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in the District of Columbia. “Hogan Lovells” is an international legal practice that includes Hogan Lovells US LLP and Hogan Lovells International LLP, with offices in: : Alicante Amsterdam Baltimore Beijing Brussels Caracas Colorado Springs Denver Dubai Dusseldorf Frankfurt Hamburg Hanoi Ho Chi Minh City Hong Kong Houston Johannesburg London Los Angeles Luxembourg Madrid Mexico City Miami Milan Monterrey Moscow Munich New York Northern Virginia Paris Philadelphia Rio de Janeiro Rome San Francisco São Paulo Shanghai Silicon Valley Singapore Tokyo Ulaanbaatar Warsaw Washington DC Associated offices: Budapest Jakarta Jeddah Riyadh Zagreb. For more information see www.hoganlovells.com

\\DC - 023866/000002 - 6414195 v2 Hogan Lovells US LLP Columbia Square 555 Thirteenth Street, NW Washington, DC 20004 T +1 202 637 5600 F +1 202 637 5910 www.hoganlovells.com February 13, 2015 By Electronic Mail

Mr. Brett Kruger Chief, U.S. Air Carrier Licensing Division Office of International Aviation U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590

Re: Application of Mesa Airlines, Inc. (DFW-MTY/SLP) – Docket DOT -OST-2015-0022

Dear Mr. Kruger:

The objection of the Envoy ALPA, dated February 12, 2015 (amended February 13, 2015) to the above-referenced application of Mesa Airlines, Inc. (“Mesa”) is without merit.

The carrier, not the Envoy ALPA, holds the Envoy designations for these routes. Whether or not the Envoy ALPA was consulted about this service plan or whether Envoy has sufficient aircraft to operate these flights has no bearing on whether the requested exemption authority and designations should be granted to Mesa.

American Airlines determines which regional carrier partners it wants to fly on what routes for its branded operations. In this case, American has asked that Mesa start operating service on behalf of American on the DFW-MTY/SLP routes in place of another regional carrier, Envoy. For that reason, American did not object when polled on this application. But, Mesa still needs the exemption authority and corresponding designations to operate such service, and, given that Mesa would like to commence these services on or about March 29, 2015, the Department’s expedited consideration and handling of this application for exemption authority is requested.

Sincerely,

Robert E. Cohn Patrick R. Rizzi Hogan Lovells US LLP

Counsel for Mesa Airlines, Inc.\\DC - 023866/000002 - 6414195 v2

cc: Sally.Glover@alpa.org (Envoy ALPA); dheffernan@cozen.com; Jeremy.ross@alaskaair.com; howard.kass@aa.com ; robert.wirick@aa.com; sascha.vanderbellen@delta.com; chris.walker@delta.com; matwood@cozen.com; stephen.lachter@lachterlaw.com; jhill@cooley.com; perkmann@cooley.com; bob.kneisley@wnco.com; leslie.abbott@wnco.com; dkirstein@yklaw.com; jyoung@yklaw.com; thomas.ting@suncountry.com; dan.weiss@united.com; steve.morrissey@united.com; barbara.russell@virginamerica.com; brian.hedberg@dot.gov; brett.kruger@dot.gov; englets@state.gov; info@airlineinfo.com
```

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 234 (Tuesday, December 7, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 76069]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-30659]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Random Drug and Alcohol Testing Percentage Rates of Covered 
Aviation Employees for the Period of January 1, 2011, Through December 
31, 2011

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The FAA has determined that the minimum random drug and 
alcohol testing percentage rates for the period January 1, 2011, 
through December 31, 2011, will remain at 25 percent of safety-
sensitive employees for random drug testing and 10 percent of safety-
sensitive employees for random alcohol testing.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Kevin Kearns, Office of Aerospace 
Medicine, Drug Abatement Division, Program Administration Branch (AAM-
810), Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Room 806, Washington, DC 20591; Telephone (202) 267-8442.
    Discussion: Pursuant to 14 CFR 120.109(b), the FAA Administrator's 
decision on whether to change the minimum annual random drug testing 
rate is based on the reported random drug test positive rate for the 
entire aviation industry. If the reported random drug test positive 
rate is less than 1.00%, the Administrator may continue the minimum 
random drug testing rate at 25%. In 2009, the random drug test positive 
rate was 0.534%. Therefore, the minimum random drug testing rate will 
remain at 25% for calendar year 2011.
    Similarly, 14 CFR 120.217(c), requires the decision on the minimum 
annual random alcohol testing rate to be based on the random alcohol 
test violation rate. If the violation rate remains less than 0.50%, the 
Administrator may continue the minimum random alcohol testing rate at 
10%. In 2009, the random alcohol test violation rate was 0.088%. 
Therefore, the minimum random alcohol testing rate will remain at 10% 
for calendar year 2011.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: If you have questions about how the annual 
random testing percentage rates are determined please refer to the Code 
of Federal Regulations Title 14, section 120.109(b) (for drug testing), 
and 120.217(c) (for alcohol testing).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 1, 2010.
Frederick E. Tilton,
Federal Air Surgeon.
[FR Doc. 2010-30659 Filed 12-6-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                               9,747
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                            0
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    19,359
<PP&E>                                             510,981 
<DEPRECIATION>                                     300,789
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     229,551
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,127,224
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                           170,073 
<OTHER-SE>                                               0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       229,551
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                         0
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      146,936
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0  
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  22,739
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (146,936)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      0
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (146,936)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       (0.00)      
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       (0.00)
        


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-7200

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

TERVEUS HYPPOLITE,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at 

Greenville. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (4:93-cr-00040-H-2)

Submitted: May 15, 2018 Decided: May 17, 2018

Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Terveus Hyppolite, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. May-Parker, Seth Morgan Wood, 

Assistant United States Attorneys, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 

Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Terveus Hyppolite appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for 

reconsideration of the court’s prior orders denying relief on his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) 

(2012) motion. We conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in denying the 

motion because Hyppolite’s Sentencing Guidelines range remains 360 months’ to life 

imprisonment after application of the retroactive drug amendments due to his status as a 

career offender. See United States v. Muldrow, 844 F.3d 434, 437 (4th Cir. 2016) (stating 

standard). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. United States v. 

Hyppolite, No. 4:93-cr-00040-H-2 (E.D.N.C. Aug. 21, 2017). We deny Hyppolite’s 

motion for appointment of counsel and to vacate and remand and grant his motion to strike 

his motion to stay the informal briefing schedule. We dispense with oral argument because 

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court 

and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
West Virginia
#### Guillermo Cruz TRUJILLO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MUNOZ, Correctional Officer, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 16-15986

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted February 13, 2018 ***

Filed February 27, 2018

*713Guillermo Cruz Trujillo, Pro Se

Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Guillermo Cruz Trujillo appeals pro se from the magistrate judge’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo whether the magistrate judge validly entered judgment on behalf of the district court. *Allen v. Meyer,*755 F.3d 866, 867-68 (9th Cir. 2014). We vacate and remand.

Trujillo consented to proceed before the magistrate judge. *See*28 U.S.C. § 636(c). The magistrate judge then screened and dismissed Trujillo’s action before the named defendants had been served. *See*28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Because all parties, including unserved defendants, must consent to proceed before the magistrate judge for jurisdiction to vest, *Williams v. King,*876 F.3d 500, 503-04 (9th Cir. 2017), we vacate the magistrate judge’s order and remand for further proceedings.

Williams’s motion to obtain a copy of the “action” (Docket Entry No. 16) is denied.

VACATED and REMANDED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
# C_2022311EN.01001701.xml

| 16.8.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 311/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.8.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 311/17

---

Action brought on 29 June 2022 — Diesel v EUIPO — Lidl Stiftung (Joggjeans)

(Case T-378/22)

(2022/C 311/20)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Diesel SpA (Breganze, Italy) (represented by: F. Celluprica, F. Fischetti and F. De Bono, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Lidl Stiftung & Co. KG (Neckarsulm, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the word mark Joggjeans — International registration designating the European Union No 1 180 919

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 April 2022 in Case R 1073/2021-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | uphold in its entirety the application filed by Diesel SpA and annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

uphold in its entirety the application filed by Diesel SpA and annul the contested decision;

| — | order the intervener to pay the costs including all the costs of the earlier stages of these proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the intervener to pay the costs including all the costs of the earlier stages of these proceedings.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 60(1)(c) in conjunction with Article 8(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 60(1)(c) in conjunction with Article 8(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---