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

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
annual report on Form 20-F of Elbit Systems Ltd. (the Company) for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Joseph
Gaspar, Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) of the Company, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to sec. 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 result of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |  |  |     |  |                                             
|-------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | --------------------------------------------
|Date: March 10, 2010 |  |  |  |     |  |                                             
|                     |  |  |  | By: |  | /S/    JOSEPH
GASPAR                        
|                     |  |  |  |     |  | Joseph Gaspar                               
|                     |  |  |  |     |  | Chief Financial Officer                     
|                     |  |  |  |     |  | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
No. 10-6628.

#### Jessee Dane Cox, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1016, 131 S. Ct. 536,

178 L. Ed. 2d 394,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8400.

November 1, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 384 Fed. Appx. 234.
#### Weber v. Borough of Wilkinsburg

04/27/2016

046 WAL (2016)

Denied

Pa.Cmwlth., 127 A.3d 894
No. 10-500.

#### Robert A. Urciuoli, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1045, 131 S. Ct. 612,

178 L. Ed. 2d 436,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8960.

November 15, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied.

*437Same case below, 613 F.3d 11.
# C_2014421EN.01003701.xml

| 24.11.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 421/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.11.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 421/37

---

Judgment of the General Court of 15 October 2014 — Skysoft Computersysteme v OHIM — British Sky Broadcasting Group and Sky IP International (SKYSOFT)

(Case T-262/13) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark SKYSOFT - Earlier Community word mark SKY - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

2014/C 421/50

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Skysoft Computersysteme GmbH (Kleinmachnow, Germany) (represented by: P. Ehrlinger and T. Hagen, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: P. Bullock and N. Bambara, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: British Sky Broadcasting Group plc (Isleworth, United Kingdom); and Sky IP International Ltd (Isleworth) (represented by J. Barry and S. Wright, solicitors, and P. Roberts, barrister)

Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 March 2013 (Case R 2503/2011-4) concerning opposition proceedings between British Sky Broadcasting Group plc and Sky IP International Ltd, on one side, and Skysoft Computersysteme GmbH, on the other.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Skysoft Computersysteme GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Skysoft Computersysteme GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 207, 20.7.2013.

1

---
#### Henry Grace, *Plaintiff in Error,*vs. State of Florida, *Defendant in Error.*

144 So. 305.

Division A.

Decision filed November 4, 1932.

*Joseph W. Nichols*for Plaintiff in Error;

*Cary D. Landis,*Attorney General, and *Boy Campbell,*Assistant, for the State.

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the judgment herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said judgment; it is therefore considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said judgment of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Buford, C.J. and Ellis and Brown, J.J., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                         5
<CIK>                             0001064414
<NAME>                            PECO ENERGY TRANSITION TRUST
<MULTIPLIER>                        1,000,000

<S>                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                         9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                     DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                        111
<SECURITIES>                                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   0
<ALLOWANCES>                                    0
<INVENTORY>                                     0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              506
<PP&E>                                          0
<DEPRECIATION>                                  0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              5,119 <F1>
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         327
<BONDS>                                     4,534
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           0
<PREFERRED>                                     0
<COMMON>                                        0
<OTHER-SE>                                    258
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                5,119
<SALES>                                         0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              370
<CGS>                                           0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              112
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            215
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 0
<INCOME-TAX>                                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             0
<DISCONTINUED>                                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 0
<CHANGES>                                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                   43
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   0
<FN>
<F1>
(1)       Includes Intangible Transition Property of $4,901.
</FN>


</TABLE>
No. 10-6720.

#### Matthew Kaguyutan, Petitioner v. Gerald L. Rozum, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution at Somerset, et al.

562 U.S. 1070, 131 S. Ct. 661,

178 L. Ed. 2d 494,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9204.

November 29, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
----

----

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

| (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/ Richard E. Wilson                 |   |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------|--------|
|   |   | Richard E. Wilson                     |
|   |   | President and Chief Executive Officer |

----

----
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 Ameritrans Capital Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Gary C.
Granoff, President, Chief Executive Officer, and 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/ GARY C. GRANOFF
----------------------------------------------
GARY C. GRANOFF
PRESIDENT, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

November 15, 2004
EXHIBIT
32.1


CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO


18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








I, Albert
E. Sisto, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of
hi/fn, inc. on Form 10-Q for the three months ended December 31, 2008 fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained in such Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial
condition and results of operations of hi/fn, inc.








February
      6, 2009
            /s/
      ALBERT E. SISTOAlbert
      E. SistoChairman
      and Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 13.2






Section 906 Certification by Principal Executive Officer
  In connection with the Annual Report of Elbit Imaging Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Ran Shtarkman, co-Chief Executive 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, to the best of 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:  May 9, 2010
  By: /s/ Ran Shtarkman

Name:  Ran Shtarkman

Title:    co-Chief Executive Officer
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 Patch  International,  Inc.  (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending February 28, 2007, as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Michael S. Vandale,  President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal  Executive
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/ MICHAEL S. VANDALE
------------------------------------------------
Michael S. Vandale
President and Chief Executive Officer
# C_2016027EN.01003802.xml

| 25.1.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 27/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.1.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 27/38

---

Judgment of the General Court of 26 November 2015 — Navarra de Servicios y Tecnologías v Commission

(Case T-487/13) (1)

1

((State aid - Digital television - Aid for the deployment of digital terrestrial television in remote and less-urbanised areas in Spain - Decision declaring aid to be partly compatible and partly incompatible with the internal market - State resources - Economic activity - Advantage - Effect on trade between Member States and distortion of competition - Service of general economic interest - Article 107(3)(c) TFEU - Misuse of power))

(2016/C 027/45)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Navarra de Servicios y Tecnologías, SA (Pamplona, Spain) (represented by: A. Andérez González, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: É. Gippini Fournier, B. Stromsky and P. Němečková, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: SES Astra (Betzdorf, Luxembourg) (represented by: F. González Díaz, F. Salerno, V. Romero Algarra, lawyers)

Intervener in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2014/489/EU of 19 June 2013 on State aid SA.28599 [(C 23/2010) (ex NN 36/010, ex CP 163/2009)] implemented by the Kingdom of Spain for the deployment of digital terrestrial television in remote and less-urbanised areas (other than Castilla-La Mancha) (OJ 2014 L 217, p. 52).

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1) | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1)

Dismisses the action;

| 2) | Orders Navarra de Servicios y Tecnologías, SA to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission and by SES Astra. |
| --- | --- |

2)

Orders Navarra de Servicios y Tecnologías, SA to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission and by SES Astra.

---

(1)  OJ C 313, 26.10.2013.

1

---
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10**  **- 7503** 

KEVIN MCDONALD , Plaintiff

– Appellant ,
v. USP HAZELTON , Defendant

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virg inia , at Richmond
. James R. Spencer, Chief District Judge. ( 3:10

- cv - 00277

- JRS )

Submitted : April 21, 2011 Decided: April 26, 2011

Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DUNCAN , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
.
Kevin McDona ld, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Kevin McDonald appeals the district court ’ s order denying relief on his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics , 403 U.S. 388 (1971). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. McDonald v. USP Hazelton , No. 3:10

- cv - 00277

- JRS (E.D. Va. Sept. 14, 2010)
. We deny McDonald’s motion s for a transcript and for summary judgment. 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
*December 14, 2017*

2017-Ohio-9004.]

2017-1496.

#### Disciplinary Counsel v. Oviatt.

On relator’s October 24, 2017 motion for an order to appear and show cause. On November 8, 2017, this court ordered respondent to show cause why he should not be held in contempt. Respondent filed a response, and this cause was considered by the court.

Motion granted. Respondent, Richard Ahlman Oviatt, found in contempt and ordered to produce his responses to relator’s discovery requests and to comply with the orders issued by the Board of Professional Conduct.

O’Neill, J., not participating.
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED AP RIL 12, 2017

NO. 03

- 15

- 00696

- CR

Justin Michael Johnson, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 147TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEA R, PEMBERTON, AND GO ODWIN

AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE PURYEAR

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction r en d ered by the trial court. Having reviewed

the re cord and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the

trial court’s judgment . Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment of conviction

.

Because ap pellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of costs is made.
#### In the Matter of Chad Nasir S. and Another, Infants. Charity Simone S., Appellant; Abbott House, Respondent.

[66 NYS3d 10]

Orders, Family Court, New York County (Susan Knipps, J.), entered on or about July 26, 2016, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, found that respondent mother is mentally ill within the meaning of Social Services Law § 384-b, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Although this nondispositional order is not appealable as of right *(see*Family Ct Act § 1112 [a]), the finding that the mother is mentally ill within the meaning of Social Services Law § 384-b constitutes a permanent and significant stigma that might impact her status in future proceedings *(see Matter of Nekia C. [Kevin E.C.—Laurel S.McC.],*155 AD3d 431 [1st Dept 2017]). Accordingly, the Court, on its own motion, deems the notice of appeal to be a request for leave to appeal, and hereby grants leave to appeal *(id.).*

Clear and convincing evidence supports the finding that the mother suffers from a mental illness as defined by Social Services Law § 384-b (4) (c) and (6) (a). The court-appointed psychologist who examined the mother for several hours and reviewed her extensive medical history opined that she is presently and for the foreseeable future unable to provide adequate care for the children due to mental illness *(see*Social Services Law § 384-b [4] [c]; [6] [a]; *see Matter of Jeremiah M. [Sabrina Ann M.],*109 AD3d 736 [1st Dept 2013], *lv denied*22 NY3d 856 [2013]). His uncontroverted testimony established that the mother’s prognosis was “quite poor” because she lacks insight into her mental illness, refuses counseling and psychotropic medication, and did not continue her therapy once her therapist stopped working at the facility she was attending. The psychologist also noted that there was a possibility that the mother would require future hospitalizations, which could leave the children without someone to care for them *(see Matter of Sharon Crystal F. [Nicole Valerie D.],*89 AD3d 639, 640 [1st Dept 2011], *lv denied*18 NY3d 808 [2012]; *Matter of Susan F.,*106 AD2d 282, 283 [1st Dept 1984]).

Although the mother is correct that hearsay statements made by the father in the expert’s report were inadmissible and should have been stricken, any error was harmless. The admissible evidence in the record, including the portions of the expert’s report that did not include hearsay, was sufficient to support the finding that the mother is mentally ill within the *426meaning of Social Services Law § 384-b *(see generally Lubit v Lubit,*65 AD3d 954, 956 [1st Dept 2009], *lv denied*13 NY3d 716 [2010], *cert denied*560 US 940 [2010]; *Matter of Benjamin L.,*9 AD3d 153, 158-159 [1st Dept 2004]).

Family Court properly drew a negative inference from the fact that the mother, while present at the hearing, did not testify *(see Matter of Alford Isaiah B. [Alford B.],*107 AD3d 562 [1st Dept 2013]).

Concur—Richter, J.P., Tom, Kapnick, Kern and Moulton, JJ.
No. 10-5528.

#### Virginia Y. Soentgen, Petitioner v. Pennsylvania.

562 U.S. 927, 131 S. Ct. 314,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7127,

178 L. Ed. 2d 204,

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia Office, denied.

Same case below, 981 A.2d 935.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Company's Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31, 1995 and
the Company's Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations for the year
ended December 31, 1995, and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                             479
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     8094
<ALLOWANCES>                                       278
<INVENTORY>                                       3130
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 11811
<PP&E>                                            6248
<DEPRECIATION>                                    1869
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   16255
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             8279
<BONDS>                                           2419
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             1187
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                        1257
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     16255
<SALES>                                          35343
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 36719
<CGS>                                            30258
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    30258
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 (113)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 829
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   1430
<INCOME-TAX>                                        98
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               1332
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      1332
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.03 
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.03 
        

</TABLE>