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

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF
EXECUTIVE OFFICERPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
    SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I,
Christopher G. Kenber, 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 June 30, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that 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.

|Date: August 2, 2005 |  | By:  /s/ Christopher G. Kenber
Name:  Christopher G. KenberTitle:  Chief Executive Officer
|-------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Assistant Secretary U.S. Department Washington, DC 20590 of Transportation

, . ,,'.**~~~."** " Office of the Secretary ofTransportation 

## JUN 1 ,0'2010

.The Honorable Bobby Jindal

Governor ofLouisiana Baton Rouge, LA 70804 Dear GovernorJindal: Thank you for your letter supporting the. application for antitrust immunity filed by American Airlines and Japan Airlines. I am responding on behalfofthe Secretary. As you may know, the applicants-members ofthe oneworld Alliance-areseeking antitrust immunity to closely coordinate flights between the United States and Asia. According to the application, the alliance partners plan to launch ajoint venture for transpacific traffic. 'The applicationis administered in a public docket, which ensures thatinterested parties have the

opportunity to comment. The U:S.Department ofTransportation (DOT) will evaluate the

.application according to rigorous statutory standards, beginning with a review ofthe record to determine ifit is substantially complete. Decisions on the application are made in consultation with the U.S. Department ofJustice's Antitrust Division following a thorough analysis of competitive factors. As this matter is now pending, I hope you understand that I cannot comment on the merits ofthe application. I can assure you, however, that DOT will give full and fair considerationto the application as well as any comments filed in the docket. As is our normalpractice, I am placing a copyofyour letter and this response in Docket DOT-OST-2010-0059 as a contact outside the record in this matter. I appreciate your interest in this proceeding.. Sincerely yours,
Susan 

### L. Kurland Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs

### S I0-\00415-0 1 0

....t'
BOBBY JINDAL Governor

## ~tatt 

# of**1Loui~iana** eUict 

## of tbefl9obernor AprilS. 2010 The Honorable Raymond LaHood Secretary U.S. Department ofTransportation .. 1200 New Jersey Ave, SE Washington, DC 20590 Attn: Docket DOT-OST-**201~**



### . DearMr. Secretary:

Please support and approve the application for anti-trustimmunity filed by American Airlines . and Japan Airlines. ApprovaJ ofthis application by the US Department ofTransportation would enable these One-World Alliance ait:lines to work closely together on trans-Pacific flights. . This effort is supported by the airports in Louisiana because it 

### will offer Louisiana customers more service, scheduIing,8.Qd**.pri~ing** 

### options. SIf:;)y, 

# IobJ Jindal Governor

Post Office 

### Box 94004. 

### Baton Rouge. Louisiana 70804-9004 • (225) 342-7015 • Fax (225) 342-7099 www.gov.state.la.us
No. 10-275.

#### Tonia E. Fisher, Petitioner v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Company.

562 U.S. 1178, 131 S. Ct. 996,

178 L. Ed. 2d 825,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 727.

January 18, 2011.

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

Same case below, 361 Fed. Appx. 974.
No. 10-6934.

#### In re Jimmy Richard Husband, Petitioner.

562 U.S. 1196, 131 S. Ct. 1041,

178 L. Ed. 2d 860,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 672.

January 18, 2011.

Petition for rehearing denied.

Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

Former decision, 562 U.S. 1043, 131 S. Ct. 612, 178 L. Ed. 2d 455, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 8909.
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
                
                Defense Logistics Agency
                        The Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency
                    DLA
            Search
                        Search Defense Logistics Agency:
                            Search
                    Search Defense Logistics Agency:
                        Search
    Home

    What DLA Offers
    
        Excess Property Disposal

    Document Services

    Products

    Services

    Programs

    Working With DLA
    
        Applications

    Small Business

    Federal and International Cataloging

    Defense Data Standards

    Events

    Procurement Policies

    Government Programs

    Forms

    Organizations
    
        DLA Headquarters

    DLA Aviation

    DLA Disposition Services

    DLA Distribution

    DLA Energy

    DLA Land and Maritime

    DLA Troop Support

    DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM

    DLA Europe & Africa

    DLA Indo-Pacific

    Customer Support
    
        Self Help Tools

    How to Order

    Find Your Order

    Customer Facing Offices

    Training

    Brochures

    Warfighter Support

    Customer Service Management

    Careers

    About DLA
    
        Contact Us

    Locations

    Leaders

    News

    History

    Media Gallery

    DLA Campaigns  Home
  Land and Maritime
  About
  DLA Land and Maritime Image Galleries
 DLA Land and Maritime images
 Supply Chain Alliance and Exhibition
 DLA Land and Maritime News
 Hall of Fame Ceremonies
 DSCC Activities
 DLA Land and Maritime Hall of Fame ceremonies
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (2.87 MB)
 
 Promotion DLA Distribution US Army DLA
 Photo Gallery
 2024 DLA Supply Chain Alliance Conference and Exhibition Image Gallery
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (2.87 MB)
 
 Promotion DLA Distribution US Army DLA
 Photo Gallery
 DLA Land and Maritime news
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (2.87 MB)
 
 Promotion DLA Distribution US Army DLA
 Photo Gallery
 DSCC activities
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (2.87 MB)
 
 Promotion DLA Distribution US Army DLA
 Photo Gallery
 Contact UsSite IndexStrategic PlanDLA IG HotlineFOIANo FEAR ActWhistleblower ProtectionDLA CareersImagesWebmasterEEOSection 508Public AffairsSAPRExternal Links DisclaimerDOD Information Quality GuidelinesPrivacy/SecurityUSA.govDOD Web PolicyDOD Open GovernmentPlain Language
                    Stay Connected
            
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
# C_2015371EN.01000701.xml

| 9.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 371/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 371/7

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 17 September 2015 — Mory SA, in liquidation, Mory Team, in liquidation, Superga Invest v European Commission

(Case C-33/14 P) (1)

1

((Appeal - State aid - Actions for annulment - Article 263 TFEU - Admissibility - Unlawful and incompatible aid - Obligation to recover - European Commission decision not to extend the recovery obligation to the successor of the aid beneficiary - Interest in bringing proceedings - Action for damages and for the recovery of aid before the national courts - Locus standi - Appellant not individually concerned))

(2015/C 371/09)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Appellants: Mory SA, in liquidation, Mory Team, in liquidation, Superga Invest (represented by: B. Vatier and F. Loubières, avocats)

Appellants:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: T. Maxian Rusche and B. Stromsky, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1) | Sets aside the Order of the General Court of the European Union in Mory and Others v Commission (T-545/12, EU:T:2013:607); |
| --- | --- |

1)

Sets aside the Order of the General Court of the European Union in Mory and Others v Commission (T-545/12, EU:T:2013:607);

Mory and Others

| 2) | Dismisses as inadmissible the action for annulment brought by Mory SA, Mory Team and Superga Invest against Decision C(2012) 2401 final of the Commission of 4 April 2012 concerning the takeover of assets of the Sernam group as part of its composition with creditors; |
| --- | --- |

2)

Dismisses as inadmissible the action for annulment brought by Mory SA, Mory Team and Superga Invest against Decision C(2012) 2401 final of the Commission of 4 April 2012 concerning the takeover of assets of the Sernam group as part of its composition with creditors;

| 3) | Orders Mory SA, Mory Team, Superga Invest and the European Commission to bear their own costs relating both to the proceedings at first instance and to the appeal. |
| --- | --- |

3)

Orders Mory SA, Mory Team, Superga Invest and the European Commission to bear their own costs relating both to the proceedings at first instance and to the appeal.

---

(1)  OJ C 102, 7.4.2014.

1

---
# C_2013377EN.01001603.xml

| 21.12.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 377/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.12.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 377/16

---

Action brought on 7 October 2013 — Microsoft v OHIM — Softkinetic Software (KINECT)

(Case T-536/13)

2013/C 377/39

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Microsoft Corp. (Redmond, United States) (represented by: A. Meijboom, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Softkinetic Software SA (Brussels, Belgium)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 25 July 2013 given in Case R 2373/2011-1; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 25 July 2013 given in Case R 2373/2011-1;

| — | Order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings; and |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings; and

| — | Order the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal, should it intervene, to pay the costs incurred in the proceedings before the OHIM. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal, should it intervene, to pay the costs incurred in the proceedings before the OHIM.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘KINECT’ for goods in Class 9 — Community trade mark application No 9 058 141

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in opposition: The word mark ‘SOFTKINETIC’ for goods and services in Classes 9, 28, 38, 41 and 42 — International registration No 1 025 034 designating the European Union; the word mark ‘SOFTKINETIC’ for goods and services in classes 9, 28, 38, 41 and 42 — Benelux trade mark registration No 850 946

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Upheld the appeal and annulled the contested decision

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 8(5) and 8(1)(b) CTMR.

Pleas in law:

---
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Todd Morris, Appellant.

[768 NYS2d 379]

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lewis, J.), rendered January 28, 2002, convicting him of crimi*653nal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Most of the defendant’s challenges to the prosecutor’s summation are unpreserved for appellate review since the defense counsel either failed to make specific and timely objections, or failed to seek curative instructions or move for a mistrial where the trial court sustained the defense counsel’s objections (see CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Medina,*53 NY2d 951 [1981]; *People v Clemmings,*300 AD2d 672 [2002]; *People v McHarris,*297 AD2d 824, 825 [2002]). To the extent that the issue is preserved, the prosecutor in his summation did not vouch for the credibility of the People’s witnesses and his remarks were responsive to the defendant’s summation (see *People v Harrison,*194 AD2d 627 [1993]; *People v Burgos,*186 AD2d 578 [1992]; *People v Colonna,*135 AD2d 724 [1987]). Santucci, J.P., Adams, Crane and Cozier, JJ., concur.
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
                
                Defense Logistics Agency
                        The Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency
                    DLA
            Search
                        Search Defense Logistics Agency:
                            Search
                    Search Defense Logistics Agency:
                        Search
    Home

    What DLA Offers
    
        Excess Property Disposal

    Document Services

    Products

    Services

    Programs

    Working With DLA
    
        Applications

    Small Business

    Federal and International Cataloging

    Defense Data Standards

    Events

    Procurement Policies

    Government Programs

    Forms

    Organizations
    
        DLA Headquarters

    DLA Aviation

    DLA Disposition Services

    DLA Distribution

    DLA Energy

    DLA Land and Maritime

    DLA Troop Support

    DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM

    DLA Europe & Africa

    DLA Indo-Pacific

    Customer Support
    
        Self Help Tools

    How to Order

    Find Your Order

    Customer Facing Offices

    Training

    Brochures

    Warfighter Support

    Customer Service Management

    Careers

    About DLA
    
        Contact Us

    Locations

    Leaders

    News

    History

    Media Gallery

    DLA Campaigns  Home
  Land and Maritime
  About
  DLA Land and Maritime Image Galleries
 DLA Land and Maritime images
 Supply Chain Alliance and Exhibition
 DLA Land and Maritime News
 Hall of Fame Ceremonies
 DSCC Activities
 DLA Land and Maritime Hall of Fame ceremonies
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Clear Search
 2024 DLA Supply Chain Alliance Conference and Exhibition Image Gallery
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Clear Search
 
  FIRST

        

        

        
        3
        
        4
        
        5
        
        6
        
        7 (current)
        

        


        


        LAST
 DLA Land and Maritime news
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Clear Search
 
  FIRST

        

        

        
        5
        
        6
        
        7 (current)
        
        8
        
        9
        

        


        


        LAST
 DSCC activities
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Clear Search
 Contact UsSite IndexStrategic PlanDLA IG HotlineFOIANo FEAR ActWhistleblower ProtectionDLA CareersImagesWebmasterEEOSection 508Public AffairsSAPRExternal Links DisclaimerDOD Information Quality GuidelinesPrivacy/SecurityUSA.govDOD Web PolicyDOD Open GovernmentPlain Language
                    Stay Connected
            
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
#### Gerard Palionis, Appellant, v Jakobson Properties, LLC, et al., Respondents.

[66 NYS3d 881]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Cynthia S. Kern, J.), entered March 4, 2016, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In this case, defendants owed no duty, statutory or otherwise, to plaintiff to provide continuous illumination in the stairway upon which plaintiff slipped during the ongoing blackout resulting from Hurricane Sandy *(see e.g. Kopsachilis v 130 E. 18 Owners Corp., 11*NY3d 512 [2008]; *Viera v Riverbay Corp.,*44 AD3d 577 [1st Dept 2007]). Plaintiff’s reliance on *Goldstein v Consolidated Edison Co. of N.Y.*(115 AD2d 34 [1st Dept 1986], *lv denied*68 NY2d 604 [1986]), is misplaced as the defendant in *Goldstein*created a dangerous situation by encouraging the tenants to use the unlighted stairways to fetch water from the fire hydrant that the building superintendent had opened up for them. Here, nothing in the record shows that defendants encouraged plaintiff or other tenants to use the unlighted stairs in any way. To the extent plaintiff is arguing that defendants voluntarily assumed a duty of care by taking affirmative acts to alleviate the hazardous condition, and that he relied on such acts to his detriment, the record does not demonstrate that he relied on the actions taken by defendants in deciding to use the stairs to leave the building (see *Heard v City of New York,*82 NY2d 66, 72-73 [1993]; *Nallan v Helmsley-Spear, Inc.,*50 NY2d 507, 523 [1980]).

Concur—Sweeny, J.P., Richter, Andrias, Web-ber, Oing, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           OCT-02-1999
<PERIOD-START>                              OCT-04-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                OCT-02-1999
<CASH>                                          137,474
<SECURITIES>                                  3,752,507
<RECEIVABLES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCES>                                          0
<INVENTORY>                                           0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              3,910,299
<PP&E>                                                0
<DEPRECIATION>                                        0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                3,910,299
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           113,124
<BONDS>                                               0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<COMMON>                                        608,293
<OTHER-SE>                                    3,188,882
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  3,910,299
<SALES>                                               0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                203,907
<CGS>                                                 0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   220,025
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                      0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                    0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (16,118)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (6,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                   0
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (10,118)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         0



</TABLE>
# Furnishings ‘check out’ of old lodging facility 

/ Published Oct. 5, 2016
Iwakuni, Japan, 
With the end of summer came the transition from the Marine Corps’ old Temporary Lodging Facility at Iwakuni, Japan, as furniture and other items not needed for the new building made their way to their temporary lodging at DLA Disposition Services.

Site Manager Llewellyn K. Castro Sr. said nine separate appointment dates and times were provided, which came to 26 hours spent DLA Disposition Services staff just receiving this property from Marine Corps Community Services. Service contactors could only work certain days of the week the process went a bit slower.

“We lucked out with regards to scheduling appointments as it during this time it was pretty slow on turn ins,” Castro said. “We were able to open the schedule up to MCCS ... While still taking care of other local customers and their needs.”

Periodically, receivers were forced to work two appointments at a time, but Castro said they were up to the task and the staff remained poised throughout the extra efforts needed.

“If anyone was directly affected it would be our receivers, who were a bit overwhelmed at first glance of the vehicles and the amount of furniture they carrying,” Castro said. “As soon as the back doors of those trucks opened they were taking charge and directing the flow. They definitely rose to the challenge.”

Temporary lodgers themselves, some items have already moved on through reutilization to serve new owners.  Castro said the biggest ticket items have been the 24 refrigerators received on record, which were all issued by Sept. 22.

“We feel pretty confident in that most of if not all of the property Iwakuni has or will receive onto its accountable records will either be reutilized or sold,” Castro said. “A good portion of the furniture has been shipped to DLA Disposition Services at Sagami for receipt as Iwakuni is not big enough to accommodate receipt of all TLF property on site.”

Castro said an arm chair and some the couches and were scrapped because of their condition.
No. 10-379.

#### Columbia Venture, LLC, Petitioner v. Dewberry & Davis, LLC, et al.

562 U.S. 1063, 131 S. Ct. 649,

178 L. Ed. 2d 480,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9312.

November 29, 2010.

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

Same case below, 604 F.3d 824.