alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

                                 CERTIFICATION

     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned certifies that (1) this Annual
Report of EDO Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or Rule 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and (2)
the information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


                                              /s/ JAMES M. SMITH
                                              ----------------------------
                                              James M. Smith
                                              Chief Executive Officer
                                              March 1, 2006


                                              /s/ FREDERIC B. BASSETT
                                              ----------------------------
                                              Frederic B. Bassett
                                              Chief Financial Officer
                                              March 1, 2006
# C_2014071EN.01002803.xml

| 8.3.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 71/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 71/28

---

Order of the General Court of 10 January 2014 — MHCS v OHIM — Compañía Vinícola del Norte de España (ICE IMPERIAL)

(Case T-555/13) (1)

(2014/C 71/53)

Language of the case: English

The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 377, 21.12.2013.

---
No. 10-6546.

#### Evans Ray, Jr., aka Charles Evans Ray, Jr., Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 990, 131 S. Ct. 437,

178 L. Ed. 2d 339,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8197.

October 18, 2010.

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

Same case below, 367 Fed. Appx. 478.
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 906

OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q, (the Report), of Triton PCS, Inc. (the Company) for the period
ended March 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission as of the date hereof, I, Michael E. Kalogris, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 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), as appropriate, 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Michael E. KalogrisName:

Michael E. KalogrisTitle:

Chief Executive OfficerDate:

May 10, 2004




A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been
provided to Triton PCS, Inc. and will be retained by Triton PCS, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



This certification accompanies the quarterly report on Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and is
not to be incorporated by reference into any filings of Triton PCS, Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the quarterly report on Form 10-Q,
irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
# C_2014448EN.01002202.xml

| 15.12.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 448/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.12.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 448/22

---

Order of the General Court of 16 October 2014 — Tameio Pronoias Prosopikou Trapezis Kyprou v Commission and ECB

(Case T-328/13) (1)

1

((Action for annulment - Cyprus stability support programme - Declaration of the Eurogroup concerning the restructuring of the banking sector in Cyprus - Erroneous identification of the defendant in the application - Inadmissibility))

(2014/C 448/29)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Tameio Pronoias Prosopikou Trapezis Kyprou (Nicosia, Cyprus) (represented by: E. Efstathiou, K. Efstathiou and K. Liasidou, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendants: European Commission (represented by: B. Smulders, J.-P. Keppenne and M. Konstantinidis, acting as Agents); and European Central Bank (ECB) (represented by: A. Sáinz de Vicuña Barroso, N. Lenihan and F. Athanasiou, acting as Agents, and by W. Bussian, W. Devroe and D. Arts, lawyers)

Defendants:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of the declaration of the Eurogroup of 25 March 2013 concerning, inter alia, the restructuring of the banking sector in Cyprus.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

| 2. | Tameio Pronoias Prosopikou Trapezis Kyprou is ordered to pay, in addition to its own costs, the costs incurred by the European Commission and by the European Central Bank (ECB). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Tameio Pronoias Prosopikou Trapezis Kyprou is ordered to pay, in addition to its own costs, the costs incurred by the European Commission and by the European Central Bank (ECB).

---

(1)  OJ C 252, 31.8.2013.

1

---
# DLA Police Officer’s real-life skills benefit safety, support charity 

/ Published May 19, 2016
COLUMBUS, Ohio, 
If you’re a fan of reality-themed television shows then you might want to tune in and watch the warrior serving on your Defense Supply Center Columbus’ security staff.DLA Installation Support Columbus Police Officer Kevin Schaefer recently participated in a military-themed episode of Steve Austin's Broken Skull Challenge at the Broken Skull Ranch. During the challenge elite athletes compete in head to head battles until one is left standing. That man or woman earns a chance to win $10,000 by defeating the Skull buster, Austin’s personal obstacle course.Drawing on his Air Force training which included tours in Iraq and Afghanistan to help him prepare Schaefer competed against seven other military veterans, (one Army, four Marine Corps, and two Navy) during three preliminary events. At 6 feet tall and 200 pounds, Schaefer won the preliminary competitions. His victory ensured advancement to Day 2 of the Skull Buster."This was the best day in my life, it felt good to send those guys home," Schaefer said at the end of the day’s competition.Competing in Day 2 of the Skull Buster Challenge included a 1/2 mile course requiring the competitors to navigate 10 obstacles, making it the toughest obstacle course in the United States. With obstacle names like Backbreaker, Heartbreak Hill and Deep Freeze, completing all 10 events tested each participant to their limits as they endured both the rain and temperatures often reaching 102 degrees.Although Schaefer didn’t win the Day 2 Skull Buster Challenge he demonstrated tenacity and strength during the competition while proudly representing the U.S. Air Force and the DLA Installation Support Columbus Police Officers. His efforts benefitted the USO with a $10,000 donation earned from his first round victory. "You have to be ready and train hard for this type of competition; it wasn't easy but I did my best!” Schaefer said.*Editor’s note: Watch Schaefer's episode on CMT.com here.*
# DLA Troop Support employee featured in new video

/ Published April 27, 2016

[This is the last of a series of videos profiling Defense Logistics Agency acquisition professionals.]A new acquisition professionals video focusing on a DLA Troop Support employee was released on the organization’s YouTube and Facebook sites April 27. 

“Geek Squad of Acquisition” profiles Jose Pereira, a Troop Support quality assurance supervisor and is level III certified in production quality & manufacturing. 

As a former active duty service member, Pereira understands the importance of getting the right part at the right time to the military services.

The acquisition videos were created to increase recognition of the importance of education in the DLA acquisition community and to highlight the diversity in the 14 areas of the community.

To view the video, visit DLA’s YouTube page or Facebook page.
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 AmerInst Insurance Group, Ltd. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2004
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Stuart Grayston, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18.U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                     
|-----------------------------------------------------
|                                                     
|/s/    STUART GRAYSTON                               
|Stuart Grayston President and Chief Executive Officer



November 12, 2004
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jose Rodriguez, Appellant.

[60 NYS3d 191]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Condon, J.), rendered January 8, 2016, convicting him of murder in the second degree and attempted aggravated murder, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Although the defendant validly waived his right to appeal, his contention concerning the voluntariness of his plea of guilty survives his appeal waiver (see *People v Seaberg,*74 NY2d 1, 10 [1989]; *People v Molina,*146 AD3d 815 [2017]; *People v May,*138 AD3d 1146 [2016]; *People v Murphy,*114 AD3d 704 [2014]). In this regard, the defendant contends that his plea of guilty was not knowing, voluntary, or intelligent because the County Court failed to inquire as to his mental capacity prior to the imposition of sentence. This contention need not have been raised by counsel in order for the defendant to raise it on appeal, since the record reveals that, at sentencing, defense counsel brought to the court’s attention that the presentence report documented the defendant’s past psychological treatment and issues as late as 2013 *(see People v Catapano,*73 AD2d 975 [1980]). However, defense counsel also stated that the defendant did not want to withdraw his plea of guilty because, inter alia, he did not want to put the victim’s family and his children through a trial. The defendant made a statement of apology to the victim’s family during sentencing. The transcript of the plea proceeding in December 2015 reveals, through a colloquy between the defendant and the court, that the defendant did not lack the capacity to understand the proceeding against him, or to proceed in his own defense. The record shows that he answered all of the court’s questions appropriately, allocuted to the crime, and expressly acknowledged that he understood what he was doing and that he was pleading guilty because he was, in fact, guilty *(see People v Gordon,*107 AD3d 739 [2013]; *People v Keiser,*100 AD3d 927 [2012]). Under these circumstances, the court providently exercised its discretion in determining that the defendant’s plea of guilty was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary without the further need of an inquiry as to the defendant’s mental capacity.

The defendant’s valid waiver of the right to appeal precludes *801appellate review of his contention that the sentence imposed was excessive *(see People v Palladino,*140 AD3d 1194, 1195 [2016]; *People v Duchatellier,*138 AD3d 887 [2016]).

Leventhal, J.P., Barros, Connolly and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ., concur.
Order entered February 1 , 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 18
- 00576
- CV
SNP SCHNEIDER
- NEUREI THER & PARTNER AG, Appellant
V. SAMUEL WOOD AND JAME S D. SPIELMAN, Appellee s On Appeal from the 192nd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. D C
- 17
- 14118



### O RDER
The Court ha s d etermined that oral argument would be appropriate in this case.
A ppellant notified this Court by letter dated Januar y 29, 2019, that its counsel is not available to present argument on February 13, 2019 , and Appellant has advised in its January 11, 2019 Unopposed Motion to Reschedule Oral Argument that counsel for all parties are available on Wednesday March 6, 2019. A ccordingly, we ORDER the parties to appear and present oral argument on Wednesday March 6, 2019 , at 11:00 a.m. in the Merrill Hartman C ourtroom, located on the 8th floor of the George Allen Courthouse.
/s/ DAVID J. SCHENCK PRESIDING JUSTICE
# C_2013367EN.01004103.xml

| 14.12.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 367/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.12.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 367/41

---

Action brought on 14th October 2013 — ZZ v EMA

(Case F-103/13)

2013/C 367/75

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: S. Rodrigues, A. Blot, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: EMA

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

The annulment of the appraisal report of the Applicant, covering the period of 15th September 2010 to 16th January 2012.

th

th

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the Applicant’s performance evaluation report for the period from 15 September 2010 to 15 September 2012 as finalised on 16 January 2013; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the Applicant’s performance evaluation report for the period from 15 September 2010 to 15 September 2012 as finalised on 16 January 2013;

| — | annul, and so far as necessary, EMA Deputy Executive Director’s decision of 2 July 2013, partially rejecting his complaint dated 6 March 2013 against the aforementioned decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul, and so far as necessary, EMA Deputy Executive Director’s decision of 2 July 2013, partially rejecting his complaint dated 6 March 2013 against the aforementioned decision;

| — | order the EMA to pay all the costs incurred by the appellant for the present appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the EMA to pay all the costs incurred by the appellant for the present appeal.

---
No. 10-5652.

#### Sergio Reynosa-Atisuego, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 933, 131 S. Ct. 333,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7340.

178 L. Ed. 2d 216,

October 4, 2010.

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

Same case below, 375 Fed. Appx. 343.
EXHIBIT 32


CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002


In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of PCS Research
Technology, Inc. (the " Company") for the quarterly period ended September 30,
2003 (the "Report"), the undersigned hereby certifies in his capacity as Chief
Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer of the Company, 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 and belief:

     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.



Dated: November 14, 2003               By: /s/ BRIAN M. OVERSTREET
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Name:  Brian M. Overstreet
                                       Title: Chief Executive Officer and
                                              Principal Accounting Officer

                                       32
# C_2014085EN.01001402.xml

| 22.3.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 85/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 85/14

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Frankfurt am Main (Germany) lodged on 20 December 2013 — Condor Flugdienst GmbH v Andreas Plakolm

(Case C-680/13)

2014/C 85/26

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Landgericht Frankfurt am Main

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Condor Flugdienst GmbH

Applicant:

Defendant: Andreas Plakolm

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Is the expression cancellation, which is defined in Article 2(l) of Regulation No 261/2004, (1) to be interpreted as meaning that in a situation such as that in the present case it also applies where, although the flight departed under the original flight number, it was not a non-stop flight as originally planned but involved a stopover scheduled before departure, and another aircraft and airline company were used in a sub-charter arrangement?

1

---

(1)  Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91, OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1.

1

---
No. 10-5852.

#### Gurmercindo Beltran, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1128, 131 S. Ct. 899,

178 L. Ed. 2d 739,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 412.

January 10, 2011.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for writ of certiorari granted. Judgment vacated, and case remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit for further consideration in light of Johnson v. United States, 559 U.S. 133, 130 S. Ct. 1265, 176 L. Ed. 2d 1 (2010).

Same case below, 367 Fed. Appx. 984.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
STATEMENT OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND THE BALANCE SHEET
AT DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           4,800
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   60,496
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,181
<INVENTORY>                                      1,232
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                74,722
<PP&E>                                         934,084
<DEPRECIATION>                                 512,150
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 507,394
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          124,160
<BONDS>                                         86,319
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       118,442
<OTHER-SE>                                      89,438
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   507,394
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               301,625
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  211,838
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,429
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 81,553
<INCOME-TAX>                                    33,187
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             48,366
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    48,366
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
Exhibit
32.1








The
following certification accompanies Dynamics Research Corporation’s Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 and is not filed as
provided in Item 601(b)(32)(ii) of Regulation S-K of the Securities and Exchange
Commission.





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 10-K of Dynamics Research Corporation,
a Massachusetts corporation (the “Company”), for the year ended December 31,
2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the “Report”), the undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer, hereby certifies
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that, to his knowledge:





(1) the
Report of the Company filed today pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act; 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:  March
      17, 2008
            /s/
      James P. ReganPresident,
      Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer
No. 10-6794.

#### Marie Rose Chery, Petitioner v. Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General.

562 U.S. 1071, 131 S. Ct. 664,

178 L. Ed. 2d 495,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9070.

November 29, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
#### People v Jackson (Brandon)

4th Dept: 145 AD3d 1658 (Erie)

denied 3/27/17 (Stein, J.)