alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**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 BMR Solutions, Inc. a Nevada corporation
        (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2007, as filed
        with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
        Mark Andre, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifies to the best
        of his
        knowledge, 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) 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 result of operations of the
                  Company.
 
 A
        signed
        original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
        to
        BMR Solutions, Inc., and will be retained by BMR Solutions, Inc. and furnished
        to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
        request.
  /s/
                    Mark
                    AndreMark
                    AndreChief
                    Executive Officer
 Date:
          August 13,
          2007
hme-10k2009ex1038.htm


    EXHIBIT
10.38

    


    AMENDMENT
NUMBER ONE

    TO

    HOME
PROPERTIES, INC.

    DEFERRED
BONUS PLAN

    (Amended
and Restated as of January 1, 2008)

     

    


     

    This
Amendment No. One to the Deferred Bonus Plan (the “Plan”) was approved by the
shareholders of the Company at a meeting duly called and held on May 1,
2008.

    The first
sentence of paragraph (h) of Section 5 of the Plan shall and hereby is amended
to increase the number of shares available for payments under the Plan from
100,000 to 150,000.

     

    IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has authorized its duly authorized officer to
execute this Amendment Number One as of the first day of May, 2008.

     

    


     

    HOME PROPERTIES, INC.

     

    


    By:           /s/ Ann M. McCormick         

    Ann M. McCormick

    Executive Vice President and
Secretary
**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 Nucotec,Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2003 asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), we, Earl T. Shannon, President of the Company, and Scott W.Bodenweber, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, respectively certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that:

 

1.               The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.               The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and result of operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/ Earl T. Shannon   |                    | /s/ Scott W. Bodenweber |   |
|-----------------------|-------------------------|-------------------------|--------|
| Earl  T. Shannon,     | Scott  W. Bodenweber,   |
| President             | Chief Financial Officer |
| August 14,  2003 | August 14,  2003   |

 

1

----
#### Simon Gerberich STEIN, Individually, and Simon Gerberich Stein, Executor of the Estate of Jessie W. Stein, Deceased, Appellants, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.

No. 17919.

United States Court of Appeals Eighth Circuit.

June 29, 1965.

Robert C. Tilden, William P. Ellwood, Cedar Rapids, Iowa, for appellants.

Martin T. Goldblum, Atty., Tax Div., Dept, of Justice, Washington, D. C., Louis F. Oberdorfer, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tax Div., Dept, of Justice, Lee A. Jackson, and Richard J. Heiman, Attys., Dept, of Justice, Washington, D. C., and Donald A. Wine, U. S. Atty., Des Moines, Iowa, for appellee.

Before VOGEL, MATTHES and RIDGE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

In his findings of fact and conclusions of law. as published in Stein v. United States, D.C.S.D.Iowa, 1964, 240 F.Supp. 818, Chief Judge Stephenson clearly and cogently demonstrates the correctness of the Commissioner’s denial of the taxpayer’s claim for refund herein. Being completely in accord with Judge Stephenson’s findings and conclusions, we affirm on the basis thereof.

Affirmed.
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5446 

To direct the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to report to the Congress on the effects of Hurricanes Katrina, 

Rita, and Wilma on the fisheries and fish habitat of the United States. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 22, 2006 

Mr. JINDAL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Resources 

A BILL 

To direct the Administrator of the National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration to report to the Congress 

on the effects of Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma 

on the fisheries and fish habitat of the United States. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. REPORT ON EFFECTS OF HURRICANES. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the 

5 date of the enactment of this Act, the Administrator of 

6 the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

7 shall report to the Congress on the effects of Hurricanes 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS
2 

•HR 5446 IH 

1 Katrina, Rita, and Wilma on the fisheries and fish habitat 

2 of the United States. 

3 (b) CONTENTS.—The report shall include a descrip4 tion of the effects of such hurricanes on— 

5 (1) commercial and recreational fisheries; 

6 (2) owners and operators of shrimp fishing ves7 sels; and 

8 (3) the oyster industry. 

Æ 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS
STATE v. Kenneth Vernon GOLDER

79PA18-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 8, 2019

Anne Bleyman, Attorney at Law, For Golder, Kenneth Vernon.

Michael T. Henry, Assistant Attorney General, for State of North Carolina.

G. Glenn Gerding, Attorney at Law, for N.C. Advocates for Justice.

John F. Carella, Staff Attorney, for N.C. Advocates for Justice.

Ivy Johnson, Attorney at Law, for N.C. Advocates for Justice.

N. Lorrin Freeman, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 7th of August 2019 by Defendant:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 8th of August 2019."
EXHIBIT 99.2


                       CITIBANK CREDIT CARD MASTER TRUST I

                          SERVICING OFFICER CERTIFICATE

     The undersigned, a duly authorized representative of Citibank (South
Dakota), National Association, as Servicer (the "Bank"), pursuant to a Pooling
and Servicing Agreement dated as of May 29, 1991, as Amended and Restated as of
October 5, 2001 (as amended and supplemented through the date hereof, the
"Agreement"), among the Bank, as Seller and Servicer, Citibank (Nevada),
National Association, as Seller, and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as
Trustee (the "Trustee"), does hereby certify that:

     1. The Bank is, as of the date hereof, the Servicer under the Agreement.
Capitalized terms used in this Certificate have their respective meanings as set
forth in the Agreement.

     2. The undersigned is a Servicing Officer who is duly authorized pursuant
to the Agreement to execute and deliver this Certificate to the Trustee.

     3. A review of the activities of the Servicer during the calendar year
ended December 31, 2005 and of its performance under the Agreement was conducted
under my supervision.

     4. Based on such review, the Servicer has, to the best of my knowledge,
performed in all material respects its obligations under the Agreement
throughout such year and no default in the performance of such obligations has
occurred or is continuing except as set forth in paragraph 5 below.

     5. The following is a description of each default in the performance of the
Servicer's obligations under the provisions of the Agreement known to me to have
been made by the Servicer during the year ended December 31, 2005, which
description sets forth in detail (i) the nature of each such default, (ii) the
action taken, if any, by the Servicer to remedy each such default and (iii) the
current status of each such default:

                                      None.


     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this certificate this
8th day of March, 2006.


                                          /s/ Susan J. Sexton
                                          ___________________________
                                          Susan J. Sexton
                                          Servicing Officer
STATE of North Carolina v. Joe Willard WILLIAMSON, Jr.

No. 187P19

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 11, 2019

Joe Willard Williamson, Jr., for Williamson, Joe Willard (Jr.).

Lisa B. Finkelstein, Assistant Attorney General, N. Lorrin Freeman, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

*161***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the notice of appeal from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, filed by Defendant on the 20th of May 2019 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-30 (substantial constitutional question), the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the notice of appeal is

"Dismissed Ex Mero Motu by order of the Court in conference, this the 11th of June 2019."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 20th of May 2019 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 11th of June 2019."
James Flint LEE, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

WD 80779

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

ORDER FILED: August 28, 2018

Melissa A. Featherston, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.

Robert J. Bartholomew, Jr., Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.

Before Division One: Thomas H. Newton, Presiding Judge, Cynthia L. Martin, Judge and Gary D. Witt, Judge

**ORDER**

Per curiam:

*917James Lee ("Lee") appeals the denial of his motion for post-conviction relief under Rule 24.035 by the Circuit Court of Clay County, Missouri following an evidentiary hearing. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).
#### Denise Cresci, Appellant, v New York City Industrial Development Agency, Respondent, et al., Defendants.

[718 NYS2d 873]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutcherson, J.), dated August 13, 1999, which granted the respondent’s motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The factors to be considered in deciding if leave to serve a late notice of claim should be granted are whether the movant demonstrated a reasonable excuse for the delay, whether the municipality acquired actual knowledge of the essential facts constituting the claim within 90 days after the claim arose or a reasonable time thereafter, and whether the municipality’s opportunity to investigate and defend against the claim was substantially prejudiced by the delay *(see, James v City of New York,*242 AD2d 630). Based upon a consideration of these factors, we conclude that the Supreme Court properly exercised its discretion in not allowing the service of a late notice of claim and granting the respondent’s motion to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it. S. Miller, J. P., McGinity, Luciano and Smith, JJ., concur.
SERVED JUNE 23, 2011 

'-::-.i-;TMhNTGF 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION , .N^nRTATIOi' 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS '"'rtf-fllijiOMS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

3 P 2- 23 •I' M ^ ' 

IN THE MATTER OF 

GREENWOOD CHEVROLET 

FAA DOCKET NO. [TO BE ASSIGNED] 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

FDMS NO. FAA-2011-0482 

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF PROCEEDING 

This proceeding (heretofore designated as Case No. 2008WP700205) has been assigned 

to Administrative Law Judge Richard C. Goodwin. All future pleadings and other 

communications regarding this proceeding shall be served on the Judge, the FAA Hearing 

Docket, and the other persons on the attached Service List. 

Tonnie A. Yoder 

Chief Administrative La' 

Attachment - Service List 
FDMS No. FAA-2011-0482 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000' 

ONE COPY 

Houston N. Tuel, Jr., Respondent's Counsel 

Law Offices of Houston Tuel 

1550 Harbor Blvd., Suite 206 

West Sacramento, CA 95691 

TEL: 916-376-0100 

FAX: 916-376-0299 

Lisa J. Toscano, Complainant's Counsel 

Attorney, Office of the Regional Counsel, AWP-7 

Western-Pacific Region 

Federal Aviation Administration 

P.O. Box 92007 

Los Angeles, CA 90009-2007 

TEL: 310-725-7110 

FAX: 310-725-6816 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor, Room El2-320 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2139 Attorney-Advisor 

202-366-5121 Legal Assistant 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

' Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by e)q)edited courier, use tlie following address: 

Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000, 

Washington, DC 20591, Attention: Hearmg Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 

- 2 -
Compensatory arrangements with Non - Management Directors



 Exhibit 10.22 
 Compensatory Arrangements with Non-Management Directors 
 (effective
January 1, 2010) 
  

			
	 Annual Retainer
	  	$35,000
		
	 Additional Annual Retainer for Audit Committee Chair
	  	$10,000
		
	 Additional Annual Retainer for Other Committee Chairs
	  	$7,500
		
	 Board Meeting Attendance Fees
	  	$750 per meeting (applicable to TECO Energy, Inc. and Tampa Electric Company Board meetings)
		
	 Committee Meeting Attendance Fees
	  	$1,500 per meeting
		
	 Restricted Stock
	  	Annual grant of 3,000 shares, which vest in three equal annual installments

 TECO Energy, Inc. also pays for or reimburses directors for their meeting-related expenses.
#### E. L. Phillips *et al. v.*Town of Corinne *et al.*

(No. 7442)

Submitted September 7, 1932.

Decided September 20, 1932.

*E. L. Phillips, Wm. M. Holroyd,*and *R. F. Musgrave,*for relators.

*John R. Pendleton*and *Russell ¡S. Ritz,*for respondents.

*534Litz, Judge:

The relators seek a peremptory writ of mandamus commanding the former council of a defunct municipal corporation to levy taxes upon the property situate within its limits sufficient to satisfy a judgment against it in favor of relator, Robert Bryant.

January 17, 1930, Robert Bryant, an infant, sustained personal injury from an explosion of gasoline in an abandoned gasoline tank in the town of Corinne, Wyoming county, belonging to Guyan Valley Oil Company, a corporation. In an action instituted by him in the circuit court of Wyoming county against the town and Guyan Valley Oil Company to recover damages for his injury, judgment of $1,000.00, in his favor, was rendered on appeal to this court.

June 30, 1931, W. E. Mullins and J. E. Martin as citizens and property owners of Corinne filed their petition in the circuit court of Wyoming county praying for the forfeiture of the charter of the town, under chapter 8, article 2, section 13 of the Code, upon the ground, among others, that it had failed for one year to' exercise its corporate powers and privileges. Judgment was entered in the proceeding by this court May 30, 1932, on an appeal from the circuit court, forfeiting the charter of the municipality for failure of one year to exercise its corporate powers and privileges.

It is now sought to compel those who were nominally recognized as couneilmen of the town at the time of its dissolution which was legally effected to levy taxes on the property within its limits to satisfy the judgment in favor of Bryant.

Whether relators may successfully assert another remedy (a matter not before us), clearly they are not entitled to relief by mandamus. “A mandamus cannot be brought against an officer in his official capacity after .his term of office has ended.” *Dent v. Taylor Court,*45 W. Va. 750, 32 S. E. 250. “A writ of mandamus does not lie against the mayor and couneilmen of a city to compel them to reconvene as a canvassing board and recanvass an election for city recorder, their terms having expired, when mandamus is *535asked.” *Holderman*v. *Schane,*56 W. Va. 11, 48 S. E. 512. “The general rule is that mandamus will not issue to compel anyone other than an officer to perform an official act, and *there must he some one in being having the power and whose duty it is to perform the act.”*38 C. J. 604. Where a municipal corporation has been legally dissolved, mandamus will not lie against its former officials. 1 McQuillan on Corporations, sec. 317; 1 Dillon’s Municipal Corporations (4th Ed.), sec. 170; *Barkley*v. *Levee Commissioners,*93 U. S. 258.

The writ is, therefore, denied.

*Writ denied.*
<PAGE>
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


In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Weston Technologies
Corp. (the "Company") for the quarter ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Yin
Sen Wong, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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, 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:  June 22, 2005


By: /s/ Yin Sen Wong
---------------------------
Yin Sen Wong, Chairman and
Chief Executive Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v James Davis, Appellant.

[719 NYS2d 557]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Jeffrey Atlas, J.), rendered on or about June 30, 1998, unanimously affirmed.

Application by appellant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is *372granted. *(See, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Saunders, 52*AD2d 833.) We have reviewed this record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no non-frivolous points which could be raised on this appeal.

Pursuant to CPL 460.20, defendant has the right to apply for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals by making application to the Chief Judge of that Court and by submitting such application to the Clerk of that Court or to a Justice of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of this Department on reasonable notice to the respondent within thirty (30) days after service of a copy of this order, with notice of entry.

Denial of the application for permission to appeal by the Judge or Justice first applied to is final and no new application may thereafter be made to any other Judge or Justice. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Rosenberger, Tom, Ellerin and Friedman, JJ.
No. 09-9471.

#### David Foster, Petitioner v. Ohio.

559 U.S. 1098, 130 S. Ct. 2384,

176 L. Ed. 2d 777,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3546.

April 26, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the Court of Appeals of Ohio, Hamilton County, denied.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

October 14, 2021

No. 04-21-00307-CV

April Marie FULLER, Billy Don Huston, Cindy Huston, James Record, Mark Alan Record, and 

Robert Dales Moores,

Appellants

v.

MALTSBERGER/STOREY RANCH, LLC, Maltsberger/Storey Ranch Lands, LLC, Storey 

Minerals, Ltd., and Rene R. Barrientos, Ltd.,

Appellees

From the 218th Judicial District Court, La Salle County, Texas

Trial Court No. 20-06-00106-CVL-C

The Honorable Russell Wilson, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Appellants’ third motion for extension of time to file their brief is GRANTED IN PART. 

It is ORDERED that appellants’ brief is due on or before November 23, 2021. No further 

extensions will be granted absent extenuating circumstances.

_________________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 14th day of October, 2021.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
**Exhibit
      31.2**


CERTIFICATION





I,
      James
      F. Smith, Chief Financial Officer, certify that:





1.  I
      have
      reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Aphton Corporation;
      and




2.  Based
      on
      my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
      fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made,
      in
      light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading
      with respect to the period covered by this report.




Date:
      May
      1, 2006




By:
            /s/
                James F. SmithName:
            James
                F. SmithTitle:
            Chief
                Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 99.1




                            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 Easton Technologies Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2003, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Jianjun Zhang, President 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 result of operations of
        the Company.



/s/ Jianjun Zhang
------------------
Jianjun Zhang
President

August 6, 2003