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 Willowtree Advisor, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I, Cynthia Allison, 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated this 4th day of May, 2006.



| | CYNTHIA ALLISON                                    
| | ---------------------------------------------------
| | Cynthia Allison                                    
| | Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer













---
Imad CHERIF, Appellant, v. Ghizlane HOUARY, Appellee.

No. 4D18-2798

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[March 21, 2019]

**DECISION WITHOUTPUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
# C_2016314EN.01003201.xml

| 29.8.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 314/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.8.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 314/32

---

Action brought on 29 June 2016 — Tillotts Pharma v EUIPO — Ferring (XENASA)

(Case T-362/16)

(2016/C 314/44)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Tillotts Pharma AG (Rheinfelden, Switzerland) (represented by: M. Douglas, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Ferring BV (Hoofddorp, Netherlands)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Applicant of the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘XENASA’ — Application for registration No 11 920 055

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Procedure before EUIPO

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 April 2016 in Case R 3264/2014-4

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Plea in law

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
Exhibit 32.2

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 Quarterly Report of Horizon Lines Holding Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the
period ending March 25, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, M. Mark Urbania, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial 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:



|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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/ M. MARK URBANIA                              
|M. Mark Urbania                                  
|Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|(Principal Financial Officer)                    
|                                                 

April 26, 2007
Order entered April 15, 2021

In The 

### Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

No. 05-21-00198-CV

IN RE PAUL A. PROP ES, JR., Relator

Original Proceeding from the 199th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 199-82537-08

ORDER Before Justices Molberg, Reichek, and Smith

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, relator’s petition f or writ of

mandamus is DENIED

.

/s/ CRAIG SMITH JUSTICE
Roy Anthony VANCE Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-0641

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 11, 2019

Affirmed.
Scott GATES, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-0494

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 27, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
The State of TexasAppellee/s



# Fourth Court of **Appeals**

**San Antonio, Texas**

April 11, 2014

N o. 04

- 13

- 00844

- CR

Mathew Ray GOMEZ

, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the County Court At Law No 2, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court No. CCL

- 12

- 1963

Honorable Frank Follis, Judge Presidi ng



### ORDER

The Court Reporter ’ s Notification of Late Record is hereby GRANTED. The reporter ’ s

record is due April 30, 2014.

_________________________________ Marialyn Barnard, Justice

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

court on this 11th day of April, 2014

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
Exhibit 99.1



CERTIFICATION OF THE 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 of Harbor Global Company Ltd. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Stephen G.
Kasnet, 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 the best of my knowledge:



(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section
13(a) 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.



Dated: May 6, 2003



By:

/s/    STEPHEN G.
KASNETStephen G. Kasnet Chief Executive Officer




This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
EX PARTE A.L.M.

(In re H.R.G. v. A.L.M.)

2160728

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

July 26, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. denied.
THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE 

CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING 

EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR. 

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA 

In The Court of Appeals 

The State, Respondent, 

v. 

Jose Martin Guzman-Pliego, Appellant. 

Appellate Case No. 2023-000263 

Appeal From Pickens County 

Perry H. Gravely, Circuit Court Judge 

Unpublished Opinion No. 2024-UP-334 

Submitted September 1, 2024 – Filed October 2, 2024 

APPEAL DISMISSED 

Appellate Defender Jessica M. Saxon, of Columbia, and 

Jose Martin Guzman-Pliego, pro se, both for Appellant. 

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Senior 

Assistant Deputy Attorney General Mark Reynolds 

Farthing, both of Columbia, for Respondent. 

PER CURIAM: Dismissed after consideration of Appellant's pro se brief and 

review pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Counsel's motion to 

be relieved is granted. 
 

 

APPEAL DISMISSED.1 

KONDUROS, GEATHERS, and VINSON, JJ., concur. 

1 We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
D.M. v. MORGAN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES

2160245

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

August 2, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Case 3:03-cv-03050-B Document 266 Filed 09/23/05 Page 1 of 3 PageID 4610
Case 3:03-cv-03050-B Document 266 Filed 09/23/05 Page 2 of 3 PageID 4611
Case 3:03-cv-03050-B Document 266 Filed 09/23/05 Page 3 of 3 PageID 4612
Nagy FARAG, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Helana FARAG n/k/a Helana Mansi, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-4725

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 17, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUTPUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 6 (Friday, January 10, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1980-1981]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-00278]

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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army

[Docket ID: USA-2024-HQ-0011]

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

AGENCY: Department of the Army, Department of Defense (DoD).

ACTION: 30-Day information collection notice.

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

SUMMARY: The DoD has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) for clearance the following proposal for collection of 
information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act.

[[Page 1981]]

DATES: Consideration will be given to all comments received by February 
10, 2025.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and recommendations for the proposed 
information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of 
this notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular 
information collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day Review--
Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Reginald Lucas, (571) 372-7574, 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Exchange Customer 
Satisfaction Surveys; OMB Control Number 0702-0130.
    Type of Request: Revision.
    Number of Respondents: 23,600.
    Responses per Respondent: 1.
    Annual Responses: 23,600.
    Average Burden per Response: 2 minutes.
    Annual Burden Hours: 787.
    Needs and Uses: The information collection requirement is necessary 
to provide the Exchange with holistic views of customers' shopping 
experiences. These surveys aid the Exchange's marketing directorate to 
address the effectiveness of providing goods and services and the 
quality of the Exchange mobile app and online shopping functionality, 
design, and use to meet with the patron's wants and desires. 
Respondents are authorized customers of the Army and Air Force Exchange 
Service, who voluntarily provide opinions or comments regarding their 
recent shopping experience at an Exchange facility or use of the 
Exchange on-line or mobile app. The survey provides valuable data used 
to enhance the customer's experience. If the Exchange does not receive 
data through these surveys, the Exchange's efforts to improve the 
customer shopping experience would not be as effective, efficient, or 
useful. Customer information is vital to the efficient and effective 
maintenance and improvement of the Exchange operations. The survey does 
not collect PII data.
    Affected Public: Individuals or households.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.
    DOD Clearance Officer: Mr. Reginald Lucas.

    Dated: January 3, 2025.
Aaron T. Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2025-00278 Filed 1-8-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6001-FR-P
```
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-6062
JULIAN EDWARD ROCHESTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SALLIE C. SMITH, Clerk of Court for Oconee County, Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. William B. Traxler, Jr., District Judge. (CA-94-1274-2-21AJ) Submitted: September 20, 1996 Decided: October 3, 1996 Before NIEMEYER, HAMILTON, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Julian Edward Rochester, Appellant Pro Se. Merl Floyd Code, Sr., CODE, WESTON & MOSLEY, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Appellant failed to provide a transcript of the bench trial at which the district court stated the reasons for denying relief. See Fed. R. App. P. 10(b)(2); Powell v. Estelle , 959 F.2d 22, 26 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 506 U.S. 1025 (1992). Moreover, Appellant has failed to state a substantial claim justifying preparation of a transcript at government expense. 28 U.S.C. § 753(f) (1994).Consequently, we affirm the district court's order. We deny Appellant's motion for an extension of time to perfect his appeal. 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
# C_2016098EN.01005101.xml

| 14.3.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 98/51 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.3.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 98/51

---

Action brought on 7 January 2016 — Awg Allgemeine Warenvertriebs v OHIM — Takko (Southern Territory 23o48’25"S)

o

(Case T-6/16)

(2016/C 098/66)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Awg Allgemeine Warenvertriebs GmbH (Köngen, Germany) (represented by: T. Sambuc, lawyer)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Takko Holding GmbH (Telgte, Germany)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Awg Allgemeine Warenvertriebs GmbH

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘Southern Territory 23o48’25"S’ –Community trade mark No 10 099 554

Trade mark at issue:

o

Procedure before OHIM: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Procedure before OHIM:

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 10 November 2015 in Case R 735/2015-4

Contested decision:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | amend the contested decision by declaring that the application for the invalidity of Community word mark 10 099 554 Southern Territory 23o48’25"S is rejected. |
| --- | --- |

—

amend the contested decision by declaring that the application for the invalidity of Community word mark 10 099 554 Southern Territory 23o48’25"S is rejected.

o

Plea in law

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 53(1)(a) read in conjunction with Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 53(1)(a) read in conjunction with Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 1 9

- 1041 V

UNPUBLISHED

RENEE BROCKMAN

,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Chief Special Master Corcoran

Filed: August 12, 2021

Special Processing Unit (SPU);
Entitlement; Tetanus

- Diphtheria

Acellular Pertussis (Tda p) ; Brachial

Neuritis

.

Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC , for

Petitioner.

Traci R. Patton , U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

RULIING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

On July 18, 2019

, Renee Brockman filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa

- 10, et seq

. 2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that as a result of the tetanus

- diphtheria

- acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccine she received on December 11, 2017, she suffered brachial neuritis within the timeframe set forth in the Vaccine Injury Table . Petit ion at Preamble

. Petitioner further alleges that she received the vaccine in the United States, that she suffered the residual effects of her injury for more than six months, and that neither she nor any other party has filed a civil action or received compensation for his injury . Petition

at 1, ¶¶ 2, 11

- 12. T he case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

1 Because this unpublished Decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the E

Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). This means the Decision will be available to anyone with access to the

internet. In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact
medical or other information, the disclosure o f which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such material from public access.

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99

- 660, 100 Stat. 3755

. Hereinafter, for ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subpara graph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012 ).2

On August 11, 2021

, R espondent filed a combined Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer (“Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer”) in which he concedes that Petitioner is entitled to

compens ation in this case

. Rule 4(c) Report and Proffer a t 3

- 4. Specifically, Respondent has “concluded that [P]etitioner has met the criteria for a Table claim” of brachial neuritis.

Id

. In view of R espondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that Petitioner

is entitle d to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Commission on Civil Rights

# AGENCY:

Commission on Civil Rights.

# ACTION:

Notice; revision of meeting date.

# SUMMARY:

                        The Commission on Civil Rights published a notice in the                         **Federal Register**                         concerning a meeting of the Iowa Advisory Committee. The meeting on Thursday, January 9, 2025, at 3:00 p.m. (CT) is now scheduled for the following Thursday, January 16, 2025, at 3:00 p.m. (CT). The Zoom meeting details are still:                         *https://www.zoomgov.com/​webinar/​register/​WN_​kDEmPTAGSf6SRFIkdrEuzA*                         (Registration Link), USA Phone Toll Free (Audio Only) 1-833-435-1820; Meeting ID: 161 597 4723. The notice is in the                         **Federal Register**                         of Monday, October 21, 2024, in FR Doc. 2024-24268, in the third column of page 84112, and the first column of 84113.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Mallory Trachtenberg, 202-809-9618,                         *mtrachtenberg@usccr.gov*.                    

Dated: January 3, 2025.

David Mussatt,

Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.

[FR Doc. 2025-00311 Filed 1-8-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA §

§

VS. § NO. 3-04-CR-0094-D 

§ NO. 3-05-CV-2094-D 

JOSE RICARDO VASQUEZ-DIAZ §

§

Defendant. §

ORDER

After conducting a review of the pleadings, files and records in this case, and the Findings

and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge in accordance with 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1), I am of the opinion that the Findings and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge are

correct and they are hereby accepted as the Findings of the Court. 

SO ORDERED.

December 5, 2005.

_________________________________

SIDNEY A. FITZWATER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 Case 3:04-cr-00094-D Document 41 Filed 12/05/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 96
#### Cleo Drew, Otto Drew, and Wesley Price, *Plaintiffs in Error,*v. State of Florida, *Defendant in Error.*

Division B.

Decision Filed December 15, 1927.

*Michler & Michler,*for Plaintiffs in Error;

*Fred H. Davis,*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 order 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 order; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the *1138said order of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.
# C_2021502EN.01002301.xml

| 13.12.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 502/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.12.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 502/23

---

Judgment of the General Court of 20 October 2021 — St. Hippolyt v EUIPO — Raisioaqua (Vital like nature)

(Case T-351/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark Vital like nature - Earlier EU figurative mark VITAL - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2021/C 502/35)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: St. Hippolyt Holding GmbH (Dielheim, Germany) (represented by: M. Gail, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: V. Ruzek, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Raisioaqua Oy (Raisio, Finland) (represented by: K. Rantala, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 March 2020 (Case R 1279/2019-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Raisioaqua and St. Hippolyt Holding.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders St. Hippolyt Holding GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders St. Hippolyt Holding GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 247, 27.7.2020.

---