alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT NO. 32.1
Form 10-QSB
Parallel Technologies, Inc.
File No. 0-19276

          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 Parallel  Technologies,  Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2005 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Glenn A. Little,  Chief  Executive and Chief  Financial  Officer of the Company,
certify  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (1)  the Report fully  complies with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     (2)  the  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
          material respects,  the financial  condition and results of operations
          of the Company.


Date: November 9, 2005                         By: /s/ Glenn A. Little
      ----------------                            ------------------------------
                                                                 Glenn A. Little
                                                     Chief Executive Officer and
                                                         Chief Financial Officer



A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided  to  Parallel  Technologies,  Inc.  and will be  retained  by  Parallel
Technologies,  Inc. and furnished to the Securities  and Exchange  Commission or
its staff upon request.
Stephen Michael BOWERS, Sr., petitioner, v. BOARD OF REGENTS OF the UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA, et al.

No. 12-1360.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 24, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
In re Albert SNOW, petitioner.

No. 12-9606.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2013.

Petition for writ of mandamus denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
THIRD QUARTER 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
10-Q.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       9,373,816
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              15,469,972
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                     46,484,219
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                (32,106,887)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                15,469,972
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,100,297
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               718,827
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           4,128,827
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,747,357)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,747,357)
<DISCONTINUED>                               4,903,873
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              1,653,096
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 4,809,612
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    93.31
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    93.31
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 99
                                                                    ----------

          WINTHROP RESIDENTIAL ASSOCIATES III, A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
                           FORM 10-QSB JUNE 30, 1998

Supplementary information required pursuant to section 9.4 of the partnership
agreement:

1.   Statement of Cash Available for Distribution for the three months ended
     June 30, 1998:

        Net Income                                                $      97,000
        Add:   Depreciation and amortization                             45,000
        Less:  Cash to reserves                                        (115,000)
                                                                  -------------
        Cash Available for Distribution                           $      27,000
                                                                  =============
        Distributions allocated to General Partners               $       2,000
                                                                  =============
        Distributions allocated to Limited Partners               $      25,000
                                                                  =============


2.   Fees and other compensation paid or accrued by the Partnership to the
     General Partners, or their affiliates, during the three months ended June
     30, 1998:

     Entity Receiving                Form of
       Compensation                Compensation                      Amount
       ------------                ------------                      ------

     General Partners           Interest in Cash Available
                                  for Distribution                 $ 2,000

     WFC Realty Co., Inc.       Interest in Cash Available
     (Initial Limited Partner)   for Distribution                  $     5





                                   13 of 13
|CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
|-------------------------

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 0F 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of EcoBlu Products, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending June 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), I, Rod H. McKinley, CFO, Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                              
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   
|(2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
|   

|\s\ Rod H. McKinleyRod H. McKinley CFOPrincipal Financial OfficerOctober 13, 2010
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---
AO 450 (Rev. 01/09) Judgment in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

Northern District of Indiana

DAVID A. SCOTT, JR.

Plaintiff(s) 

v. Civil Action No. 2:14-cv-106

UAW SOLIDARITY HOUSE

BOB KING TERMINATED: 09/22/2015

JAMIE LUNA: TERMINATED: 09/22/2015

Defendant(s)

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL ACTION

The court has ordered that (check one):

☐ the Plaintiff(s), recover from the 

Defendant(s) damages in the 

amount of , plus post-judgment interest at the rate of %

☐ the plaintiff recover nothing, the action is dismissed on the merits, and the defendant 

recover costs from the plaintiff .

X Other: Judgment is entered in favor of Defendant UAW Solidarity House and against

Plaintiff David A. Scott, Jr.

This action was (check one):

☐ tried to a jury with Judge 

presiding, and the jury has rendered a verdict.

☐ tried by Judge 

without a jury and the above decision was reached.

X decided by Judge Jon E. DeGuilio on a Motion for Summary Judgment 

DATE: 10/31/2017 ROBERT TRGOVICH, CLERK OF COURT

by /s/Jason Schrader 

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

USDC IN/ND case 2:14-cv-00106-JD document 108 filed 10/31/17 page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

HAMMOND DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) No. 2:13 CR 11 

)

CHRISTIAN P. AUSTIN )

ACCEPTANCE OF PLEA OF GUILTY,

 ADJUDICATION OF GUILTY AND

CONFIRMATION OF SENTENCING HEARING

Pursuant to the Findings and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge

(DE # 13), to which the defendant has waived objection, and subject to this court’s

consideration of the Plea Agreement pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(3), the Magistrate

Judge’s findings are now ADOPTED, defendant’s plea of guilty to the offense charged in

Count 1 of the Indictment is now hereby ACCEPTED, and defendant is adjudged guilty of

that offense. Defendant and his counsel shall appear before the undersigned for sentencing

on Monday, February 24, 2014, at 10:15 a.m.

The court reminds counsel for the parties that within ten days after receipt of the final

presentence report and addendum, each must file a sentencing memorandum with the court,

opposing counsel, and the probation office which may contain information relevant to the

§ 3553(a) sentencing factors, any requests for a variance from or a particular sentence within

the guidelines sentencing range, any request by the government for a departure pursuant to

§5K1.1 and §3553(e), plus any other mitigating or aggravating circumstances the parties want

the court to consider. These filings are mandatory because they are helpful to the court in

determining an appropriate sentence for defendant and also because they eliminate any
surprises at the sentencing hearing. It appears that the parties have complied with this

obligation.

 Within ten days after the probation office receives the parties’ sentencing

memoranda, the probation office will file with the court and provide to counsel for the

government and the defendant a summary report which contains the advisory guidelines

sentencing range calculation, the relevant statutory sentencing provisions, the conclusions as

to the applicable § 3553(a) sentencing factors, and all other mitigating or aggravating

circumstances the court is to consider in determining a just sentence for the defendant. 

SO ORDERED.

Date: February 18, 2014

s/James T. Moody 

JUDGE JAMES T. MOODY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Angeles
Income Properties, Ltd. II 1998 Third Quarter 10-QSB and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such 10-QSB filing.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000711642
<NAME> ANGELES INCOME PROPERTIES, LTD. II
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                           2,057
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                          36,623
<DEPRECIATION>                                  25,504
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  15,469
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                         18,050
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     (3,575)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    15,469
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 5,620
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 5,498
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,081
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       141
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.40<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Registrant has an unclassified balance sheet.
<F2>Multiplier is 1.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
**outside counsel expertise**

**law firm name:**

**completed by:***(Authorized Firm Representative)*

**title:****date:**

**areas of expertise:  *(check all applicable areas of law below in which the firm has expertise available to the FDIC)***

**FORMCHECKBOX asset-based lending & restructures**

 FORMCHECKBOX **banking regulations**

**FORMCHECKBOX bankruptcy – personal/consumer**

**FORMCHECKBOX bankruptcy – commercial**

**FORMCHECKBOX business law**

**FORMCHECKBOX capital markets & securitizations/credit card transactions**

**FORMCHECKBOX collections**

**FORMCHECKBOX commodities/futures**

**FORMCHECKBOX complex negotiations***(e.g., Multi-party, Foreign Governments)*

**FORMCHECKBOX consumer compliance issues**

**FORMCHECKBOX corporate governance**

**FORMCHECKBOX derivatives, securities, other financial instruments**

**FORMCHECKBOX e-commerce, payment systems, ucc**

**FORMCHECKBOX employee benefits/erisa/compensation agreements/pension funds**

**FORMCHECKBOX environmental issues**

**FORMCHECKBOX fdic special issues/powers**

**FORMCHECKBOX federal contracts**

**FORMCHECKBOX fidelity bond claims**

**FORMCHECKBOX intellectual property**

**FORMCHECKBOX international arbitration**

**FORMCHECKBOX international commerce/trade**

**FORMCHECKBOX international practice***(specify country or countries)*

**FORMCHECKBOX litigation – appellate**

**FORMCHECKBOX litigation – general**

**FORMCHECKBOX litigation – professional liability**

**FORMCHECKBOX litigation – real estate**

**FORMCHECKBOX mergers & acquisitions**

**FORMCHECKBOX mortgage loan fraud**

**FORMCHECKBOX real estate – foreclosure/deed-in-lieu**

**FORMCHECKBOX real estate – landlord/tenant**

**FORMCHECKBOX real estate – tax-exempt bonds**

**FORMCHECKBOX real estate – title insurance**

**FORMCHECKBOX real estate – transactions**

**FORMCHECKBOX real estate – zoning/land use**

**FORMCHECKBOX tax – federal**

**FORMCHECKBOX tax – state**

**FORMCHECKBOX other***(specify)*
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA 

HAMMOND DIVISION 

CYNTHIA LUDWIG, ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiff, ) 

 ) 

 vs. ) Civil Action No.: 3:13-cv-01123 

 ) 

CAROLYN COLVIN, ) 

Acting Commissioner of Social ) 

Security, ) 

) 

 Defendant. ) 

 

ORDER 

 This matter is before the Court on the Plaintiff’s Attorney’s Motion for an Award of Attorneys 

Fees Under 42 U.S.C. 406(b), filed by the Plaintiff on August 25, 2016. (DE #38.) After due 

consideration, and noting that the Government does not object to the motion or amount requested (see DE 

#43),1

 the Court GRANTS the motion. 

 IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED by the Court that the 

Defendant, Carolyn Colvin, in her capacity as Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, is 

hereby directed to pay Plaintiff’s attorney fees in the amount of $18,052.75. 

 Upon receipt of the $18,052.75 fee, Plaintiff’s counsel is ordered to refund the amount received 

under EAJA ($5,084.82) to Plaintiff. 

Dated: October 25, 2016 /s/Rudy Lozano 

 Judge, United States District Court 

 

1

 The Government having inadvertently failed to file a response by the Court’s deadline, filed a Motion 

for Leave to File Response Instanter (DE #42). That motion is GRANTED.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 94 (Tuesday, May 16, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 26031]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11992]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-5207-8]


Good Neighbor Environmental Board

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency gives notice of a 
meeting of the Good Neighbor Environmental Board.
    The Good Neighbor Environmental Board was created by the Enterprise 
for the Americas Initiative Act of 1992. An Executive Order delegates 
implementing authority to the Administrator of EPA. The Board is 
responsible for providing advice to the President and the Congress on 
environmental and infrastructure issues and needs within the States 
contiguous to Mexico in order to improve the quality of life of persons 
residing on the United States side of the border. The statute calls for 
the Board to have representatives from U.S. Government agencies; the 
governments of the States of Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas; 
and private organizations with expertise on environmental and 
infrastructure problems along the southwest border. The Board meets 
twice annually. The Board is required to submit an annual report to the 
President and the Congress. The draft annual report will be discussed 
at the meeting.
    Members of the public are invited to provide oral and/or written 
comments to the Board. Time will be provided at the meeting to obtain 
input from the public.

DATES: The Board will meet on June 13-14, 1995. The Board will meet on 
June 13 from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. and on June 14 from 8:30 a.m. to Noon.

ADDRESSES: Windmill Inn, 4250 North Campbell Avenue, Tucson, Arizona 
85718-6580. The meeting is open to the public, with limited seating on 
a first-come, first-served basis.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. Robert Hardaker, Designated Federal Officer, U.S. EPA, Office of 
Cooperative Environmental Management, telephone 202-260-2477.

    Dated: May 3, 1995.
Robert Hardaker,
Designated Federal Officer, Good Neighbor Environmental Board.
[FR Doc. 95-11992 Filed 5-15-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-M
Exhibit 32.1   CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL 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 accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of  International Industrial Enterprises for the year ended December 31, 2007, I certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge, that:  (1)the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of International Industrial Enterprises for the year ended December 31, 2007 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 Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2007, fairly presents in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of International Industrial Enterprises.  By:/s/ David RogersName:David RogersTitle:Principal Executive Officer,
and DirectorDate:February 20, 2009By:/s/ David RogersName:David RogersTitle:Principal Financial OfficerDate:February 20, 2009
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

BANDIDO’S, INC., )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CAUSE NO. 1:15-CV-140-JVB-SLC

)

DUPONT PLACE JM, LLC, )

)

Defendant. )

OPINION AND ORDER

This case was removed to this Court from the Allen Superior Court by Defendant Dupont

Place JM, LLC, based on diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). (DE 1). The

Notice of Removal alleges that Plaintiff Bandido’s, Inc., is an Indiana corporation with its

principal place of business in Indiana, and that the “sole member of [Defendant Dupont Place

JM, LLC] is The Jeffrey A. Lehmann and Monica S. Lehmann Revocable Trust dated January

23, 2001, thus making it a citizen of California.” (DE 1 at ¶¶ 4, 5). 

The Notice of Removal, however, is inadequate with respect to Defendant. A trust’s

citizenship is determined by the citizenship of its trustee(s). Grede v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon, 598

F.3d 899, 901 (7th Cir. 2010); May Dep’t Stores Co. v. Fed. Ins. Co., 305 F.3d 597, 599 (7th Cir.

2002). Yet the Notice of Removal fails to state the identity and citizenship of the trustee(s). As

such, it is unclear on what basis Defendant asserts that it is a citizen of California. 

Accordingly, Defendant is ORDERED to supplement the record by filing an amended

notice of removal on or before June 22, 2015, properly alleging the citizenship of Defendant
Dupont Place JM, LLC.1

 

SO ORDERED.

Enter for this 8th day of June, 2015.

s/ Susan Collins 

Susan Collins

United States Magistrate Judge

1 Defendant is reminded that with respect to individuals, “it is the citizenship, not the residency, of

individual persons that matters for diversity jurisdiction.” Bou-Matic, LLC v. R.J. Fullwood & Bland, Ltd., No. 08-

cv-441-bbc, 2008 WL 4691831, at *2 (W.D. Wis. Oct. 22, 2008). “An individual is a citizen of the state in which he

is domiciled, that is, where he has a permanent home and principal establishment, and to which he has the intention

of returning whenever he is absent therefrom.” Id. (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).

2
Brandon Shane GRAVATT, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 13-6888.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 18, 2013.

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