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





**PURSUANT
      TO 18 U.S.C. 1350**




Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act
      of 2002, each of the undersigned officers of Solution Technology International,
      Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to such
      officer’s knowledge, that:





The
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the three months ended September 30, 2007
      (the “Form 10-QSB”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of
      Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and information
      contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the
      financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:
                November 15, 2007
            
            /s/
                Dan L. JonsonDan
                L. JonsonChief
                Executive OfficerDate:
                November 15, 2007
            
            /s/
                Michael PollackMichael
                PollackChief
                Financial Officer




The
      foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350,
      as
      adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and is not
      being filed as a separate disclosure document.
#### Loretta T. Broughal, Appellant, v Richard S. Moss, Respondent.

[941 NYS2d 881]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals (1), as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Phelan, J.), entered April 6, 2011, as granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that she did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d), and (2) from a judgment of the same court entered April 25, 2011, which, upon the order, is in favor of the defendant and against her dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the appeal from the order is dismissed; and it is further,

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, the complaint is reinstated, the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied, and the order is modified accordingly; and it is further,

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the plaintiff.

The appeal from the intermediate order must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of judgment in the action *(see Matter of Aho,*39 NY2d 241, 248 [1976]). The issues raised on the appeal from the order are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the judgment *(see*CPLR 5501 [a] [1]).

The defendant met his prima facie burden of showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident *(see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys.,*98 NY2d 345 [2002]; *Gaddy v Eyler,*79 NY2d 955, 956-957 [1992]). The defendant established, prima facie, that the alleged injuries to the cervical region of the plaintiffs spine did not constitute a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) *(see Rodriguez v Huerfano,*46 AD3d 794, 795 [2007]), and, in any event, were not caused by the subject accident *(cf. Jilani v Palmer,*83 AD3d 786, 787 [2011]; *Gentilella v Board of Educ. of Wantagh Union Free School Dist.,*60 AD3d 629, 629-630 [2009]).

However, in opposition, the plaintiff submitted evidence rais*799ing a triable issue of fact as to whether the alleged injuries to the cervical region of her spine constituted a serious injury under the permanent consequential limitation of use and/or significant limitation of use categories of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) (see *Perl v Meher,*18 NY3d 208, 215-218 [2011]). The plaintiff also submitted evidence raising a triable issue of fact as to whether those alleged injuries were caused by the subject accident *(id.*at 218-219; *see Jaramillo v Lobo,*32 AD3d 417, 418 [2006]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have denied the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Angiolillo, J.P., Florio, Leventhal and Lott, JJ., concur. [Prior Case History: 2011 NY Slip Op 30956(U).]
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals 30203 29-OCT-2013 10:32 AM
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 USC
SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Medallion Financial Corp. (the Company) for the quarter ending September 30, 2017 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 USC Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on 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 as of
the dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.



|                                     |  |                   
|------------------------------------ |  | ------------------
|By:                                  |  | /s/ Alvin Murstein
|Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

Date: November 9, 2017
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 Fisher Communications, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Form 10-Q), I, Joseph L. Lovejoy, 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 Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: November 3, 2010



/s/ Joseph L. LovejoyJoseph L. LovejoySenior Vice President andChief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2096 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

105th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2096

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of 
   documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the 
                coastwise trade for the vessel FOILCAT.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 20, 1998

 Mr. Inouye (for himself and Mr. Akaka) introduced the following bill; 
    which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, 
                      Science, and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of 
   documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the 
                coastwise trade for the vessel FOILCAT.

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

SECTION 1. LIMITED DURATION WAIVER OF COASTWISE TRADE LAWS.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding sections 12106 and 12108 of title 
46, United States Code, section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Act (46 
U.S.C. App. 289), and section 27 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1920 (46 
U.S.C. App. 883), the Secretary of Transportation may issue a 
certificate of documentation with appropriate endorsement for 
employment in the coastwise trade for the vessel FOILCAT (United States 
Official Number 1063892).
    (b) Termination.--The certificate issued under subsection (a) shall 
be in effect for the vessel FOILCAT for the period--
            (1) beginning on the date on which the vessel is placed in 
        service to initiate a high-speed marine ferry demonstration 
        project; and
            (2) ending on the last day of the 36th month beginning 
        after the date on which it became effective under paragraph 
        (1).
                                 <all>
```
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

November 28, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-30360

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

AHMAD R. MUHAMMAD,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Louisiana

USDC No. 3:04-CR-98-ALL

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

Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Ahmad 

R. Muhammad has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief

in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). 

Our independent review of counsel’s brief, Muhammad’s response,

and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. 

Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED,

counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the

APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Grand Forks, North Dakota
 close




            Search small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home People & Locations







Marie-Laure C Reese
                        Location Support Staff

                        




                        
                        Program Support Assistant (Office Automation)
                        Phone: (701) 795-8363
                        
                        
                        Fax: (Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

PETER STROJNIK, Sr.,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.
PASADENA ROBLES ACQUISITION, LLC, DBA Hilton Pasadena,

Defendant

- Appellee. No

. 19

- 56037

D.C. No. 2:19

- cv

- 02067

- AB

- PJW

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Andre Birotte, Jr., District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 7, 2020 * *

Before: TASHIMA, BYBEE
, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Peter Strojnik, Sr. appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing his action alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act
(“ADA”) and state law. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We r eview

de novo a district court’s dismissal for lack of standing. D’Lil v. Best W. Encina

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

APR 15 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 19

- 56037

Lodge & Suites , 538 F.3d 1031, 1035 (9th Cir. 2008). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Strojnik’s ADA claim for lack of
standing because Strojnik failed to demonstrate an intent to return to defendant’s
hotel or that he was deterred from visiting defendant’s hotel

. See Chapman v. Pier

1 Imports (U.S.) I

nc. , 631 F.3d 939, 950 (9th Cir. 2011) (an ADA plaintiff may

establish injury for standing purposes by showing an “inten[t] to return to a
noncompliant accommodation” or that the noncompliant accommodation deterred
the plaintiff from visiting and the plaintiff “plans to visit [the] noncompliant
accommodation in the future”) ; see also Civil Rights Educ. & Enf ’t Ctr. v. Hosp.

Props. Trust , 867 F.3d 1093, 1100 (9th Cir. 2017) ( district courts make “case

- by

case determinations about whethe r a particular plaintiff’s injury is imminent”

(citation omitted))

. The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying St r ojnik leave to

amend because amendment would have been futile. See Gordon v. City of

Oakland , 627 F.3d 1092, 1094 (9th Cir. 2010) (setting forth standard of review and
explaining that leave to amend may be denied if amendment would be futile)

. We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued

in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised f or the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright , 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.
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; cancellation of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

The Commission on Civil Rights published a notice in the **Federal Register** concerning a meeting of the North Dakota Advisory Committee. The meeting scheduled for Thursday, September 2, 2021, at 10:00 a.m. (CT) is cancelled. The notice is in the **Federal Register** of Monday, August 16, 2021, in FR Doc. 2021-17423, in the second and third columns of page 45702.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Evelyn Bohor, (202) 921-2212, *ebohor@usccr.gov.*

Dated: August 24, 2021.

David Mussatt,

Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.

[FR Doc. 2021-18576 Filed 8-27-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>

          This schedule  contains summary financial  information  extracted from
          Pen  Interconnect,  Inc.  June 30, 1998  financial  statements and is
          qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.

</LEGEND>

<CIK>                         0001000266
<NAME>                        Pen Interconnect, Inc.

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS

<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1998

<CASH>                                         994,397
<SECURITIES>                                   350,750
<RECEIVABLES>                                  3,827,019
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (105,089)
<INVENTORY>                                    5,661,634
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               11,362,670
<PP&E>                                         3,873,205
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (1,523,349)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 18,677,178
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          7,515,282
<BONDS>                                        1,091,458
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       47,739
<OTHER-SE>                                     10,776,222
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   18,677,178
<SALES>                                        12,113,556
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               15,220,519
<CGS>                                          9,431,973
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  9,431,973
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               2,225,510
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             703,613
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (247,540)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (21,562)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (225,978)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (225,978)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.05)
        


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32

ITRONICS INC.

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the annual report of Itronics Inc. (theCompany") on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2006 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on April 16, 2007 (the "Report") each of theundersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that to his knowledge:

1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

Date: April 16, 2007                     /S/JOHN W. WHITNEY
                                      John  W. Whitney

                                         President

Date: April 16, 2007                     /S/MICHAEL C. HORSLEY
                                         MichaelC. Horsley

                                         Controller

84
**Exhibit 10.91**

 

**Fourth Amendment to Revolver Promissory Note**

 

**THIS FOURTH AMENDMENT TO PROMISSORY NOTE** datedthis 15th day of October, 2005, is by and among Danzer Industries, Inc. (‘“Borrower”)and Fair Holdings, Inc. (“Fair”), an Ohio corporation. The parties agreeas follows:

 

**Recitals**

 

**WHEREAS**, Borrower and Fair entered into thatcertain Promissory Note dated August 15, 2001, in the principal amount of$1,000,000.00, which was subsequently amended by certain amendments dated September 31,2003 and July 1, 2004, that increased the amount that Borrower may borrowunder the Note to $3,000,000.00 (the original Promissory Note and allamendments thereto being referred to herein as the “Note’); and

 

**WHEREAS**, Fair has agreed to amend the Note inorder to increase to $5,000,000.00 the amount which Borrower may borrow;

 

**WHEREAS**, Fair is willing to amend the Notesubject to the terms herein and subject to the amendment of the Note as hereinprovided;

 

**NOW****THEREFORE**, inconsideration of the premises, and the mutual promises herein contained, theparties agree that the Note shall be, and hereby is, amended as provided hereinand the parties further agree as follows:

 

The principalamount of the Note is hereby increased so that the total amount that can beborrowed under the Note is $5,000,000.

 

All otherterms and conditions contained in the Note, the Security Agreement and Mortgageor other related documents shall remain the same and shall continue in fullforce and effect that are not specifically amended herein and shall continueduring the term of the Note without change, except to reflect the increase inthe amount of the Note and to provide security therefore for entire amount thatmay become due under the Note.

 

**IN WITNESS WHEREOF**, Borrower, and Fair havecaused this Fourth Amendment to Promissory Note to be executed as of the dayfirst written above.

 

 
| **Fair  Holdings, Inc.**        | **Danzer  Industries, Inc.**       |
|--------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|
| ** **                           | ** **                              |
| /s/ Timothy  S. Durham          | ** **                              | /s/ Terry  Whitesell | ** ** |
| **By:  Timothy S. Durham, CEO** | **By:  Terry Whitesell, Chairman** |
|                                      |                                         |  |  |

 

1

----
RYDER SCOTT COMPANY                                           Fax (713) 651-0849
PETROLEUM ENGINEERS
1100 Louisiana  Suite 3800   Houston, Texas 77002-5218  Telephone (713) 651-9191







                      CONSENT OF PETROLEUM ENGINEERING FIRM
                        AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO ANNUAL REPORT


     We consent to the  reference to our name  included in this Annual Report on
Form  10-K405/A for the year ended  December 31, 1997 for Geodyne  Energy Income
Limited Partnership II-C.


                                          //s// Ryder Scott Company
                                                 Petroleum Engineers

                                          RYDER SCOTT COMPANY
                                          PETROLEUM ENGINEERS




Houston, Texas
July 27, 1998