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 Secure Computing Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q/A for the period ending June 30, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John E. McNulty, 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:



(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/ John E. McNulty                            
|John E. McNulty                                
|Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
|December 6, 2005
1 ... S eeTe x. R. App . P. 47. 4. 

## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICTOFTEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 2 - 09 - 32 4- CV I N R E CL I F T ON D E W AY NE HA R VI N R E L AT OR

----- ----- -- OR I GI NALP R OCE E DI NG

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

### M E M ORANDU M OP I NI ON 1

----- ----- -- T h e c o u r t h a s c o n s id e r e d r e la t o r ’s p e t it io n f o r w r it o f m a n d a m u s a n d is oft he op i n i o n t hatt he pet i t i on s houl d be di sm i ss ed as m oot . Accor di ngl y, rel a to r’ s p e ti ti o n for w ri t of m a n d a m u s i s d i sm i ss e d as m o o t.
P E R CU R I AM P A N E L : D A U P H IN O T , L IV IN G S T O N , a n d G A R D N E R , J J . DEL I VERE D: Oct ob e r7, 2009
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 eLinear, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-QSB/A  for  the quarter ended March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Kevan M Casey, Chief
Executive  Officer,  President  and Principal Accounting 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  to  the  best  of  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.



____________________________________
Kevan M. Casey,
Chief Executive Officer, President and Principal
Accounting Officer
June 13, 2003


     A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to eLinear, Inc. and will be retained by eLinear, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



<PAGE>
#### Zimmerman, Appellant, v. Sanderson Bros. Steel Co., Respondent.

*(Supreme Court, General Term, Fourth Department.*

May 2, 1890.)

Ho opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs.
#### O’HARA, Respondent, v. CHAPMAN et al., Appellants.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

April, 1896.)

Action by Hugh O’Hara against Aaron F. Chapman and George W. Storms.

No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.
#### In the Matter of Irving Wallins, as Executor of Sam Wallins, Deceased.

Present — Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Boomer, Lawton and Schnepp, JJ.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-8548

GREGORY MARSHALL,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION; RICHARD A. LANHAM,

SR.; G. NUTH, Warden; T. PURNELL, Chief of

Security; KAREN WOULDRIDGE, Case Worker; MAJOR

FORD; CAPTAIN WOULDRIDGE, JR.; M. ANDERSON,

Correctional Officer I; C. A. JACKSON, Remedy

Coordinator,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Walter E. Black, Jr., Senior District

Judge. (CA-95-334-B)

Submitted: February 7, 1996 Decided: February 29, 1996

Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gregory Marshall, Appellant Pro Se. Audrey J. S. Carrion, OFFICE

OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2
3

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. Marshall v. Commissioner of Correction, No. CA-95-334-B (D.

Md. Nov. 21, 1995). 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
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF FULTON BANCORP, INC. FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1999
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                             596
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          12,694
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                      2,708
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        100,476
<ALLOWANCE>                                      1,171
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 118,651
<DEPOSITS>                                      74,456
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                381
<LONG-TERM>                                     18,199
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            18
<OTHER-SE>                                      25,597
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 118,651
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  8,235
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  142
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   515
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 8,892
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               3,472
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,543
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            4,349
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      210
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  3,054
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,640
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         993
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       993
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.65
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.64
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.80
<LOANS-NON>                                        234
<LOANS-PAST>                                       215
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   644
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                    989
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   971
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       14
<RECOVERIES>                                         4
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                1,171
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             1,009
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            162


</TABLE>
```
**                    EXHIBIT 32.2** 
```

```
 
```

```
**                    CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER**
```

```
**                         PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**
```

```
**                AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
```

```
 
```

```
    I, Phillip Michael Hardy, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant  to  Section  906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of eLinear, Inc. on Form 10-QSB/A (Second Amendment) for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2004, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such  Form 10-QSB/A fairly  presents in all material respects the financial condition and results  of  operations of eLinear, Inc.
```

```
 
```

```
Date:  April 3, 2006
```

```
 
```

```
 
```

```
 
```

```
By:  __/s/  Phillip Michael Hardy_______________
```

```
        Phillip Michael Hardy
```

```
        Principal Financial and Accounting Officer
```
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Anthony Webb, Appellant.

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Clabby, J.), rendered March 3, 1983, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the law, by reducing the sentence imposed on the defendant’s conviction of criminal possession of stolen property from 2 Vi to 5 years to 2 to 4 years and, as so modified, the judgment is affirmed.

The comments of the prosecutor during his opening did not deprive the defendant of a fair trial *(see, People v Johnson,*125 AD2d 701 [decided herewith]). The defendant’s sentence of 2 *Vi*to 5 years for criminal possession of stolen property exceeded the legal maximum for an E felony and must be reduced (Penal Law § 70.06 [3] [e]; [4] [b]; CPL 470.15, 420.20). Niehoff, J. P., Weinstein, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit      32.1**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE      SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

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

| /s/                Pak King Diu                      |
|------------------------------------------------------|
| Ms.                Pak King Diu                      |
| President                and Chief Financial Officer |
| December                3, 2007                      |
##### 



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
  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and3.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Date:      April 2, 2007
    By:
    /s/ ROBERT L. BINTLIFFRobert L. BintliffChief Financial Officer
and Principal Accounting Officer
# C_2021005EN.01000501.xml

| 7.1.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 5/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.1.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 5/5

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10035 — Burnam Parties/Kroenke Parties/SMG/Cascade Investment/StorageMart)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 5/05)

On 21 December 2020, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32020M10035. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32020M10035. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Ann M. Belaska, Appellant, v New York State Department of Law et al., Respondents. Workers’ Compensation Board, Respondent.

[946 NYS2d 904]

*1253Peters, P.J.

Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed December 6, 2010, which ruled that claimant’s injury did not arise out of her employment and denied her claim for workers’ compensation benefits.

aimant, a clerk for the Department of Law, sustained injuries to her chest, neck and right shoulder after she was involved in an altercation with a fellow passenger on the shuttle bus ride to a satellite parking lot in September 2009. Subsequently, claimant sought workers’ compensation benefits for her physical injuries, as well as for consequential posttraumatic stress disorder. The State Insurance Fund, as the workers’ compensation carrier for the employer, controverted the claim. Ultimately, the Workers’ Compensation Board denied the claim, finding that the injuries did not arise out of claimant’s employment. Claimant now appeals.

We affirm. Injuries stemming from an assault which arose in the course of employment are presumed to have arisen out of the employment unless substantial evidence is presented that the assault was motivated by purely personal animosity *(see Matter of Rosen v First Manhattan Bank,*84 NY2d 856, 857 [1994]; *Matter of Wadsworth v K-Mart Corp.,*72 AD3d 1244, 1244-1245 [2010]; *Matter of Turner v F.J.C. Sec. Servs.,*306 AD2d 649, 649 [2003]). Here, claimant testified that, at the end of the bus ride to her car after work, a passenger tried to exit before claimant and she told the passenger to wait for her because of her disabilities. When that passenger became frustrated because claimant was not getting off the bus fast enough, a verbal altercation ensued which then became physical, leading to claimant’s injuries. Notably, claimant testified that she had never before met the person who allegedly assaulted her. Thus, we find that substantial evidence supports the Board’s determination that the assault on claimant arose from personal hostilities unrelated to her employment *(see Matter of Perez v Victory Motor Inn, 2*AD3d 963, 964 [2003]; *Matter of Turner v F.J.C. Sec. Servs.,*306 AD2d at 650; *see also Matter of Wadsworth v K-Mart Corp.,*72 AD3d at 1245). We have examined claimant’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing.

Spain, Malone Jr., Kavanagh and Garry, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
# C_2021130EN.01000101.xml

| 14.4.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 130/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.4.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 130/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.9221 — CMA CGM/CEVA)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 130/01)

On 6 February 2019, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32019M9221. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32019M9221. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
#### Prescott Davis v. B. R. Wilson et al.

If a petition for *certiorari*state a case which shows that the plaintiff had no legal defense, it is proper to dismiss the petition.

Where the petition showed that a note, payable to H. or bearer, was transferred, for a valuable consideration, by delivery before due, it matters not if the payee indorsed it after due, so far as the plea of failure of consideration is concerned. (Paschal’s Dig., Art. 221, Note 284.)

*137Appeal from Wood. The ease was tried before Hon. Charles A. Frazer, one of the district judges.

As the case turned upon the demurrer to the petition, the statement of the court in regard to the facts is quité sufficient.

*Winston Banks,*for appellant.

*J. H. Dearborn,*for appellee.

Morrill, C. J.

—Wilson having obtained a judgment against Davis, as maker, and one Herndon, as indorser, of a promissory note executed on the 25th February, 1857, payable to Eeuben Herndon or bearer, calling for $25, due 25th December, 1857, before a justice of the peace, the defendant, Davis, applied to the district judge for a *certiorari,*whereby the proceedings of the magistrate were brought before the district court. The legal sufficiency of the petition was objected to by the plaintiff, Wilson, and the objection sustained by the judge, and the decision of the judge thereon is before us and assigned as error.

The petitioner alleges that .it was proved that the note was indorsed by Herndon and delivered to Wilson after it became due; that it was also proved by Herndon^ who became a witness at the instance of Wilson, and against the wishes of Davis; that Herndon had made a donation of the note to his son, who had traded it to Wilson in consideration of certain goods, and after it became due that Herndon indorsed it.

It nowhere appears that it was not assigned before it became due, and as the law presumes that it was assigned on the day of its execution, when in the possession of a third party and indorsed without date or payable to bearer, the petition was demurrable. But as the maker of the note, in his petition, admits that it was proved that the note was passed to the plaintiff for value received before it became *138due, it being payable to bearer, the only effect that an indorsement thereof by the payee could have would be to make the payee liable by the indorsement, but would not change the liability of the maker in any respect. Hence, the defense of want of consideration could not be admitted, and the judge did not err in so deciding.

Judgment aeeibmed.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Arthur Niebergall, Appellant.

*833We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf. People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Mollen, P. J., Bracken, Lawrence and Hooper, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 99.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO  18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 (as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002), I, the undersigned Chief Financial Officer of Precis, Inc. (the
"Company"), hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Company for the year period ended December 31, 2002 (the "Report") fully
complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

|Date: March 28, 2003 |  | /s/ DINO ELIOPOULOSChief Financial Officer
|-------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------

---

QuickLinks