alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-1999
<CASH>                                           1,147
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      131
<ALLOWANCES>                                        40
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,272
<PP&E>                                              33
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   1,406
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              113
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             4
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,289
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,406
<SALES>                                            367
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   430
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,541
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,111)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,111)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,111)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.29)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.29)


</TABLE>
**Exhibit  13.1**

**HOLMES FINANCING (NO. 4) PLC****04167953**

**ABBEY NATIONAL HOUSE   2 TRITON SQUARE, REGENTS PLACE****LONDON NW1 3AN**

**Certification    Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002   (Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States  Code)**

Pursuant to section 906 of    the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350,    chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of the    servicer does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that: 

The Annual Report on Form    20-F for the year ended December 31, 2004 (the “Form 20-F”) of Holmes Financing (No. 4) PLC (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 20-F fairly presents,    in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations    of the Company. 

|                                        |               |
|---------------------------------------------|--------------------|
|                                        |               |
|                                        |               |
| Dated:    June      30, 2005 | /s/ Chris Fielding |
|                                        | Chris Fielding     |

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

----
# Filing Directions to Obtain Employment Authorization and Advance Parole Card Where Adjustment of Status Application is Pending

#### Archived Content

The information on this page is out of date. However, some of the content may still be useful, so we have archived the page.

In February 2011, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) began issuing employment and advance parole authorization on a single card for certain applicants filing an Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status, Form I-485. An applicant may receive this card when he or she files an Application for Employment Authorization, Form I-765, and an Application for Travel Document, Form I-131, concurrently with or after filing Form I-485. If USCIS approves both the Form I-765 and the Form I-131, the applicant may receive one card that will serve as both an employment authorization document and an advance parole document. Through our public engagement channels we have learned our filing instructions for Forms I-131 and I-765 do not allow for these two forms to be filed together if the Form I-485 is still pending. This was not our intent.

If Form I-485 has already been filed and Forms I-765 and I-131 are being filed together, use Form I-765 filing location instructions.  USCIS’ intake operations will process and send the forms together to the appropriate USCIS service center. We have updated the form instructions on our website accordingly for both forms.

For more information about the employment authorization and Advance Parole card, see the related Questions and Answers. 

USCIS encourages applicants to read form filing instructions in their entirety prior to filing their applications. Applicants should be aware that USCIS will not grant advance parole to an individual who is in removal or rescission proceedings.  An individual who is in proceedings needs to present any advance parole request to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Please visit www.uscis.gov for more information about USCIS and its programs, including forms, filing instructions and fee information. Applicants with additional questions can call our USCIS Contact Center at (800) 375-5283.

09/12/2011

0 / 2000To protect your privacy, please do not include any personal information in your feedback. Review our Privacy Policy.
<PAGE> 1
                                                                     EXHIBIT 23

                          CONSENT OF COMPANY COUNSEL

    I hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in Solutia Inc.'s
Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-34561, 333-34587, 333-34589,
333-34591, 333-34593, 333-34683, and 333-35689) of the reference to Solutia's
counsel in Note 6 to the Notes to Financial Statements in Solutia's Form 10-Q
Report for the quarter ended June 30, 1997. In giving this consent I do not
thereby admit that I am within the category of persons whose consent is
required under Section 7 of the Securities Act of 1933.

                                          KARL R. BARNICKOL
                                          General Counsel
                                          Solutia Inc.

Saint Louis, Missouri
September 26, 1997

                                    18
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

We grant Respondent’s request to substitute the warden of Perez’s ***

current prison, rather than the State of California, as the properly-named

respondent.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JOSE BALDEMAR PEREZ,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

 v.

FERNANDO GONZALEZ, Warden,***

 Respondent - Appellee.

No. 09-16290

D.C. No. 1:07-cv-01662-WQH

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

William Q. Hayes, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 14, 2010** 

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.

FILED

JAN 05 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 09-16290

Jose Baldemar Perez appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment

denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction under 28

U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.

Perez contends that he was arbitrarily denied a state law entitlement and

therefore his due process rights were violated because there was insufficient

evidence to corroborate his accomplice’s testimony regarding the occurrence of an

attempted robbery. The record indicates that there was corroborating evidence

sufficient to connect Perez to the commission of the attempted robbery in such a

way as to reasonably satisfy the jury that the accomplice was telling the truth.

Laboa v. Calderon, 224 F.3d 972, 979 (9th Cir. 2000).

Perez also argues that his counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing

to object to: the unsworn testimony of a witness; the admission of that witness’

prior inconsistent statements; the competency of that witness; and the trial court’s

determination of the witness’ competency without a separate hearing. Perez has

not demonstrated a reasonable probability that the judgment would have been

different, had counsel objected. Therefore, Perez cannot establish he was

prejudiced by counsel’s performance. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668,

694 (1984).
3 09-16290

In sum, the state court’s rejection of Perez’s claims was neither contrary to,

nor an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, nor an

unreasonable determination of the facts based on the evidence presented. See 28

U.S.C. § 2254(d).

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 32.1



Certification of Chief Executive Officer and President (Principal Financial Officer) pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



We, David C. Collins and Nicholas R. Schacht, certify that the periodic report, to which this Statement is attached, fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the periodic report to which this Statement is attached, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of the registrant at the dates and for the periods indicated.



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Statement as of the date first written below.



Dated: August 13, 2004



/s/ DAVID C. COLLINSDavid C. CollinsChief Executive Officer/s/ NICHOLAS R. SCHACHTNicholas R. SchachtPresident(Principal Financial Officer)
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5774 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5774

To require the Federal Government to pay the costs incurred by a State 
or local government in defending a State or local immigration law that 
   survives a constitutional challenge by the Federal Government in 
                             Federal court.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 19, 2010

 Mr. Moran of Kansas introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To require the Federal Government to pay the costs incurred by a State 
or local government in defending a State or local immigration law that 
   survives a constitutional challenge by the Federal Government in 
                             Federal court.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Respect for Local Laws Act''.

SEC. 2. PAYMENT OF ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COURT COSTS RELATED TO FEDERAL 
              GOVERNMENT CHALLENGE OF STATE IMMIGRATION LAW.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, all attorneys' fees and 
associated court costs incurred by a State or unit of local government 
in the course of defending a constitutional challenge to a State law or 
a municipal ordinance regarding immigration that is brought by the 
Federal Government in any Federal court shall be paid by the Federal 
Government if the court upholds, in whole or in part, the challenged 
State law or municipal ordinance.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                         540,723
<SECURITIES>                                       129
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,757,104
<ALLOWANCES>                                   535,005
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,475,676
<PP&E>                                         979,582
<DEPRECIATION>                                 579,407
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,475,676
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       14,243,214
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        40,600
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,003,234
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,475,676
<SALES>                                      2,656,029
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,656,029
<CGS>                                        4,217,431
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,217,431
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                36,730
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              46,932
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,293,866)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,293,866)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,293,866)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.56)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
#### Sandra Barnes, Respondent, v Nassau County et al., Appellants.

— In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Kutner, J.), entered October 8, 1986, which denied their motion for summary judgment.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendants clearly failed to establish as a matter of law that the order of protection and the arrest warrant issued by the Family Court were jurisdictionally defective because the plaintiff was not legally married at the time of their issuance *800
      *(see,*Family Ct Act § 812; *see generally, Mapoy v Johnson,*125 AD2d 454). The Supreme Court, Nassau County, properly denied the motion for summary judgment owing to the existence of triable issues of fact *(see generally, Rowan v Brady,*98 AD2d 638). Insofar as the defendants challenge the credibility of the plaintiff, we note that a resolution of credibility issues is generally not appropriate upon a motion for summary judgment *(see, Hourigan v McGarry,*106 AD2d 845, *appeal dismissed*65 NY2d 637). Mollen, P. J., Eiber, Kunzeman and Spatt, JJ., concur.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned officer of Pinnacle Resources, Inc. (the "Company"),
hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that the Company's
report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended September 30, 2007 (the
"Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in
the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.

                                  /s/ Glen R. Gamble
                                  ------------------------
                                  Glen R. Gamble
                                  Chief Executive Officer

February 13, 2009
<PAGE>


EXHIBIT 99.2

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

In connection with the Annual Report of MBT Financial Corp. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Eugene D.
Greutman, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as enacted 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.

/s/ Eugene D. Greutman
--------------------------------
Eugene D. Greutman
Chief Financial Officer
March 27, 2003





                                       52
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF

THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C SECTION 1350)

The undersigned, as the Chief Executive Officer of Logility, Inc., certifies that, to the best of his knowledge and belief, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
fiscal quarter ended January 31, 2006 (the Report), which accompanies this certification, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Logility, Inc. at the dates and for the periods indicated. The foregoing certification is made pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350) and shall not be relied upon for any other purpose.



|                            |  |                                             
|--------------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------
|This 9th day of March, 2006 |  | /s/ J. Michael Edenfield                    
|                            |  | J. Michael Edenfield Chief Executive Officer

The undersigned, as the Chief Financial Officer of Logility, Inc., certifies that, to the best of his knowledge
and belief, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended January 31, 2006 (the Report), which accompanies this certification, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Logility, Inc. at the dates and for the periods indicated. The foregoing certification is made
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350) and shall not be relied upon for any other purpose.



|                            |  |                                           
|--------------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------
|This 9th day of March, 2006 |  | /s/ Vincent C. Klinges                    
|                            |  | Vincent C. Klinges Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating,
acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Logility, Inc. and will be retained by Logility, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

The information in this Exhibit 32.1 shall not be deemed filed
for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, except as shall be expressly set forth by specific reference in such
filing.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS

MISC. NO. 06-11

IN RE: STANDING PANEL ON ADMISSION AND DISCIPLINE

O R D E R

Pursuant to Resolution 01-2011, the Chief Judge has determined that Judge Greene will

remain a member of the Standing Panel on Admission and Discipline (Standing Panel) for cases that

were assigned to the Standing Panel before December 31, 2010, but that a new Standing Panel

member shall be assigned in his stead with regard to any cases forwarded to the Standing Panel after

December 31, 2010.

Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is 

ORDERED that, effective this date, the Standing Panel will consist of Judges Hagel, Davis

and Schoelen.

DATED: March 11, 2011 FOR THE COURT:

/s/ Gregory O. Block

GREGORY O. BLOCK

Clerk of the Court
Amendment No. 1 to the 2009 Stock Plan



 Exhibit 10.72 
 AMENDMENT TO THE 
 PALM, INC. 
 2009 STOCK PLAN 
 PALM, INC. (the “Company”), having adopted the Palm, Inc. 2009 Stock Plan (the “Plan”), hereby amends the Plan, effective as of December 16, 2009, as follows: 
 1. Section 4(a)(iv) of the Plan is hereby amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows: 
 “(iv) Other Administration. Other than as provided above, the Plan shall be administered by (A) the Board or
(B) a Committee, which committee shall be constituted to satisfy Applicable Laws. Notwithstanding the foregoing or any provision in Section 4 of the Plan to the contrary, no discretionary Award granted to a Director who is not an
Employee (“Non-Employee Director”) may be granted or modified by any person other than a Committee comprised solely of Non-Employee Directors.” 
 2. Except as otherwise set forth herein, the terms of the Plan shall continue in full force and effect. 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company, by its duly authorized officer, has executed this Amendment to the Plan effective as of December 16, 2009. 
  

			
	 PALM, INC.

		
	By:	 	/S/     DOUGLAS C.
JEFFRIES        
	Name:	 	Douglas C. Jeffries
	Title:	 	SVP and CFO
EXHIBIT 32.2

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

This certification set forth below is hereby made solely for the purpose of
satisfying the requirements of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and
may not be relied upon or used for any other purposes.

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Investors Capital Holdngs, Ltd. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Timothy
B. Murphy, 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 to my knowledge: (1) the Report fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
and (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 or other
document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by
the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.


Date:  August 13, 2004                                 By: /s/ Timothy B. Murphy
                                                       -------------------------
                                                       Timothy B. Murphy
                                                       Chief Financial Officer


                                       17