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**

|   | (1) | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d));                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/              STUART A. BENSON                                                                   |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Stuart                A. Benson *Chief                Executive Officer, acting Chief Financial Officer* |
|   |                                                                                                     |

 

----
# C_2019213EN.01002801.xml

| 24.6.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 213/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.6.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 213/28

---

Judgment of the General Court of 7 May 2019 — Germany v Commission

(Case T-239/17) (1)

(EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Expenditure incurred by Germany - Flat-rate financial correction applied due to insufficient frequency of key controls - Obligation to calculate interest and record it in the accounts annually - Articles 31 and 32 of Regulation (EC)No 1290/2005 - Article 6(h) of Regulation (EC) No 885/2006 - Obligation to state reasons - Proportionality)

(2019/C 213/27)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: initially D. Klebs and T. Henze, and subsequently D. Klebs, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Triantafyllou, and M. Zalewski, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application on the basis of Article 263 TFEU seeking partial annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU)2017/264 of 14 February 2017 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2017 L 39, p. 12), in so far as it concerns the Federal Republic of Germany.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 195, 19.6.2017.

---
# FIL ED Jul y 1, 1998 Cecil W. Crow son A pp ellat e C ou rtC lerk 

### IN TH E C OURT OF A PPEA LS OF T ENN ESSEE

A T NASHVI LLE

W . H UD SON C ON NE RY , J R. , ET A L., ) ) Pl ain ti ffs/A ppel lan ts, ) Appeal N o. ) 01- A- 01- 9709- CH -0 0529 ) VS. ) Davi dson Chance ry ) No. 95 -386 5-I ) COLUMBIA/ HCA HEALT HCARE ) CO RP ORATION , ET A L., ) ) Defend ant s/Ap pellee s. )



### CON CUR RI NG OP I NI ON I concu r in Judge To dd’s op inion a f f irming the grant of

summ ary jud g ment t o the defendants
. I w ri te s eparatel y si mply to emphasi z e the foll ow ing poin ts:
Fi rs t, the b onus pla n al low ed th e pl ain ti ffs t o purchas e s hares of the company

at a pr ic e bel ow

the mark et pr ic e. W hen t he pl ain ti ffs l eft the c ompany before the shares f ully

v este d, th ey did no t forfeit the ir i nvestme nt; th ey simp ly lost the d ifferenc e betw een w hat t hey had inv est ed and the mar ketv alu e of the shares. T he d if feren ce in the purcha se price an d the marke t v alue is w hatthis contro v ersy is about
. Seco nd, t he pl an g av e the co mpensat ion co mmitt ee th e pow er to “w aive anycond itions for the lap se or term inatio n of restrictions w ith respe ct to all or any por ti on of the Res tr icted S toc k o r Res tr icted U nit s.” Se c. 8( b) of the 1 990 Pl an. W hen t he c ommitt ee i ss ued t he rest ri cte d s toc k i n October of 1994 - - w it h the merger of

the com pan y

w ith Colum bia HCA Corporat ion pe ndin g -- it sp e cif ica lly po in te d ou t t h a t ves ti n g w o u ld no t a cc e le ra te in th e eve n t o f a “c h a n ge2

in cont ro l, ” a c ondi ti on th at woul d hav e resul ted i n v est ing under Sec . 18( h) of the pla n. Therefore, t he rest ri cte d s toc k d id not v estw hen t he two c ompani es merg ed.

Finally , I think th e un dispu ted facts sho w thatthe pla intif

fs v olun tarily left t he c ompany . Therefore, t hey co uld not tak e adv antag e of the prov is ion that the rest ri cte d s toc k woul d full y v estupon ter minat ion w it hout caus e.

_________

_________

_________

______ BEN H . C AN TRELL, JU DG E
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman,

 Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Kurtis T. Wilder

Elizabeth T. Clement,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 

 

May 2, 2018 

Order 

 

Clerk 

May 2, 2018 

156132(85) 

MARY ANN HEGADORN, 

 Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 SC: 156132 

v COA: 329508 

 Livingston CC: 2014-028394-AA 

DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES 

DIRECTOR, 

 Defendant-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Chief Justice, the motion to substitute “RALPH HEGADORN, as 

Personal Representative of the Estate of MARY HEGADORN” as the plaintiff-appellant 

in all further proceedings before this Court is GRANTED.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2347 

To expand in-country processing of family units and minors in Guatemala, 

Honduras, and El Salvador to provide relief to the southern border 

and uphold access to humanitarian protection consistent with U.S. laws. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 18, 2019 

Mr. VELA (for himself, Mr. GONZALEZ of Texas, and Mr. CUELLAR) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To expand in-country processing of family units and minors 

in Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador to provide 

relief to the southern border and uphold access to humanitarian protection consistent with U.S. laws. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Border and Refugee 

5 Assistance Act of 2019’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 2347 IH

1 SEC. 2. NEED FOR COMPREHENSIVE ASSISTANCE STRAT2 EGY. 

3 It is the sense of Congress that a multifaceted U.S. 

4 response is needed to address the humanitarian crisis in 

5 the Northern Triangle. Such a response must include U.S. 

6 investment in the Northern Triangle aimed at improving 

7 governance, enhancing security, and promoting prosperity 

8 in the region as well as investments in the U.S. Depart9 ment of State’s Refugee Processing Center, USCIS Asy10 lum Division, and U.S. Immigration Courts to uphold ac11 cess to humanitarian protection consistent with U.S. law 

12 and international standards. In-country processing of ref13 ugee claims is only one component of a comprehensive 

14 strategy, aimed at providing increased economic and secu15 rity conditions in the Northern Triangle. 

16 SEC. 3. EXPANSION OF IN-COUNTRY PROCESSING. 

17 Notwithstanding any other provision of law: 

18 (a) The Secretary of Homeland Security and the Sec19 retary of State shall work together to expand in-country 

20 refugee processing centers within Northern Triangle coun21 tries to accept applications from family units and minors 

22 in order to provide a safe and orderly process for proc23 essing claims and ensuring humanitarian protection. 

24 (b) Victims of domestic violence and gangs are eligi25 ble to qualify for refugee protections. 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

HR 2347 IH

1 (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There 

2 are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be 

3 necessary to implement section 3. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
# C_2020215EN.01001001.xml

| 29.6.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 215/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.6.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 215/10

---

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 26 March 2020 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Okręgowy w Łodzi and the Sąd Okręgowy w Warszawie — Poland) — Miasto Łowicz v Skarb Państwa — Wojewoda Łódzki (C-558/18) and Prokurator Generalny, represented by the Prokuratura Krajowa, formerly the Prokuratura Okręgowa w Płocku v VX, WW, XV (C-563/18)

(Joined Cases C-558/18 and C-563/18) (1)

(References for a preliminary ruling - Second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU - Rule of law - Effective judicial protection in the fields covered by Union law - Principle of judicial independence - Disciplinary regime applicable to national judges - Jurisdiction of the Court - Article 267 TFUE - Admissibility - Interpretation necessary for the referring court to be able to give judgment - Meaning)

(2020/C 215/11)

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Okręgowy w Łodzi, Sąd Okręgowy w Warszawie

Parties to the main proceedings

(Case C-558/18)

Applicant: Miasto Łowicz

Defendant: Skarb Państwa — Wojewoda Łódzki

In the presence of: Prokurator Generalny, represented by the Prokuratura Krajowa, formerly the Prokuratura Regionalna w Łodzi, Rzecznik Praw Obywatelskich

(Case C-563/18)

Applicant: Prokurator Generalny, represented by the Prokuratura Krajowa, formerly the Prokuratura Okręgowa w Płocku

Defendants: VX, WW, XV

Operative part of the judgment

The requests for a preliminary ruling made by the Sąd Okręgowy w Łodzi (Regional Court, Łódź, Poland) and by the Sąd Okręgowy w Warszawie (Regional Court, Warsaw, Poland), by decisions of 31 August 2018 and 4 September 2018, are inadmissible.

---

(1)  OJ C 44, 4.2.2019.

---
#### STATE v. GEIGER

No. 419P98

Case below: 130 N.C.App. 758

Motion by Attorney General to dismiss notice of appeal allowed 5 November 1998. Petition by defendant for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 5 November 1998. Petition by defendant for writ of certiorari to review the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 5 November 1998.
# C_2019230EN.01001301.xml

| 8.7.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 230/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.7.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 230/13

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 8 May 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Castilla y León -Spain) — Violeta Villar Láiz v Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad Social (INSS), Tesorería General de la Seguridad Social (TGSS)

(Case C-161/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security - Directive 79/7/EEC - Article 4 - Prohibition of any discrimination on the ground of sex - Indirect discrimination - Part-time work - Calculation of retirement pension)

(2019/C 230/15)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Castilla y León

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Violeta Villar Láiz

Respondent: Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad Social (INSS), Tesorería General de la Seguridad Social (TGSS)

Operative part of the judgment

Article 4(1) of Council Directive 79/7/EEC of 19 December 1978 on the progressive implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which provides that the amount of retirement pension based on contributions of a part-time worker is to be calculated by multiplying a basic amount, established from the remuneration actually received and contributions actually paid, by a percentage which relates to the length of the period of contribution, that period being itself modified, by a reduction factor equal to the ratio of the time of part-time work actually carried out to the time of work carried out by a comparable full-time worker, and increased by the application of a factor of 1.5, to the extent that that legislation places at a particular disadvantage workers who are women as compared with workers who are men.

---

(1)  OJ C 190, 4.6.2018.

---
# C_2020019EN.01003901.xml

| 20.1.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 19/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.1.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 19/39

---

Order of the President of the Court of 29 August 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD) — Portugal) — Totalmédia — Marketing Directo e Publicidade S.A. v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

(Case C-751/18) (1)

(2020/C 19/42)

Language of the case: Portuguese

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 82, 4.3.2019.

---
<PAGE>
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                           JURISDICTION OF
                                            INCORPORATION/                        % OF
               NAME                         ORGANIZATION                        OWNERSHIP
               ----                        ---------------                      ---------
<S>                                        <C>                                  <C>
dj Orthopedics, LLC                         Delaware                              100%
DJ Orthopedics Capital Corporation          Delaware                              100%
dj Orthopedics Development Corporation      Delaware                              100%
dj Orthopedics de Mexico S.A. de C.V.       Delaware                              100%
dj Ortho, Canada Inc.                       Canada                                100%
dj Orthopedics UK Limited                   United Kingdom                        100%
dj Orthopedics Deutschland GmbH             Germany                               100%
</TABLE>
**
**Exhibit 31.2**

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO**

**SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT RULES 13A-14(A) AND 15D-14(A)**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, Marc R. Schneebaum, certify that: 

 
1.
I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-K/A to the AnnualReport on Form 10-K of Madrigal Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; and 

 
2.
Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report. 

 
/s/ MARC R. SCHNEEBAUMMarc R. Schneebaum*Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer**(Principal Financial Officer)*Date: April 30, 2019**
# C_2019103EN.01002103.xml

| 18.3.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 103/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.3.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 103/21

---

Order of the President of the Court of 17 December 2018 — European Commission v Republic of Austria

(Case C-487/18) (1)

(2019/C 103/25)

Language of the case: German

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 328, 17.9.2018.

---
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03

- 23

- 00446

- CV

D & D Unlimited , Appellant

v.

Tracie S. Kitchens

- Savage , Appellee

FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF BELL COUNTY

NO. 23CCV00697

, THE HONORABLE PAUL A. MOTZ , JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant ’s brief was due on November 6, 2023

. By let ter dated November 28,

2023 , this C ourt notified appellant that appellant ’ s brief was overdue and that failure to file a

satisfactory res ponse by December 8, 2023, would result in the dismissal of this appeal for want

of p rosecution. To date, appellant has not filed a brief or a motion for extension of time.

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b).

__________________________________________ Darlene Byrne

, Chief Justice

Before C hief Justice Byrne, Justices Kelly and Theofanis

Dismissed for Want of Prosecution

Filed: January 4, 202 4
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

	NO. 2-09-196-CR

FLOYD CHRISTOPHER WHITING	APPELLANT

	V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS	STATE

	----------

	FROM CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 4 OF TARRANT COUNTY

	----------

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

						----------

	We have considered “Appellant’s Motion To Withdraw The Appeal.”  The motion complies with rule 42.2(a) of the rules of appellate procedure.  Tex. R. App. P. 42.2(a).  No decision of this court having been delivered before we received this motion, we grant the motion and dismiss the appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.2(a), 43.2(f). 							 													

							PER CURIAM

PANEL:  LIVINGSTON, DAUPHINOT, and GARDNER, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: October 15, 2009
Exhibit 31.2

Certification of Chief Financial Officer

I, Michael Ashby, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Calix, Inc. for the quarter ended March 26, 2011;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash
flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrants other certifying officer and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant,
including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,
as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) Disclosed in this report any change
in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or
is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrants
other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting.



|                     |  |  |  |  |  |                        
|-------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | -----------------------
|Date: April 28, 2011 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ Michael Ashby      
|                     |  |  |  |  |  | Michael Ashby          
|                     |  |  |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer
# C_2019044EN.01006701.xml

| 4.2.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 44/67 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.2.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 44/67

---

Order of the General Court of 14 November 2018 — Bruel v Commission and Others

(Case T-793/17) (1)

((Action for annulment and damages - Measure adopted by the Head of Section of the EU Delegation to Algeria in the context of a public procurement procedure for the provision of services - Decision requesting the replacement of the applicant as an expert - Termination of the agreement between the successful tendering company and the applicant following that decision - No capacity as defendant - Act not open to challenge - No sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals - Causal link - Action in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law))

(2019/C 44/87)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Damien Bruel (Paris, France) (represented by: H. Hansen, lawyer)

Defendants: European Commission (represented by: A. Aresu, acting as Agent), European External Action Service (represented by: S. Marquardt and R. Spac, acting as Agents), European Union Delegation to Algeria

Re:

First, application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the letter of 25 September 2017 requesting the replacement of the applicant as an expert in the context of an agreement for the provision of services concluded between the successful tendering company and the applicant and, secondly, application pursuant to Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the damage which the applicant claims to have suffered as a result of that decision.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | Mr Damien Bruel shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mr Damien Bruel shall pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 52, 12.2.2018.

---