alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit
      32**





**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 Tremisis Energy Acquisition Corporation
      II (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30,
      2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
      (the “Report”), the undersigned, in the capacities and on the date indicated
      below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





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





2.  The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.


Date:
                  January 22, 2008
              /s/
                  Lawrence S. CobenName:
              Lawrence
                  S. CobenTitle:
              Chairman
                  and Chief Executive Officer(Principal
                  Executive Officer)/s/
                  Ronald D. OrmandName:
              Ronald
                  D. OrmandTitle:
              President
                  and Chief Financial Officer(Principal
                  Financial and Accounting
                  Officer)
---

EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Theron Resource
Group (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended August 31, 2008, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Periodic Report), I, Jerry R. Satchwell, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|1. | the Periodic 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 Periodic Report fairly
      presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.

Date: October 14, 2008

/s/ Jerry R. Satchwell

Jerry R. Satchwell Chief Financial
Officer

---
EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AND RULE 13a-14(b) OR RULE 15d-14(b)

OF THE U.S. SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934



In connection with the Quarterly Report of
EMC Metals Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2014 (the "Report"), the
undersigned, in the capacities and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------









Dated:
August 11, 2014                      
/s/
Edward Dickinson

Edward Dickinson

Principal Financial
Officer
#### STATE v. RICH

No. 384A95-2

Case below: Greene County Superior Court

Petition by Malcolm Ray Hunter as Appellate Defender on his own motion for writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, Greene County denied 17 September 1998. Motion by Malcolm Ray Hunter as appellate defender on his own motion to vacate order of execution denied 17 September 1998.
#### In the Matter of Parminder Kaur et al., Respondents, v New York State Urban Development Corporation, Doing Business as Empire State Development Corporation, Appellant. In the Matter of TucK-It-AwAY, Inc., et al., Respondents, v New York State Urban Development Corporation, Doing Business as Empire State Development Corporation, Appellant.

Submitted May 3, 2010;

decided May 6, 2010

Motion by City of New York for leave to file a brief amicus curiae on the appeal herein granted and the proposed brief is accepted as filed. Two copies of the brief must be served and 24 copies filed within seven days.
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 8 Filed 01/29/2008 Page 1 of 2Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 8 Filed 01/29/2008 Page 2 of 2
#### Yolanda PAREDES-RAMIREZ, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 05-60550

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

June 9, 2006.

Charles Howard Portz, Portz & Portz, Houston, TX, for Petitioner.

*434Thomas Ward Hussey, Director, Elizabeth J. Stevens, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, No-rah Ascoli Schwarz, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Hipólito Acosta, U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service, Houston, TX, for Respondent.

Alberto R. Gonzales, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, pro se.

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Yolanda Paredes-Ramirez, a citizen of Mexico, petitions this court for review of an order pretermitting her application for adjustment of status to that of lawful permanent resident and ordering her removal to Mexico. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirmed the order of the immigration judge (IJ).

Paredes-Ramirez argues that the BIA erred by determining that she was not eligible for adjustment of status and that the IJ erred by failing to properly adjudicate her application for permission to reapply for admission. Because Paredes-Ramirez was inadmissible pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(9)(C)(i)(I), the BIA did not act arbitrarily when it determined that Paredes-Ramirez was not eligible for adjustment of status under 8 U.S.C. § 1255(i)(1)(A)(i). *Mortera-Cruz v. Gonzales,*409 F.3d 246, 255-56 (5th Cir.2005). Because Paredes-Ramirez did not challenge the adjudication of her application for permission to reapply for admission when she was before the BIA, that issue is not cognizable in this court. *Roy v. Ashcroft,*389 F.3d 132, 137 (5th Cir.2004). Even if we were to review that claim, Paredes-Ramirez would not be entitled to relief because she has failed to make an initial showing of substantial prejudice. *Anwar v. INS,*116 F.3d 140, 144 (5th Cir.1997).

Paredes-Ramirez’s petition for review is DENIED.

*

 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.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Christopher Clark, Appellant.

Submitted December 19, 2011;

decided January 5, 2012

Reported below, 88 AD3d 527.

*866Motion for an extension of the time within which to apply for permission to appeal pursuant to CPL 460.20 granted and motion papers treated as a timely CPL 460.20 application.
#### Robert A. DAVIS, Elton D. Davis, Elton Davis Trucking, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. AT & T, INC., et al., Defendants, Bellsouth Telecommunications, Inc., d.b.a. AT & T Alabama, Defendant-Appellee. Robert A. Davis, et al., Plaintiffs, Canal Insurance Company, Intervenor-Appellant, v. AT & T, Inc., et al., Defendants, Bellsouth Telecommunications, Inc., d.b.a. AT & T Alabama, Defendant-Appellee.

Nos. 12-14399, 12-14839.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Aug. 26, 2013.

Michael K. Beard, Thomas Marshall Powell, Marsh Rickard & Bryan, PC, Birmingham, AL, for Plaintiffs.

Jeffrey Edward Holmes, Joseph W. Car-lisle, Gilpin Givhan, PC, Birmingham, AL, for Defendants.

Before CARNES, Chief Judge, TJOFLAT, Circuit Judge, and MARRA,* District Judge.

*

 Honorable Kenneth A. Marra, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Florida, sitting by designation.

PER CURIAM:

After considering the briefs and the relevant parts of the record, and hearing oral argument, we affirm for the reasons set *911out on pages 18 through 24 of the district court’s opinion.

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 99.2


                WRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


                           PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350


     Solely  for  the  purposes  of  complying  with  18  U.S.C.  1350,  I,  the
undersigned Chief Financial Officer of National  Healthcare  Financial Services,
Inc. (the  "Company"),  hereby certify,  based on my knowledge,  that the Annual
Report on Form  10--KSB  of the  Company  for the  fiscal  year  ended  June 30,
2002,(the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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.

/s/ David Bullard

David Bullard
November 19, 2002
EXHIBIT
18.1














May 17,
2010








Sound
Financial, Inc.


2005
Fifth Avenue, 2nd Floor


Seattle,
WA 98121





Ladies
and Gentlemen:




At your
request, we have read the description in Note 8 of your interim consolidated
financial statements included in the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q to the
Securities and Exchange Commission for March 31, 2010, of the facts relating to
the adoption of the fair value option of accounting for originated mortgage
servicing rights. We believe, on the basis of the facts so set forth and other
information furnished to us by appropriate officials of Sound Financial, Inc.
(the “Company”), that the adoption of the fair value option of accounting for
originated mortgage servicing rights described in your Form 10-Q is to an
alternative accounting principle that is preferable under the
circumstances.




With
regard to the aforementioned accounting change, it should be recognized that
professional standards have not been established for evaluating the
preferability of one acceptable method of accounting over another method.
Accordingly, we are furnishing this letter solely for purposes of the Company’s
compliance with the requirements of the Securities and Exchange Commission, and
it should not be used or relied on for any other purpose.




We have
not audited any consolidated financial statements of the Company as of any date
or for any period subsequent to December 31, 2009. Therefore, we are unable to
express, and we do not express, an opinion on the facts set forth in the above
mentioned Form 10-Q, on the related information furnished to us by officials of
the Company, or on the financial position, results of operations, or cash flows
of the Company as of any date or for any period subsequent to December 31,
2009.




Very
truly yours,





/s/ Moss
Adams LLP
UNITED STATES

SECURITY AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549



---

FORM 8-K

---



CURRENT REPORT

Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934



Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported):June 5, 2007



---

National Presto Industries, Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in this chapter)



Wisconsin
        811-21874
        39-0494170(State or other jurisdictionof incorporation)
        (CommissionFile Number)
        (IRS EmployerIdentification No.)




3925 North Hastings WayEau Claire, Wisconsin
        54703-3703(Address of principal executive office)
        (Zip Code)






Registrants telephone number, including area code:715-839-2121



N/A

(Former name or former address, if changed since last report)



---

Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions:



o
        Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)




o
        Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)




o
        Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))




o
        Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13a-4(c))








---

Item 8.01 Other Events



On June 5, 2007, the registrant issued a press release regarding Grant Thorntons denial of the registrants request for reinstatement of its audit reports for fiscal years ended December 31, 2003, 2004, and 2005.  The full text of the press release is filed as Exhibit 99.1 to this Form 8-K.  Such Exhibit shall not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act), or incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except as shall be expressly set forth by specific reference in such a filing.



Item 9.01 Financial Statements and Exhibits



(d)
        Exhibits:




Exhibit 99.1 Press Release of National Presto Industries, Inc., dated June 5, 2007.



SIGNATURE



Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.



National Presto Industries, Inc.(Registrant)/s/ Maryjo Cohen(Signature)Maryjo Cohen, President
and Chief Executive Officer


Date:June 6, 2007



---
United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit

No. 07-1860

MARK LESSARD AND LINDA LESSARD,

Plaintiffs, Appellants,

v.

WILTON-LYNDEBOROUGH COOPERATIVE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND

NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION,

Defendants, Appellees.

ERRATA SHEET

The opinion of this Court issued on February 28, 2008 is

corrected as follows:

On p.21, l.23, "the IEP favored" should be "Stephanie was

the beneficiary of".
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jorge CASTANEDA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 13-40253

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Oct. 15, 2013.

Renata Ann Gowie, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Michael Lance Herman, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Jorge Castaneda appeals the sentence imposed following the revocation of his supervised release (“SR”). Specifically, he contests the reimposition of a $100 special assessment (“SA”). He asserts that he was relieved of that obligation because more than five years elapsed since the date of the underlying judgment, and the court otherwise had no statutory authority to impose or reimpose the SA. Castaneda also contends that the SA should be vacated because its reimposition was set forth in only the written revocation judgment, and any conflict must be resolved in favor of the oral pronouncement, which did not reference the SA. The government agrees that the court exceeded its authority and that the written judgment should be reformed to strike the SA.

Although a SA is a mandatory component of a sentence, *see*18 U.S.C. § 3013(a)(2)(A), the obligation to pay it “ceases five years after the date of the judgment,” § 3013(c). More than five years elapsed between the initial imposition of the SA and the revocation of SR. Because neither § 3013 nor 18 U.S.C. *491§ 3583 (which concerns SR) sanctions the imposition of a SA for revocation of a term of SR, the court lacked authority to impose or reimpose a SA. *See United States v. Carlos Pineda,*594 F.3d 892, 893 (5th Cir. 2010) (per curiam). Because the court lacked that authority, we need not consider Castaneda’s argument that the written judgment should be remanded for amendment because the oral pronouncement at the revocation hearing conflicted with the written revocation judgment.

Accordingly, we VACATE in part and REMAND for amendment of the judgment consistent with this opinion.

*

 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.
Change of Control Agreements as of October 11, 2005



 Exhibit 10.2 
  
 BOARD POLICY ON CHANGE OF CONTROL AGREEMENTS 
 AS OF OCTOBER 11, 2005 
  
 It shall be the policy of the Board of Directors that the aggregate payments provided for in any future termination agreements (or amendments to existing agreements) with any officer or employee of International Paper
Company or any of its subsidiaries which are conditioned on a change of control of the Company shall not exceed 2.99 times the individual’s highest gross income received from the Company (as defined for U.S. federal income tax purposes, and
reflected on the individual’s Form W-2) in any one of the three calendar years preceding the date of the change of control. 
  
 The term “aggregate payments” shall not include any benefits to which the individual would otherwise be entitled under the terms of any
qualified or non-qualified Company pension plan(s), or Company severance policy or program not conditioned on a change of control, in effect as of the date preceding the date of the change of control. 
  
 Any future termination agreement (or amendment to an existing agreement) must
be specifically approved by the Management Development & Compensation Committee. If the agreement is with an officer who is also a member of the Board of Directors, the agreement must also be approved by the independent directors.

  
 No future termination agreement (or amendment to an existing
agreement) which would provide for an increase in the aggregate payments provided for in existing agreements shall exceed the limitations set forth above, except if it has been approved or ratified by a majority of the shares voting at a meeting of
shareholders. 
  
 The term “future termination
agreements” shall not include (i) any agreements currently approved for the Company’s Tier I or Tier II Change of Control program filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and entered into now and in the future with officers
in their applicable tiers or (ii) any amendments to existing agreements that do not increase the aggregate payments provided for in the existing agreements. 
  
 This policy supersedes the Board Policy on Change of Control Agreements which was adopted, October 14, 2003. 
  

 1
---

EXHIBIT 32.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Theron Resource
Group. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter and six month period ended
November 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Periodic Report), I, Jerry R. Satchwell, Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|1. | the Periodic 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 Periodic Report fairly
      presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.

Dated: January 21, 2011

/s/         Jerry R.
Satchwell

Jerry R. Satchwell Chief Executive
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 Theron Resource
Group. and will be retained by Theron Resource Group. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
<PAGE>
                                                                 EXHIBIT 23.1


               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on
Form S-8 (No. 333-73966) pertaining to the Fifth Amended and Restated 1999 Stock
Option Plan, the dj Orthopedics, Inc. 2001 Omnibus Plan, the dj Orthopedics,
Inc. Employee Stock Purchase Plan, and the dj Orthopedics, Inc. 2001
Non-Employee Directors' Stock Option Plan of dj Orthopedics, Inc. of our report
dated January 31, 2003, with respect to the consolidated financial statements
and schedule of dj Orthopedics, Inc. included in its Annual Report (Form 10-K)
for the year ended December 31, 2002.



                                              /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP


San Diego, California
March 25, 2003
#### Glacial Aggregates LLC, Appellant, v Town of Yorkshire, Respondent.

Submitted April 5, 2010;

decided June 10, 2010

Motion for reargument and/or clarification denied *[see*14 NY3d 127 (2010)].
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1


                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                      JURISDICTION OF
           NAME OF ENTITY:                            INCORPORATION:
           ---------------                            --------------
<S>                                                   <C>
           Applix B.V.                                The Netherlands

           Applix Canada, Inc.                        Delaware

           Applix Foreign Sales Corporation           Barbados

           Applix France                              France

           VistaSource France                         France

           Applix GmbH                                Germany

           VistaSource GmbH                           Germany

           Applix (UK) Limited                        United Kingdom

           VistaSource (UK) Limited                   United Kingdom

           Applix Securities Corp.                    Massachusetts

           Applix Singapore, Inc.                     Delaware

           Applix Australia Pty. Ltd.                 Australia

           Sinper Corporation                         Florida

           Target Corporation                         Massachusetts

           Veriteam, Inc.                             Washington

           VistaSource, Inc.                          Delaware
</TABLE>