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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Internet
Brands, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert
N. Brisco, President, Chief Executive Officer and Director 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
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.








Date: March5,
      2009
            
            /s/
      Robert N. Brisco
              
              Robert
      N. Brisco
              President,
      Chief Executive Officer and Director
              Internet
      Brands, Inc.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1377 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

  1st Session
                                H. R. 1377

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 27, 1999

  Recieved; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental 
                                Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service at 13234 
South Baltimore Avenue in Chicago, Illinois, as the ``John J. Buchanan 
                        Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 13234 
South Baltimore Avenue in Chicago, Illinois, is hereby designated as 
the ``John J. Buchanan Post Office Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, regulation, map, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be considered to be a reference to the ``John J. Buchanan Post 
Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives May 24, 1999.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1174 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1174

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to reduce from 24 months to 
   12 months the holding period used to determine whether horses are 
             assets described in section 1231 of such Code.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 17, 1999

 Mr. Weller (for himself, Mrs. Thurman, Mr. Lewis of Kentucky, and Mr. 
   Hefley) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to reduce from 24 months to 
   12 months the holding period used to determine whether horses are 
             assets described in section 1231 of such Code.

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

SECTION 1. HOLDING PERIOD REDUCED TO 12 MONTHS FOR PURPOSES OF 
              DETERMINING WHETHER HORSES ARE SECTION 1231 ASSETS.

    (a) In General.--Subparagraph (A) of section 1231(b)(3) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to definition of property used 
in the trade or business) is amended by striking ``and horses''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1999.
                                 <all>
```
Anthony SHEELY, et ux., petitioners, v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., et al.

No. 18-7328.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 18, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
# C_2019210EN.01002101.xml

| 21.6.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 210/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.6.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 210/21

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.9227 — Rockwell/Schlumberger/JV)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2019/C 210/11)

1.

On 17 June 2019, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the companies Rockwell Automation, Inc. (‘Rockwell’, United States) and Schlumberger Limited (‘Schlumberger’, United States) acquire, within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation, joint control over a newly-created company constituting a joint venture (‘JV’) by way of purchase of shares and contribution of assets and associated personnel.

2.

| — | Rockwell is a global company dedicated to industrial automation and control solutions, |
| --- | --- |

—

Rockwell is a global company dedicated to industrial automation and control solutions,

| — | Schlumberger is a global supplier of technology, integrated project management and information solutions to customers in the oil and gas industry, |
| --- | --- |

—

Schlumberger is a global supplier of technology, integrated project management and information solutions to customers in the oil and gas industry,

| — | The JV will be active in the provision of fully integrated and digitally enabled surface automation and control solutions to customers in the global oil and gas industry. |
| --- | --- |

—

The JV will be active in the provision of fully integrated and digitally enabled surface automation and control solutions to customers in the global oil and gas industry.

3.

Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

4.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.9227 — Rockwell/Schlumberger/JV

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

| Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu |
| --- |
| Fax +32 22964301 |
| Postal address: |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax +32 22964301

Postal address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

1

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.

2

---
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**§ 302 CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Kelly A. Gray, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of St. John Knits International, Incorporated; 

 

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 tomake 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 financialcondition, 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(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 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 consolidatedsubsidiaries, 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 theeffectiveness 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 mostrecent 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.

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) 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 function): 

 

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation 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 otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: January 27, 2004
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15

- 41 017 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
JESUS MORALES

- SANCHEZ , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:1 4

- CR

- 912

- 1

Before JONES, WIENER, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
Jesus Morales

- Sanchez pleaded guilty to a charge of illegal reentry and
was sentenced to 41 months of imprisonment . His sentence was based in part

on a 16

- level enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) for an aggravated felony conviction: a Texas conviction of aggravated assault

. Morales

- Sanchez argues that the district court plainly erred by characterizing
the Texas aggravated assault offense as an aggravated felony under 8 U.S.C.

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Cir cuit 

### FILED December 8, 2016 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 15-41017 Document: 00513789458 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/08/2016No. 15

- 41 017

2 § 1101(a)(43)(F) and as a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 16(b) for the purposes of con victing and sent encing him under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2). Relying on Johnson v. United States , 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), Morales

- Sanchez argues that the definition of a crime of violence in § 16(b), which is incorporated by reference into § 1101(a)(43)(F)’s definition of an aggravated felony, is unconstitutionally vague on its face . He further contends that this court cannot apply § 16(b) in this case without violating due process. The Government has filed an unopposed motion for summary af firmance, urging that Morales

- Sanchez ’s arguments are foreclosed by our
recent decision in United States v. Gonzalez

- Longoria , 831 F.3d 670 (5th Cir. 2016) (en banc), pet ition for cert. filed (Sept. 29, 2016) (No. 16

- 6259). The Government is correct

. 1 Se e id. Accordingly, the motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. The Government’s alternat ive motion for an extension of time to file a brief is
DENIED.

1 The recent grant of certiorari by the United States Supreme Court on the issue whether § 16(b) is unconstitutional in light of Johnson in Lynch v. Dimaya , ___ S. Ct. ___, 2016 WL 3232911 (Sep t. 29, 2016) (No. 15

- 1498), does n ot alter our analysis. This court is bound by its own precedent unless and until that precedent is altered by a decision of the Supreme Court. See Wicker v. McCotter , 798 F.2d 155, 157

- 58 (5th Cir. 1986). Case: 15-41017 Document: 00513789458 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/08/2016
Elamin BASHIR, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-8205.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 1, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
----

Exhibit 21 

Subsidiaries of China Valves Technology, Inc. 

| Name of Subsidiary                               | Jurisdiction of Organization | % Owned |
|--------------------------------------------------|------------------------------|---------|
| China Fluid Equipment Holdings Limited           | Hong Kong                    | 100%    |
| Henan Tonghai Fluid Equipment Co.,    Ltd.       | PRC                          | 100%    |
| Taizhou Taide Valve Co., Ltd.                    | PRC                          | 100%    |
| Able Delight (Changsha) Valve Co.,    Ltd.       | PRC                          | 100%    |
| Zhengzhou City Zhengdie Valve Co.,    Ltd.       | PRC                          | 100%    |
| Henan Kaifeng High Pressure Valve Co.,    Ltd.   | PRC                          | 100%    |
| Yangzhou Rock Valve Lock Technology    Co., Ltd. | PRC                          | 100%    |

----
<PAGE>


                                                                      Exhibit 12

                              BGF Industries, Inc.

                Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
                             (dollars in thousands)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                               Fiscal Year Ended December 31,
                                       -----------------------------------------------
                                        2001      2000      1999      1998      1997
                                       -----------------------------------------------
<S>                                    <C>       <C>       <C>       <C>       <C>
Earnings:
     Pretax  income (loss) (a) .....   $(4,946)  $13,932   $ 7,597   $25,171   $35,382

Add:
     Fixed  charges ................    14,504    14,405    16,084     4,937     2,619
     Capitalized interest ..........      (227)       --       (46)     (127)      (32)
                                       -------   -------   -------   -------   -------
                                       $ 9,331   $28,337   $23,635   $29,981   $37,969
                                       =======   =======   =======   =======   =======

Fixed Charges:
     Interest expense(b) ...........   $13,972   $14,168   $15,817     4,517     2,355
     Capitalized interest ..........       227        --        46       127        32
     Portion of rents
          representative of
          interest  factor(c) ......       305       237       221       293       232
                                       -------   -------   -------   -------   -------
                                       $14,504   $14,405   $16,084   $ 4,937   $ 2,619
                                       =======   =======   =======   =======   =======

Ratio of earnings to fixed
         charges ...................       0.6x      2.0x      1.5x      6.1x     14.5x
</TABLE>

(a)  Income (loss) before taxes and extraordinary loss.

(b)  Includes amortization of debt issuance costs and original issue discount
     and excludes capitalized interest.

(c)  One-third of rental expense.
UNITED STATES, ex rel. Thomas A. BERG, et al., petitioners, v. HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL, INC., et al.

No. 18-1030.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 1, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Geneva Elaine HAMES, petitioner, v. Patricia YELDELL, Warden.

No. 18-8656.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
Brandon Gale COMBS, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-6702.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 22, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-11259 Conference Calendar

LASSISSI RACHIDI, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTE, BIG SPRINGS, TEXAS, Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:97-CV-72

- - - - - - - - - - October 21, 1998 Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and WIENER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Lassissi Rachidi appeals from the dismissal of his claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b), 2671-2680, for failure to prosecute. Rachidi seeks compensation for injuries allegedly caused while he was working as a federal prisoner. Although federal prisoners may seek recovery under the FTCA for certain injuries, the exclusive remedy for a federal prisoner’s work-related injury is a claim filed pursuant to 18No. 97-11259 -2- U.S.C. § 4126. United States v. Demko , 385 U.S. 149, 152-53 (1966); Aston v. United States , 625 F.2d 1210, 1211 (5th Cir. 1980). The district court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to hear Rachidi’s claim because it was not cognizable under the FTCA. Aston , 625 F.2d at 1211. Dismissal of Rachidi’s lawsuit was therefore proper. See Bickford v. Int’l Speedway Corp. , 654 F.2d 1028, 1031 (5th Cir. 1981)(judgment may be affirmed on any basis supported by the record).
AFFIRMED.
PRESIDIO COMPONENTS, INC., petitioner, v. AMERICAN TECHNICAL CERAMICS CORP.

No. 17-1649.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied.
Roger L. KAUFMAN, petitioner, v. Paul S. KEMPER, Warden.

No. 18-7827.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1

                       IPC HOLDINGS, LTD. AND SUBSIDIARIES
         RECONCILIATION OF BASIC AND DILUTED NET INCOME PER COMMON SHARE

 (Expressed in thousands of United States dollars, except for per share amounts)

A reconciliation of the numerator and denominator for basic and diluted EPS is
given in the following table:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                          Amount per
Three months ended June 30, 1999             Income          Shares          Share
                                           ----------      ----------     ----------
<S>                                        <C>             <C>             <C>
Basic EPS                                  $    2,913      25,033,932      $   0.12
Effect of Dilutive Options                                    956,283
Diluted EPS                                $    2,913      25,990,215      $   0.11

Three months ended June 30, 1998

Basic EPS                                  $   22,156      25,033,932      $   0.89
Effect of Dilutive Options                                  1,668,657
Diluted EPS                                $   22,156      26,702,589      $   0.83


Six months ended June 30, 1999

Basic EPS                                  $   18,129      25,033,932      $   0.72
Effect of Dilutive Options                                  1,047,524
Diluted EPS                                $   18,129      26,081,456      $   0.70

Six months ended June 30, 1998

Basic EPS                                  $   50,948      25,028,489      $   2.04
Effect of Dilutive Options                                  1,672,380
Diluted EPS                                $   50,948      26,700,869      $   1.91
</TABLE>


                                       15
Calvin E. BARNETT, petitioner, v. Joe M. ALLBAUGH, et al.

No. 18-7629.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 1, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

ERICK OLIVAS,

Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 11

- 00081

- CR

Appeal from the

168th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC#20100D04099)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was no error in the

judgment. We therefore affirm the judgment of the court below. This d ecision shall be certified

below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 20TH DAY OF MARCH, 2013.

GUADALUPE RIVERA, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rivera, and Antcliff, JJ.

Antcliff, J., not participating
Juanita GARCIA, petitioner, v. Deborah JOHNSON, Warden.

No. 18-8291.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 1, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.