alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32-A

FARO Technologies, Inc.

Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, the undersigned President and Chief Executive Officer and Director of FARO Technologies, Inc., (the Company) hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K, for the year ended
December 31, 2008 (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/    JAY W. FREELAND
|Jay W. Freeland       
|February 27, 2009
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 101 (Wednesday, May 25, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 31887]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-11188]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank 
or Bank Holding Company

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank 
Control Act (Act) (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and Sec.  225.41 of the Board's 
Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank or bank 
holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the 
applications are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 
1817(j)(7)).
    The public portions of the applications listed below, as well as 
other related filings required by the Board, if any, are available for 
immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank(s) indicated below and 
at the offices of the Board of Governors. This information may also be 
obtained on an expedited basis, upon request, by contacting the 
appropriate Federal Reserve Bank and from the Board's Freedom of 
Information Office at https://www.federalreserve.gov/foia/request.htm. 
Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards 
enumerated in paragraph 7 of the Act.
    Comments regarding each of these applications must be received at 
the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors, 
Ann E. Misback, Secretary of the Board, 20th Street and Constitution 
Avenue NW, Washington DC 20551-0001, not later than June 8, 2022.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas (Karen Smith, Director, 
Applications) 2200 North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201-2272:
    1. The Cook Memorial Trust #1, Cook Memorial Trust #4, and the 
Mayfair Private Trust Company, as co-trustee, all of McAllen, Texas; 15 
trusts for the benefit of minor children, all of McAllen Texas, and the 
Mayfair Private Trust Company and Asiatrust Limited, Rarotonga, Cook 
Islands, as co-trustees, and Elizabeth L. Morgan, Austin, Texas; as 
trust protector, for each of the aforementioned trusts, to join the 
Collins Family Control Group, a group acting in concert, to acquire 
voting shares of VBT Financial Corporation, and thereby indirectly 
acquire voting shares of Vantage Bank Texas, both of San Antonio, 
Texas.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
Michele Taylor Fennell,
Deputy Associate Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2022-11188 Filed 5-24-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________ 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff(s)

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address)

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney,

whose name and address are:

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

CLERK OF COURT

Date:

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

Eastern District of Texas

ServStor Technologies LLC

2:23-cv-00181

Celestica Inc.

Celestica Inc.

844 Don Mills Road

Toronto, Ontario

M3C 1V7 Canada

Fabricant LLP

411 Theodore Fremd Ave., Suite 206 South, Rye, NY10580

c/o Vincent J. Rubino, III

4/21/23

Case 2:23-cv-00181-JRG-RSP Document 7 Filed 04/21/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 27
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) .

u I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or

u I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or

u I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

 designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date) ; or

u I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

u Other (specify):

.

My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date:

Server’s signature

Printed name and title

Server’s address

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

2:23-cv-00181

0.00

Case 2:23-cv-00181-JRG-RSP Document 7 Filed 04/21/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 28
Robert K. STEWART, petitioner, v. NORTH CAROLINA.

No. 18-6841.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of North Carolina denied.
Corey E. JOHNSON, petitioner, v. BUTLER LAW FIRM.

No. 18-5863.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Motion of petitioner for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

§

LIONRA TECHNOLOGIES §

§

v. § CASE NO. 2:23-cv-00207 (TXED)

§

§

CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. §

REPORT OF MEDIATION

The above-captioned case was mediated (via Zoom video conference) by David Folsom on 

Friday, April 19, 2024, between Plaintiff(s) Lionra Technologies and Defendant(s) Cisco Systems, 

Inc. The mediation session has been suspended., but the undersigned mediator will continue to 

work with the parties in an effort to settle. 

Signed this 26 day of April 2024.

/s/ David Folsom

David Folsom

TXBN: 07210800

6002-B Summerfield Drive

Texarkana, Texas 75503

 Cell: 903 277-7303

 Email: david@folsomadr.com

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was filed electronically in 

compliance with Local Rule CV-5(a) on this 26 day of April 2024. As such, this document was 

served on all counsel who are deemed to have consented to electronic service. Local Rule CV5(a)(3)(A).

/s/ David Folsom

David Folsom

Case 2:23-cv-00207-JRG Document 14 Filed 04/26/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 352
Michael DANILOVICH, aka Sealed Defendant 2, aka Mike Daniels, aka Fat Mike, aka Mike D, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-6967.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF CAMPBELL STRATEGIC ALLOCATION FUND, L.P. AS OF AND FOR 
THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          81,471
<SECURITIES>                                   106,048
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               187,519
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 187,519
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,705
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     184,814
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   187,519
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                20,853
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    9,762
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 11,091
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             11,091
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    11,091
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   103.66
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   103.66
        

</TABLE>
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, 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.

 February 28, 2014

h0224

Order 

Clerk

February 28, 2014

147951

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 147951

COA: 315498

Wayne CC: 99-001344-FC

ANTHONY G. HUNT,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 8, 2013 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF DECEMBER 30, 1996 AND THE CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENT OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 30, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS ON FORM 10-K.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-26-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-30-1996
<CASH>                                       7,493,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                8,506,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,041,000
<INVENTORY>                                  6,818,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            26,261,000
<PP&E>                                     219,253,000
<DEPRECIATION>                             118,084,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             177,205,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      117,883,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,000
<OTHER-SE>                               (162,826,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               177,205,000
<SALES>                                    445,424,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           445,424,000
<CGS>                                      141,032,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              413,516,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            41,315,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               332,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          37,954,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (47,361,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    94,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (47,455,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                            (1,688,000)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (49,143,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Damien CASTILLO-MURION, aka Hector Raul Chairez, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-7939.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth 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. 98-40586 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus LESTER CHARGOIS, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:97-CR-122-2

- - - - - - - - - - February 10, 1999 Before JOLLY, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Lester Chargois appeals his conviction and sentence for conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine. He argues that the evidence at trial was insufficient to prove his identity as the perpetrator of those offenses. The Government presented two witnesses who identified Chargois as the guilty party. Their testimony was not contradicted. A rational trier of fact could have found that the evidence establishedNo. 98-40586 -2- Chargois as the guilty party beyond a reasonable doubt. See Jackson v. Virginia , 443 U.S. 307, 318-19 (1979). AFFIRMED.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 197 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 197

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service at 410 
North 6th Street in Garden City, Kansas, as the ``Clifford R. Hope Post 
                               Office''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 6, 1999

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service at 410 
North 6th Street in Garden City, Kansas, as the ``Clifford R. Hope Post 
                               Office''.

    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 410 
North 6th Street in Garden City, Kansas, is hereby designated as the 
``Clifford R. Hope Post Office''. Any reference to such facility in a 
law, regulation, map, document, paper, or other record of the United 
States shall be considered to be a reference to the ``Clifford R. Hope 
Post Office''.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

COBBLESTONE WIRELESS, LLC,

 Plaintiff,

v.

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD and

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, 

INC.,

 Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:23-CV-00285-JRG-RSP

ORDER

Before the Court is the Unopposed Motion for Issuance of Letters of Request (the 

“Motion”) filed by Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, 

Inc. Dkt. No. 56. After consideration, the Court GRANTS Samsung’s Motion.

Accordingly, the Court will execute the Request for Judicial Assistance attached as Exhibit 

A to Samsung’s Motion. The Clerk is DIRECTED to authenticate, under seal of this Court, the 

Court’s signature on the Request for Judicial Assistance and prepare two certified copies of the 

signed and sealed letter. Counsel for Samsung, or their agent, is hereby ORDERED to arrange

receipt of the materials from the Court by contacting the Clerk’s Office and to deliver the issued

Request for Judicial Assistance to the proper authority.

Case 2:23-cv-00285-JRG-RSP Document 61 Filed 07/19/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 5172
EXHIBIT
32: Rule 13a-14(b) Certifications





The
undersigned officers certify that this 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 Jinzanghuang
Tibet Pharmaceuticals, Inc.





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





December
      4, 2009
            /s/ Xue
      BangyiXue Bangyi (Chief Executive Officer)December
      4, 2009
            /s/ Zeng
      YilingZeng Yiling (Chief Financial
  Officer)








---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SHERMAN DIVISION

DAVID BRIDGE,

Plaintiff,

v.

WOPAC CONSTRUCTION, INC.

Defendant.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

 

 Case No. 4:23-cv-547-KPJ-ALM

 

JOINT STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

Plaintiff David Bridge (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Wopac Construction, Inc. 

(“Defendant”) (collectively “the Parties”) stipulate and agree that as Plaintiff no longer desires to 

pursue his claims against Defendant, any and all allegations, claims, and defenses asserted by and 

between them in the above-styled and numbered action should be dismissed with prejudice 

pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 41(a)(1)(ii) and each party shall bear their own fees and costs. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff and Defendant respectfully request the Court enter an order 

dismissing with prejudice any and all claims asserted by and between Plaintiff and Defendant in 

this action with each party bearing their own attorney’s fees and costs.

Case 4:23-cv-00547-ALM-KPJ Document 10 Filed 02/08/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 45
2

 Respectfully Submitted,

By: /s/ Douglas B. Welmaker

Douglas B. Welmaker

Texas State Bar No. 00788641 

Attorney-in-Charge

Welmaker Law, PLLC 

409 N. Fredonia, Suite 118

Longview Texas 75601

(512) 799-2048 (Direct)

doug@welmakerlaw.com

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF

By: /s/ Michael C. Wynne

MICHAEL C. WYNNE

ATTORNEY IN CHARGE

State Bar No. 22110800 

WYNNE, SMITH & YOUNG, PLLC 

707 W. Washington Street P.O. Box 2228

Sherman, Texas 75090 903.893.8177 (T) 

903.892.0916 (F) 

mwynne@wynnesmithlaw.com 

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT 

WOPAC CONSTRUCTION, INC. 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

On February 8, 2024, I electronically submitted the foregoing document with the clerk of 

court for the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas, using the electronic case filing system 

of the court. I hereby certify that I have served all counsel and/or pro se parties of record 

electronically or by another manner authorized by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5(b)(2). 

/s/ Douglas B. Welmaker

Douglas B. Welmaker

Case 4:23-cv-00547-ALM-KPJ Document 10 Filed 02/08/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 46
<PAGE>   1
Detroit Diesel Corporation Form 10-Q (continued)

                                                                      EXHIBIT 11

                           Detroit Diesel Corporation
                 Statement of Computation of Earnings Per Share


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                               Three Months Ended September 30,             Nine Months Ended September 30,
                                                  1998                  1997                  1998                  1997
                                                  ----                  ----                  ----                  ----
<S>                                         <C>                    <C>                 <C>                   <C>        
 Basic net income per share
        Net income (loss)                         ($2,400,000)           $8,200,000          $17,700,000           $22,000,000

        Weighted average number of shares 
          outstanding                              24,702,233            24,699,566           24,701,983            24,699,566
                                            -----------------      ----------------      ---------------       ---------------
 Basic net income per share                            ($0.10)                $0.33                $0.72                 $0.89
                                            =================      ================      ===============       ===============

 Diluted net income per share:
        Net income (loss)                         ($2,400,000)           $8,200,000          $17,700,000           $22,000,000

        Weighted average number of shares 
          outstanding                              24,702,233            24,699,566           24,701,983            24,699,566
        Dilutive effect of stock options                                    136,374 (2)           61,995 (1)            74,299 (2)
                                            -----------------      ----------------      ---------------       ---------------
        Weighted average number of shares 
          outstanding                              24,702,233            24,835,940           24,763,978            24,773,865
                                            -----------------      ----------------      ---------------       ---------------
 Diluted net income per share                          ($0.10)                $0.33                $0.71                 $0.89
                                            =================      ================      ===============       ===============
</TABLE>




(1)  Represents the weighted average dilutive effect of 299,310, 263,750,
     103,250, 20,000, 2,500 and 218,750 stock options exercisable at $20.00,
     $17.00, $23.75, $21.81, $23.94 and $22.69 per share, respectively,
     calculated using the treasury stock method.

(2)  Represents the weighted average dilutive effect of 300,250, 267,500,
     106,000 and 5,000 stock options exercisable at $20.00, $17.00, $23.75 and
     $18.00 per share, respectively, calculated using the treasury stock method.







                                       18
PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOCIATES, LLC, petitioner, v. Iris POUNDS, et al.

No. 18-204.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 19, 2018.

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