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

CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Solely for the purpose of complying with 18 U.S.C. §1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned in his capacity
as an officer of Fremont Michigan InsuraCorp, Inc. (the Company) hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:



|1. | The accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended March 31, 2009 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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: May 15, 2009 |  |  |  | /s/ Richard E. Dunning                                                                  
|                   |  |  |  | Richard E. Dunning, President and Chief Executive Officer                               
|                   |  | 
|Date: May 15, 2009 |  |  |  | /s/ Kevin G. Kaastra                                                                    
|                   |  |  |  | Kevin G. Kaastra, Vice President of Finance (principal financial and accounting officer)

The foregoing certifications are being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350,
and are not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and are not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any
general incorporation language in such filing.



30
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 32(b)

                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 on Form 10-Q of Navarre
Corporation (the "Company") for the period ended September 30, 2004, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 31, 2004 (the "Quarterly
Report"), I, James Gilbertson, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, hereby 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 Quarterly 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
            or 78o(d)); and

      2.    The information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in
            all material respects, the financial condition and results of
            operations of the Company at the end of and for the period covered
            by the Quarterly Report.

      .

November 12, 2004                      By /s/ James Gilbertson
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       James Gilbertson
                                       Vice President and
                                       Chief Financial Officer
Robert Sanchez TURNER, Petitioner v. Al THOMAS, Jr., et al.

No. 19-529

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 13, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
# Official Journal L 341/2007

| | ISSN 1725-2555 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 341 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 5027 December 2007 |

ISSN 1725-2555

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 341

English edition

Legislation

Volume 5027 December 2007

---

| Contents | | II   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is not obligatory | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | GUIDELINES |
| | | European Central Bank |
| | | 2007/830/EC |
| | * | Guideline of the European Central Bank of 1 August 2007 on monetary, financial institutions and markets statistics (recast) (ECB/2007/9) | 1 |

Contents

II   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is not obligatory

page

GUIDELINES

European Central Bank

2007/830/EC

*

Guideline of the European Central Bank of 1 August 2007 on monetary, financial institutions and markets statistics (recast) (ECB/2007/9)

(ECB/2007/9)

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 12-590V

Filed: January 9, 2014

Not for Publication

*************************************

KELLY SCHULTZ and PETER *

SCHULTZ, Parents of L.S., a Minor, *

*

 Petitioners, * Attorneys’ fees and costs decision based on

 * stipulation of fact

v. *

 *

SECRETARY OF HEALTH *

AND HUMAN SERVICES, *

 *

 Respondent. *

*

*************************************

Ronald C. Homer, Boston, MA, for petitioners.

Justine E. Daigneault, Washington, DC, for respondent.

MILLMAN, Special Master

DECISION AWARDING ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS1

On January 8, 2014, the parties filed a stipulation of fact in which they agreed on an 

appropriate amount for attorneys’ fees and costs in this case. In accordance with the General 

Order #9 requirement, petitioners filed a statement on January 8, 2014, asserting that they did not 

incur any costs in pursuit of their petition.

 

1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the special master’s action in this 

case, the special master intends to post this unpublished decision on the United States Court of Federal 

Claims’s website, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, 116 Stat. 2899, 

2913 (Dec. 17, 2002). Vaccine Rule 18(b) states that all decisions of the special masters will be made 

available to the public unless they contain trade secrets or commercial or financial information that is 

privileged and confidential, or medical or similar information whose disclosure would constitute a clearly 

unwarranted invasion of privacy. When such a decision is filed, petitioner has 14 days to identify and 

move to redact such information prior to the document=s disclosure. If the special master, upon review, 

agrees that the identified material fits within the banned categories listed above, the special master shall 

redact such material from public access.
2

Petitioners submitted their request for attorneys’ fees and costs to respondent. During 

informal discussions, respondent raised objections to certain items in petitioners’ application. 

Based on these objections, petitioners amend their application for attorneys’ fees and costs to 

$10,215.63. Respondent does not object to this amount. The undersigned finds this amount to 

be reasonable. Accordingly, the court awards $10,215.63, representing reimbursement for 

attorneys’ fees and costs. The award shall be in the form of a check payable jointly to petitioners

and Conway, Homer & Chin-Caplan, P.C. in the amount of $10,215.63.

In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the 

court is directed to enter judgment herewith.2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 9, 2014 s/ Laura D. Millman

 Laura D. Millman

 Special Master

 

2

Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by each party, either separately or 

jointly, filing a notice renouncing the right to seek review.
FORM OF PROXY
GREENWICH STREET CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL FUND INC.
388 Greenwich Street
New York, New York 10013
This Proxy is Solicited on Behalf of the Directors of the Fund

The undersigned hereby appoints HEATH B. McLENDON, LEWIS E. DAIDONE, and 
ROBERT M. NELSON, and each of them acting in the absence of the other, 
as Proxies, each with the power to appoint his substitute, and hereby 
authorizes them to represent and to vote, as designated herein, all the 
shares of common stock of Greenwich Street California Municipal Fund 
Inc. held of record by the undersigned on November 15, 1996 at a Meeting 
of Stockholders to be held on December 23, 1996 or any adjournment 
thereof.




CONTINUED AND TO BE SIGNED ON REVERSE SIDE	[SEE REVERSE SIDE]







[   X   ]	Please mark
	votes as in 
	this example.

The Board of Directors recommends a vote "FOR" the following proposals. 
This proxy, when properly executed, will be voted in the manner directed 
herein by the undersgned stockholder.  If no direction is made, this 
proxy will be voted FOR  each nominee for director and FOR each 
proposal.

1.	ELECTION OF DIRECTORS				 
Nominees: J. Bibliowicz, J.H. Fleiss, F.P. Martin, 

	   FOR			WITHHELD
	[              ]		[                 ]   

(INSTRUCTION:	To withhold authority to vote for any individual 
nominee write that nominee's name on the space provided above.)

	[              ]
	For all nominees except as noted above


2.	PROPOSAL TO RATIFY THE SELECTION OF KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP AS THE 
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS OF THE FUND. 

	   FOR			WITHHELD		ABSTAIN
	[              ]		[                 ]		[                   
]

3.	In their discretion, the Proxies are authorized to vote upon such 
other business as may properly come before the meeting. 

	[               ]
	MARK HERE FOR ADDRESS CHANGE AND NOTE AT LEFT

Please sign exactly as name appears to the left.  
When shares are held by joint tenants, both should 
sign, or if one signs, that stockholder's vote 
binds both stockholders. When signing as attorney, 
executor, administrator, agent, trustee or 
guardian, please give full title as such. If a 
corporation, please sign in full corporate name by 
President or other authorized officer.  If a 
partnership, please sign in partnership name by 
authorized person.

PLEASE MARK, SIGN, DATE AND RETURN THE PROXY CARD PROMPTLY USING THE 
ENCLOSED ENVELOPE.

Signature: ____________________________ Date: ______________
Signature: ____________________________ Date: ______________
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, e xcept under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and col lateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judg ments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and condi tions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### AUG 10 2004 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

DAVID ROYCE PRATT,

Petitioner-Appellant,

v. MIKE NELSON, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF KANSAS, Respondents-Appellees. No. 03-3130 (D.C. No. 99-CV-3321-SAC)

(D. Kan.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Before KELLY , Circuit Judge, BRORBY , Senior Circuit Judge, and BRISCOE , Circuit Judge.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, th is panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materiallyassist the determination of this appeal. **See** Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.-2-

David Royce Pratt appeals from the denial of his habeas corpus petition brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Mr. Pratt was conv icted after a bench trial of two counts of aggravated burglary, aggravated crimi nal sodomy, rape, attempted rape, two counts of aggravated kidnaping, two count s of aggravated robbery, and two counts of aggravated battery arising from two s eparate crime sprees. He was sentenced to two consecutive life sentences for the aggravated kidnapings as well as to several concurrent sentences for the remainin g convictions. The Kansas Supreme Court affirmed his convictions and sentence s on direct appeal. Subsequently, the Kansas Court of Appeals also affi rmed the denial of his state application for post-conviction relief, and the Kan sas Supreme Court denied review. Having exhausted his state-court remedies , Mr. Pratt then filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the United States Di strict Court for the District of Kansas. The court did not conduct an evidentiary h earing, basing its decision solely on the state-court record. Following the district court’s denial of his habeas petition, Mr. Pratt filed the instant appeal in this court. We granted a certificate of appealability (COA) on the issue of whether Mr. Pratt had received cons titutionally ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel. With re spect to these issues, Mr. Pratt claims that (1) counsel failed to seek suppression of Mr. Pratt’s custodial statement; (2) counsel failed to request a jury tri al or to adequately explain the-3-

right to a jury trial to him; (3) counsel failed to seek suppression of DNA and other evidence; and (4) appellate counsel failed to argue these issues and others on direct appeal. In its memorandum and order deny ing relief, the district court applied 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1) and (2) in its revie w of the state court’s rulings. We agree with the district court’s conclusions and AFFIRM the denial of Mr. Pratt’s habeas petition.

Entered for the Court

Mary Beck Briscoe Circuit Judge
113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 1391 

AN ACT 

Designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 25 South Oak Street in London, Ohio, as 

the ‘‘London Fallen Veterans Memorial Post Office’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 1391 EH

1 SECTION 1. LONDON FALLEN VETERANS MEMORIAL POST 

2 OFFICE. 

3 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

4 Postal Service located at 25 South Oak Street in London, 

5 Ohio, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘London Fall6 en Veterans Memorial Post Office’’. 

7 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg8 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

9 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

10 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘London Fallen Vet11 erans Memorial Post Office’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives June 17, 2014. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 1391 

AN ACT 

Designate the facility of the United States Postal 

morial Post Office’’. don, Ohio, as the ‘‘London Fallen Veterans MeService located at 25 South Oak Street in Lon-
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1105 

To amend the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 to provide a registration 

exemption for private equity fund advisers, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 13, 2013 

Mr. HURT (for himself, Mr. COOPER, Mr. HIMES, and Mr. GARRETT) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To amend the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 to provide 

a registration exemption for private equity fund advisers, 

and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Small Business Capital 

5 Access and Job Preservation Act’’. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1105 IH

1 SEC. 2. REGISTRATION AND REPORTING EXEMPTIONS RE2 LATING TO PRIVATE EQUITY FUNDS ADVI3 SORS. 

4 Section 203 of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 

5 (15 U.S.C. 80b–3) is amended by adding at the end the 

6 following: 

7 ‘‘(o) EXEMPTION OF AND REPORTING REQUIRE8 MENTS BY PRIVATE EQUITY FUNDS ADVISORS.— 

9 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in this 

10 subsection, no investment adviser shall be subject to 

11 the registration or reporting requirements of this 

12 title with respect to the provision of investment ad13 vice relating to a private equity fund or funds, pro14 vided that each such fund has not borrowed and 

15 does not have outstanding a principal amount in ex16 cess of twice its invested capital commitments. 

17 ‘‘(2) MAINTENANCE OF RECORDS AND ACCESS

18 BY COMMISSION.—Not later than 6 months after the 

19 date of enactment of this subsection, the Commis20 sion shall issue final rules— 

21 ‘‘(A) to require investment advisers de22 scribed in paragraph (1) to maintain such 

23 records and provide to the Commission such an24 nual or other reports as the Commission taking 

25 into account fund size, governance, investment 

26 strategy, risk, and other factors, as the ComVerDate Mar 15 2010 23:24 Mar 18, 2013 Jkt 029200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1105.IH H1105

srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1105 IH

1 mission determines necessary and appropriate 

2 in the public interest and for the protection of 

3 investors; and 

4 ‘‘(B) to define the term ‘private equity 

5 fund’ for purposes of this subsection.’’. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14**  **- 1827** 

In R e: PRESTON LEVONNE BUIE , Petitioner

.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus

. (1:08

- cr - 00347

- WO

- 1)

Submitted : October 3, 2014 Decided: October 9, 2014

Before NIEMEYER and GREGORY , Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion

.
Preston Levonne Buie, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Preston Levonne Buie petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion to vacate . He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act on the motion and to releas e him on bond pending the motion’s resolution . Our review of the district court’s docket reveals that the district
court issued an order den ying relief on the § 2255 motion on September 16, 2014. Accordingly, because the district court has recently decid ed Buie ’s case, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
**Exhibit
      32.2**




**CERTIFICATION
      OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. ss.
      1350**





**(SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)**





I,
      Li Chi
      Yuen, Chief Financial Officer of China-Biotics, Inc. (the "Registrant"), certify
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based upon a review of the Quarterly Report
      on
      Form 10-QSB for the period ended December 31, 2007 of the Registrant (the
      "Report"):





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




(2)
            The
                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
                Registrant.





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




/s/
              Li Chi
              YuenLi Chi Yuen
              Chief Financial Officer
              February 12, 2008
Marco GONZALEZ, Petitioner, v. PANDA RESTAURANT GROUP, INC.

No. 19-6574

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 13, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District denied.
SUB-ITEM 77D

Pursuant to Rule 35d-1 under the Investment Company Act of
1940, as amended, the Smith Barney Managed Governments Fund
changed its investment policies to invest, under normal
circumstances, at least 80% of its net assets plus the
amount of any borrowings for investment purposes in the
types of investments suggested by its name.
C.P., et al., Petitioners, v. C.A.

No. 18-1354

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, Third Appellate District denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 6
<CIK> 0000919557
<NAME> Putnam Diversified Income Portfolio
<SERIES>
   <NUMBER>007
   <NAME>Travelers Series Fund Inc.

<S>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>          Year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  Oct-31-2001
<PERIOD-END>                       Oct-31-2000
<INVESTMENTS-AT-COST>              156,000,926
<INVESTMENTS-AT-VALUE>             138,880,206
<RECEIVABLES>                        8,321,993
<ASSETS-OTHER>                          96,179
<OTHER-ITEMS-ASSETS>                         0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                     147,298,378
<PAYABLE-FOR-SECURITIES>             4,622,657
<SENIOR-LONG-TERM-DEBT>                      0
<OTHER-ITEMS-LIABILITIES>            1,831,304
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES>                  6,453,961
<SENIOR-EQUITY>                              0
<PAID-IN-CAPITAL-COMMON>           158,251,253
<SHARES-COMMON-STOCK>               13,659,122
<SHARES-COMMON-PRIOR>               13,895,033
<ACCUMULATED-NII-CURRENT>           10,860,854
<OVERDISTRIBUTION-NII>                       0
<ACCUMULATED-NET-GAINS>            (10,737,031)
<OVERDISTRIBUTION-GAINS>                     0
<ACCUM-APPREC-OR-DEPREC>           (17,530,659)
<NET-ASSETS>                       140,844,417
<DIVIDEND-INCOME>                      439,057
<INTEREST-INCOME>                   14,029,349
<OTHER-INCOME>                               0
<EXPENSES-NET>                       1,323,606
<NET-INVESTMENT-INCOME>             13,144,800
<REALIZED-GAINS-CURRENT>            (5,445,160)
<APPREC-INCREASE-CURRENT>           (6,984,701)
<NET-CHANGE-FROM-OPS>                  714,939
<EQUALIZATION>                               0
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-INCOME>          (12,792,088)
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-GAINS>                     0
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OTHER>                        0
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-SOLD>                647,934
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-REDEEMED>          2,092,927
<SHARES-REINVESTED>                  1,209,082
<NET-CHANGE-IN-ASSETS>             (15,262,264)
<ACCUMULATED-NII-PRIOR>             12,807,689
<ACCUMULATED-GAINS-PRIOR>           (7,591,418)
<OVERDISTRIB-NII-PRIOR>                      0
<OVERDIST-NET-GAINS-PRIOR>                   0
<GROSS-ADVISORY-FEES>                1,144,869
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           0
<GROSS-EXPENSE>                      1,323,606
<AVERAGE-NET-ASSETS>               151,752,481
<PER-SHARE-NAV-BEGIN>                   11.240
<PER-SHARE-NII>                          0.930
<PER-SHARE-GAIN-APPREC>                 (0.880)
<PER-SHARE-DIVIDEND>                     0.980
<PER-SHARE-DISTRIBUTIONS>                0.000
<RETURNS-OF-CAPITAL>                     0.000
<PER-SHARE-NAV-END>                     10.310
<EXPENSE-RATIO>                           0.87



</TABLE>