alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                        COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
                             (Dollars in thousands)

                                                                       For the three months ended
                                                    September 30, 1999                         September 30, 1998
                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Weighted                                    Weighted
                                                         Average       Per share                     Average      Per share
                                           Income         Shares         Amount         Income        Shares       Amount
<S>                                          <C>            <C>            <C>            <C>            <C>       <C>
Basic EPS
  Income available to common
   shareholders                              $498      1,305,922        $0.38           $429      1,331,483         $0.32

Effect of dilutive securities
  Options                                                 39,868                                     56,033

Diluted EPS
  Income available to common
   shareholders                               498      1,345,790        $0.37           $429      1,387,515         $0.31


                                                                   For the nine months ended
                                                  September 30, 1999                            September 30, 1998
                                    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basic EPS
  Income available to common
   shareholders                            $1,392      1,301,582        $1.07         $1,343      1,297,091         $1.03

Effect of dilutive securities
  Options                                                 43,301                                     54,035

Diluted EPS
  Income available to common
  shareholders                             1,392       1,344,883        $1.04         $1,343      1,351,125         $0.99


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2

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 of Active Power, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the
period ending December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John K. Penver, Vice President of Finance, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary 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 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: March 3, 2009



|                                                                               
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/    JOHN K.
PENVER                                                          
|John K. Penver Vice President of Finance, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15

- 41370 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v. RUDITH VALMORE GUERRERO

- ARANIVA, also known as Rudith Valmore Araniva

- Guerrero , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:15

- CR

- 536

- 1

Before DAVIS, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Following the entry of his guilty plea conviction of illegal reentry, Rudith Valmore Guerrero

- Araniva was sentenced to 32 months of imp ris onment, based in part on an eight

- level enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)( 1)(C) for his prior conviction of the Texas offense of injury to a child under T EX

. P ENAL C ODE § 22.04. Guerrero

- Araniva argues for the first time

* 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 se t forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED November 23, 2016 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 15-41370 Document: 00513772205 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/23/2016No. 15

- 41370

2 on appeal that the district court plainly erred by characterizing his 1991 Texas conviction for injury to a child as an aggravated felony un der 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(F) for purposes of applying the § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C) sentencing enhancement and for convictin g and sent encing him under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2)

. Relying primarily on Johnson v. United States , 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), Guerrero

- Araniva argues that the definition of a crime of violence in 8 U.S.C. § 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 affirm a nce, urging that Guerrero

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

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

- 6259). The Government is correct that Gonzale z - Longoria forecloses Guerrero

- Araniva ’s facial vagueness challenge to § 16(b) , as well as his challenge to our application of § 16(b) on due process grounds. 1 See id. Accordingly, the motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the district court’s ju dgment is AFFIRMED. The Government’s alternate 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. ___, No. 15

- 1498, 2016 WL 3232911 (Sep t. 29, 2016), does not 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: 15-41370 Document: 00513772205 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/23/2016
```

                                                                EXHIBIT 13.(a).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 of Tefron Ltd. (the "Company") on Form 20-F
for the period ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned hereby
certify that to the best of our 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.

Date: March 27, 2008

                                                         /s/ YOSEF SHIRAN
                                                         ----------------
                                                         Yosef Shiran
                                                         Chief Executive Officer

Date: March 27, 2008

                                                         /s/ ASAF ALPEROVITZ
                                                         -------------------
                                                         Asaf Alperovitz
                                                         Chief Financial Officer
```
# C_2023223EN.01001402.xml

| 26.6.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 223/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.6.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 223/14

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal du travail francophone de Bruxelles (Belgium) lodged on 27 March 2023 — GI v Partena Assurances Sociales pour Travailleurs Indépendants ASBL

(Case C-195/23, Partena)

(2023/C 223/19)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal du travail francophone de Bruxelles

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: GI

Defendant: Partena Assurances Sociales pour Travailleurs Indépendants ASBL

Question referred

Do Protocol (No 7) on the privileges and immunities of the European Union, in particular Article 14 thereof, the principle of a single social security scheme applicable to workers, whether employed or self-employed, active or retired, and the principle of sincere cooperation as set out in Article 4(3) of the Treaty on European Union preclude a Member State from imposing a national social security scheme on, and requiring the payment of social security contributions from, an official who, in addition to his employment within a European institution, also carries out additional teaching activities with the latter’s authorisation, when that official is, by virtue of the Staff Regulations of Officials, already subject to the joint social security scheme of the EU institutions?

---
# C_2023329EN.01002901.xml

| 18.9.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 329/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.9.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 329/29

---

Action brought on 27 July 2023 — Landesbank Baden-Württemberg v SRB

(Case T-441/23)

(2023/C 329/41)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Landesbank Baden-Württemberg (represented by: H. Berger, M. Weber and D. Schoo, lawyers)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the decision of the Single Resolution Board of 2 May 2023 on the calculation of the 2023 ex-ante contributions to the Single Resolution Fund (SRB/ES/2023/23) together with annexes, at least in so far as the contested decision together with Annexes I, II and III concern the applicant’s contribution, |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the Single Resolution Board of 2 May 2023 on the calculation of the 2023 ex-ante contributions to the Single Resolution Fund (SRB/ES/2023/23) together with annexes, at least in so far as the contested decision together with Annexes I, II and III concern the applicant’s contribution,

| — | order the SRB to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the SRB to pay the costs.

In the alternative, in the event that the Court takes the view that the contested decision is legally non-existent as a result of the use of the incorrect official language by the SRB and the action for annulment would therefore be inadmissible on the ground that it would be devoid of purpose, the applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | declare that the contested decision is legally non-existent; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that the contested decision is legally non-existent;

| — | order the SRB to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the SRB to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on nine pleas in law which are identical to those relied on in Case T-440/23, Berlin Hyp v SRB.

---
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON



### O RDER 

### W ITHDRAWING 

### M EDIATION 

### O RDER

Court of Appeals Number: 01

- 20

- 00208

- CV

Style: Sandeep Patel and ERCC Construction Company, LLC v.

Warwick Construction, Inc.

Trial Court Case Number: 14

- DCV

- 219641

Trial Court: 268th District Court of Fort Bend County

Type of Motion: Objection to Mediation

Party Filing Motion: Appellee



### Appellee has objected to mediation. The Court’s mediation order dated March 30,

2020 is withdrawn.

Judge's signature: / s / Peter Kelly

Acting individually

Date: April 10, 202 0

* Absent emergency or a statement that the motion is unopposed, must wait ten days before acting on motion except for

motion to extend time to file a brief. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 10.3(a).

Note : Single justice may grant or deny any request for relief properly s ought by motion, except in a civil case a single justice

should not: (1) act on a petition for an extraordinary writ or (2) dismiss or otherwise determine an appeal or a motion

for rehearing. T EX . R. A PP . P. 10.4(a).
# C_2023304EN.01000302.xml

| 28.8.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 304/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.8.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 304/3

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal da Concorrência, Regulação e Supervisão (Portugal) lodged on 24 April 2023 — Synlabhealth II SA v Autoridade da Concorrência

(Case C-259/23, Synlabhealth II)

(2023/C 304/05)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal da Concorrência, Regulação e Supervisão

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Synlabhealth II SA

Defendant: Autoridade da Concorrência

Questions referred

| I. | Do the business records at issue in this case, which are transmitted by e-mail, constitute ‘correspondence’ for the purposes of Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union? |
| --- | --- |

I.

Do the business records at issue in this case, which are transmitted by e-mail, constitute ‘correspondence’ for the purposes of Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union?

| II. | Does Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union preclude business records arising from e-mail communications between managers and employees of undertakings from being seized in the course of an investigation into agreements and practices prohibited under Article 101 TFEU (ex Article 81 TEC)? |
| --- | --- |

II.

Does Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union preclude business records arising from e-mail communications between managers and employees of undertakings from being seized in the course of an investigation into agreements and practices prohibited under Article 101 TFEU (ex Article 81 TEC)?

| III. | Does Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union preclude such business records from being seized on the prior authorisation of a judicial authority, in this case the Public Prosecutor’s Office, which is responsible for representing the State, defending the interests determined by law, bringing criminal prosecutions on the basis of the principle of legality and defending democratic legality in accordance with the Constitution, and which operates independently of the other central, regional and local authorities? |
| --- | --- |

III.

Does Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union preclude such business records from being seized on the prior authorisation of a judicial authority, in this case the Public Prosecutor’s Office, which is responsible for representing the State, defending the interests determined by law, bringing criminal prosecutions on the basis of the principle of legality and defending democratic legality in accordance with the Constitution, and which operates independently of the other central, regional and local authorities?

---
Presidential Documents

Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 133 / Wednesday, July 13, 2022 / Presidential Documents 42057 

Notice of July 11, 2022 

Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect to 

Hong Kong 

On July 14, 2020, by Executive Order 13936, the President declared a national 

emergency pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act 

(50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat 

to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States 

constituted by the situation with respect to Hong Kong. 

The situation with respect to Hong Kong, including recent actions taken 

by the People’s Republic of China to fundamentally undermine Hong Kong’s 

autonomy, continues to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the 

national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States. For 

this reason, the national emergency declared on July 14, 2020, must continue 

in effect beyond July 14, 2022. Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) 

of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 

1 year the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13936 with 

respect to the situation in Hong Kong. 

This notice shall be published in the Federal Register and transmitted to 

the Congress. 

THE WHITE HOUSE, 

July 11, 2022. [FR Doc. 2022–15140 

Filed 7–12–22; 11:15 am] 

Billing code 3395–F2–P 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PREZ DOC 3BIDEN.EPS</GPH>
<PAGE>   1
EX-21.1
Subsidiaries of the Registrant

                                                                    Exhibit 21.1

Subsidiaries of the Registrant

Prisym Technologies, Inc. of Georgia, a Georgia corporation
G&R Marketing, Inc., an Illinois corporation
Microsouth, Inc., a Georgia corporation
tekgraf, inc., a Texas corporation
Computer Graphics Distributing Company, a Maryland corporation
Intelligent Products Marketing, Inc., a California corporation
IG Distributing, Inc., a California corporation
Tekgraf Sub I, Inc., a Georgia corporation
Tekgraf Sub II, Inc., a Georgia corporation
Tekgraf Sub III, Inc., a Georgia corporation
**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 Annual Report of Clickable Enterprises, Inc. (the “Company”)
        set forth in Amendment No. 2 to Form 10-KSB for the period ended March 31, 200 6 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 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 operation of the Company.
 Date: August
                13, 2007
              By:
              /s/ Nicholas
                Cirillo, Jr.Name:
                  Nicholas Cirillo, Jr.,Title:
                  President and Chief Executive Officer
                (Principal
                    Executive Officer)
 
 **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 of Clickable Enterprises, Inc. (the “Company”)
        set forth in Amendment No. 2 to Form 10-KSB for the period ended March 31, 2006 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 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
        operation of the Company.
 Date: August
                13, 2007
              By:
              /s/ Guy
                PipoloName:Guy
                  PipoloTitle:Chief
                  Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial
                  Officer)
  A
        signed
        original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
        authentications, 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 Clickable Enterprises, Inc. and will
        be
        retained by Clickable Enterprises, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
        Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk January 21, 2009

0114 

# Order

January 21, 2009

137606

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 137606 COA: 277549 Washtenaw CC: 06-001194-FC JOSHUA JOSEPH TACKETT, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 9, 2008 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.