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 GameTech International, Inc.
      (the “Company”) for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007, as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Jay M.
      Meilstrup, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
      U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d));
      and




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


/s/
                  JAY M. MEILSTRUPJay
                  M. Meilstrup
                Chief
                  Executive OfficerJanuary
                  21, 2008
   51
STATE v. Joseph M. JOHNSTON.

No. 452P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 9, 2008.

Robert Montgomery, Special Deputy Attorney General, Garland N. Yates, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 24th day of September 2008 by Defendant for Notice of Appeal:

"Motion Dismissed ex mero motu by order of the Court in conference this the 9th day of October 2008."
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**RECKSON OPERATING PARTNERSHIP, L. P.**

 

**Certificationof Marc Holliday, President of Wyoming Acquisition GP LLC, the sole generalpartner of the Registrant, pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title18 of the United States Code**

 

I, Marc Holliday,President of Wyoming Acquisition GP LLC, the sole general partner of RecksonOperating Partnership, L. P. (the “Company”), certify pursuant to section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

 

1)         The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Qof the Company for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2008 (the “Report”)fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

 

2)         The information containedin the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| Dated:   May 14, 2008 | By     | /s/  MARC HOLLIDAY                          |
|---------------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|
|                            |   | Marc  Holliday                              |
|                            |   | President                                   |
|                            |   | of  Wyoming Acquisition GP LLC,             |
|                            |   | the  sole general partner of the Registrant |

 

----
----

(2004/C 33 E/038)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0399/03

by Karl von Wogau (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(17 February 2003)

Subject:   Compulsory registration for visitors to health spas

The spa tax regulations of a German community stipulate that persons from outside the community who are accommodated free of charge not only have to register their presence on the next working day after arrival, and register their departure at the latest on the last day of their stay but that they also have to pay spa taxes for the period of their stay.

These measures also apply to visitors from other Member States of the European Union.

This requirement means that people who stay overnight in the community while visiting friends or relatives for example, have to pay spa taxes.

Does the Commission take the view that these regulations are compatible with European Union provisions on the free movement of persons?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(1 April 2003)

In the absence of harmonised fiscal legislation at Community level, the Member States and their local authorities are free to design their taxes according to their political preferences. In doing so, however, they must respect the general freedoms and principles enshrined in the EC Treaty. Neither the local tax, described by the Honourable Member, nor the corollary registration obligation, discriminate against nationals of other Member States, since all visitors, irrespective of their nationality or place of residence, are subject to it. Therefore, the Commission does not consider that these taxes interfere with the principle of free movement of persons.

----
# C_2023321EN.01001901.xml

| 11.9.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 321/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.9.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 321/19

---

Appeal brought on 25 April 2023 by Topcart GmbH against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 15 February 2023 in Case T-8/22, Topcart GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office

(Case C-270/23 P)

(2023/C 321/23)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Appellant: Topcart GmbH (represented by: M. Hoffmann, Rechtsanwalt)

Other party to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office

By order of 17 July 2023, the Court of Justice of the European Union (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) did not allow the appeal to proceed and ordered the appellant to bear its own costs.

---
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

                                  CERTIFICATION

            Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
       (Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18,
                              United States Code)

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and
(b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of the
undersigned officers of UST Private Equity Investors Fund, Inc. (the "Company"),
does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended April 30, 2003 (the
"Form 10-Q") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13
(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information
contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date:  September 15, 2003                    /s/ David I. Fann
                                           ---------------------------------
                                           Name:  David I. Fann
                                           Title: Co-Chief Executive Officer

Date:  September 15, 2003                    /s/ Douglas A. Lindgren
                                           ---------------------------------
                                           Name:  Douglas A. Lindgren
                                           Title: Co-Chief Executive Officer

Date:  September 15, 2003                    /s/ Robert F. Aufenanger
                                           ---------------------------------
                                           Name:  Robert F. Aufenanger
                                           Title: Treasurer

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the PanAmSat
Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 1997 and is qualified in
its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                       4,568,758
<SECURITIES>                               375,581,803
<RECEIVABLES>                               11,478,380
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (200,000)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            21,691,280
<PP&E>                                     868,594,627
<DEPRECIATION>                           (153,839,495)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           1,661,988,437
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       30,270,225
<BONDS>                                    635,701,943
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      340,199,811
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,000,116
<OTHER-SE>                                 510,943,909
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             1,661,988,437
<SALES>                                     75,256,417
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            75,256,417
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               35,845,965
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,886,426
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             41,800,203
<INCOME-TAX>                                17,202,829
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         24,597,374
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                24,597,374
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1766
BOZENA GOSSETT, a/k/a Bozena Iratova, Petitioner, versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A79-417-800) Submitted: February 16, 2005 Decided: February 28, 2005 Before WILLIAMS and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. David F. Vedder, DAVID F. VEDDER, P.A., Daytona Beach, Florida, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, David V. Bernal, Assistant Director, Anthony P. Nicastro, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Bozena Gossett, a native and citizen of the Czech Republic, petitions for review of an order of the immigration judge, as affirmed by the Board of Immigration Appeals, denying her motion to reopen. Our review of the denial of a motion to reopen is extremely deferential, and the decision will not be reversed absent abuse of discretion. Stewart v. INS , 181 F.3d 587, 595 (4th Cir. 1999). Such motions are disfavored. INS v. Doherty , 502 U.S. 314, 323 (1992). We have reviewed the administrative record and conclude that the Board did not abuse its discretion in affirming the immigration judge’s denial of the motion to reopen. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED
STATE of North Carolina v. George W. BALDWIN.

No. 47P02-10.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January 28, 2009.

George W. Baldwin, Pro Se.

Robert Montgomery, Special Deputy Attorney General, Robert F. Johnson, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the application filed by Defendant on the 9th day of January 2009 in this matter for Writ of Habeas Corpus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, Alamance County:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 28th day of January 2009."

Upon consideration of the application filed by Defendant on the 27th day of January 2009 in this matter for Writ of Habeas Corpus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, Alamance County:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 28th day of January 2009."
# Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014Show full title

Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 of 17 March 2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or            threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (revoked)         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014                     

# of 17 March 2014

# concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and                        independence of Ukraine (revoked)                     

F1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                        

Textual Amendments

F1Regulation revoked (31.12.2020) by The Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 (S.I. 2019/855), regs. 1(2), **98(a)** (with reg. 103); 2020 c. 1, **Sch. 5 para. 1(1)**
STATE of North Carolina v. Jerry Dean BRYANT.

No. 376P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 11, 2008.

Michael J. Reece, Smithfield, for Bryant.

*568Terence D. Friedman, Assistant Attorney General, Thomas J. Keith, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 14th day of August 2008 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 11th day of December 2008."
Henry LAWSON, Jr. v. Owen Dana WHITE, Thomas Calvin Gordon, Sr., Thomas Edward Cook, III & Southeastern Outdoor Products, Inc.

No. 69P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 11, 2008.

J. Gates Harris, Roanoke Rapids, for Lawson.

Gregory T. Griffin, Clinton, for White, et al.

*ORDER*

The plaintiff's Petition for Discretionary Review is allowed for the limited purpose of remanding this case to the Court of Appeals for reconsideration of its decision in light of *Dogwood Development and Management Co., LLC v. White Oak Transport Co., Inc.,*362 N.C. 191, 657 S.E.2d 361 (2008).

By order of the Court in Conference, this 11th day of June 2008.
# C_2023083EN.01003001.xml

| 6.3.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 83/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.3.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 83/30

---

Action brought on 23 January 2023 — Chart v EUIPO (ABSOLUTEFLOW)

(Case T-21/23)

(2023/C 83/38)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Chart Inc. (Ball Ground, Georgia, United States of America) (represented by: R. Drożdż and J. Wachinger, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Trade mark at issue: Application for EU word mark ABSOLUTEFLOW — Application for registration No 18 669 744

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 31 October 2022 in Case R 1583/2022-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

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

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Plea in law

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
September
28, 2009





The Board
of Directors


China
Precision Steel, Inc.


18/F Teda
Building


87 Wing
Lok Street


Sheung
Wan


Hong
Kong





Dear
Sirs:





CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We hereby
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form
S-3 (File No.: 333-153613) of China Precision Steel, Inc. of our report dated
September 26, 2009, on the consolidated financial statements and internal
control over financial reporting of China Precision Steel, Inc., which appears
in this annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30,
2009.





Yours
faithfully,





/s/ Moore
Stephens


Certified
Public Accountants


Hong
Kong
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3199 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

  2d Session
                                S. 3199

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exempt certain shipping 
                    from the harbor maintenance tax.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 25, 2008

Mr. Lautenberg (for himself, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Smith, Mrs. Murray, Mr. 
 Schumer, Ms. Stabenow, and Mr. vitter) introduced the following bill; 
     which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exempt certain shipping 
                    from the harbor maintenance tax.

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

SECTION 1. EXEMPTION OF CERTAIN COMMERCIAL AND BULK CARGO FROM THE 
              HARBOR MAINTENANCE TAX.

    Section 4462 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by 
redesignating subsection (i) as subsection (j) and by inserting after 
subsection (h) the following new subsection:
    ``(i) Exemption for Certain Short Sea Shipping Cargo.--
            ``(1) In general.--No tax shall be imposed under section 
        4461(a) with respect to commercial cargo (other than bulk 
        cargo) that is loaded at--
                    ``(A) a port in the United States mainland and 
                unloaded at another port in the United States mainland 
                after transport solely by coastal route or river or 
                unloaded at a port in Canada located in the Great Lakes 
                Saint Lawrence Seaway System, or
                    ``(B) a port in Canada located in the Great Lakes 
                Saint Lawrence Seaway System and unloaded at a port in 
                the United States mainland.
            ``(2) Definitions.--In this subsection:
                    ``(A) Bulk cargo.--The term `bulk cargo' has the 
                meaning given that term by section 53101(1) of title 
                46, United States Code.
                    ``(B) Great lakes saint lawrence seaway system.--
                The term `Great Lakes Saint Lawrence Seaway System' 
                means the waterway between Duluth, Minnesota, and Sept 
                Iles, Quebec, encompassing the 5 Great Lakes, their 
                connecting channels, and the Saint Lawrence River.
                    ``(C) United states mainland.--The term `United 
                States mainland' has the meaning given such term in 
                subsection (b)(3).''.

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendments made by section 1 shall apply to port use after the 
date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

      Schedule of Year-To-Date Principal and Interest Distributions
                                  to 
                         Certificate Holders

                                                    Ending
Class          Interest       Principal      Losses Balance
<S>            <C>            <C>            <C>    <C> 
A               2,255,719.73   5,801,046.70   0.00   107,194,953.30
CE              1,280,754.41           0.00   0.00     2,479,629.00
M1                259,115.37           0.00   0.00    12,397,000.00
M2                206,110.18           0.00   0.00     9,564,000.00
M3                 96,863.22           0.00   0.00     4,252,000.00
R1                      0.51         100.00   0.00             0.00
R2                      0.51         100.00   0.00             0.00
R3                      0.51         100.00   0.00             0.00





</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 176 (Tuesday, September 13, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54005-54006]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-18054]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Northeast Oregon Forests Resource Advisory Committee (RAC)

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of meetings.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 54006]]

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the authorities in the Federal Advisory Committees 
Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Northeast Oregon Forests Resource Advisory 
Committee (RAC) will meet on September 19 and 20, 2005 in La Grande, 
Oregon. The purpose of the meeting is to meet as a Committee to review 
proposed projects for fiscal year 2006 and to review projects in the 
field.

DATES: The meeting will be held as follows: September 19, 2005, 1 p.m. 
to 5 p.m. in La Grande, Oregon; September 20, 2005, 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. in 
La Grande, Oregon.

ADDRESSES: The September 19, 2005 meeting will be held at the Blue 
Mountain Conference Center, 404 12th Street, La Grande, Oregon.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Harris, Designated Federal 
Official, USDA, Malheur National Forest, P.O. Box 909, John Day, Oregon 
97845. Phone: (541) 575-3008.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: At the September 19, 2005 meeting the RAC 
will finish reviewing proposed projects for the coming year. A public 
comment period will be provided at 1:40 p.m. and individuals will have 
the opportunity to address the committee at that time. The September 
20, 2005 field trip will leave from the La Grande Ranger District, 
Highway 30, La Grande, Oregon.

    Dated: September 7, 2005.
Jennifer L. Harris,
Designated Federal Official.
[FR Doc. 05-18054 Filed 9-12-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-DK-M
STATE of North Carolina v. Michael Lamont SPELLER.

No. 188P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 11, 2008.

Michael Speller, Pro Se.

Burke Haywood, Special Deputy Attorney General, Seth Edwards, District Attorney, for State.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 17th day of April 2008 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference this the 11th day of June 2008."

HUDSON, J., recused.