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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of LIN TV Corp. for the three months ended March 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Vincent L. Sadusky, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Richard J. Schmaeling, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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.







Dated: April 27, 2010/s/ Vincent L. Sadusky


Vincent L. Sadusky


President and Chief Executive Officer








Dated: April 27, 2010            /s/ Richard J. Schmaeling


Richard J. Schmaeling


Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     (Replace this text with the legend)
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                          0000930832
<NAME>                                         JETFLEET III
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     US DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         1,981,640
<SECURITIES>                                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    155,040
<ALLOWANCES>                                           0
<INVENTORY>                                            0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               2,136,680
<PP&E>                                        13,196,240
<DEPRECIATION>                                 1,934,940
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                14,394,730
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,137,230
<BONDS>                                       11,076,350
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                    1,661,450
<COMMON>                                         815,200
<OTHER-SE>                                      (295,500)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  14,394,730
<SALES>                                                0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 597,380
<CGS>                                                  0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                          0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 267,350
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               228,170
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  101,860
<INCOME-TAX>                                      31,010
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               70,850
<DISCONTINUED>                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                        0
<CHANGES>                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                      70,850
<EPS-BASIC>                                         0.09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       0.09



</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 178 (Thursday, September 15, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 54567]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-18362]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Bureau of Customs and Border Protection


Notice of Cancellation of Customs Broker License

AGENCY: Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Department of 
Homeland Security.

ACTION: General notice.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 641 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 
(19 U.S.C. 1641) and the Customs Regulations (19 CFR 111.51), the 
following Customs broker licenses are cancelled without prejudice.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Name                License No.        Issuing port
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MarketMakers, Inc................        14666  Miami.
General Brokerage Services, Inc..        07283  Miami.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Dated: September 8, 2005.
Jayson P. Ahern,
Assistant Commissioner, Office of Field Operations.
[FR Doc. 05-18362 Filed 9-14-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-06-P
_________________________________________ 

 

 

 

_________________________________________ 

v

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

August 21, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 134665(78) Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, FRANK J. TOMECEK, JR., and Justices 

JANIS H. TOMECEK, 

Plaintiffs-Appellees, 

 SC: 134665 

 COA: 258907

 Berrien CC: 02-003707-CH 

ANDREW LUCIAN BAVAS, JOYCE BAVAS, INEZ 

HILDEGARD BAVAS, STANLEY FRANCIS STASCH, 

JULIA STASCH, MARTHA STASCH, PATRICIA M. 

CURTNER, TIMOTHY V.McGREE, PETER A. STRATIGOS, 

ALICE M. STRATIGOS, PAMELA KRUEGER, DEVEREAUX 

BOWLY, JR., DAVID N. DERBYSHIRE, ELLEN R. LA FOUNTAIN, 

JONATHAN RODGERS, ROYAL KENNEDY RODGERS, 

LEE STAHL, III, and SUSAN STAHL, 

 Defendants-Appellants, 

and 

INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY, d/b/a 

AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY, INC., 

MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND 

ECONOMIC GROWTH, and BERRIEN COUNTY 

DRAIN COMMISSIONER,

 Defendants-Appellees, 

and 

DANIEL JOHNSON, et al, 

 Defendants. 

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion by plaintiffs-appellees for extension to August 15, 2008 

of the time for filing their brief and appendix is considered and it is GRANTED. 

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

August 21, 2008 

 Clerk
EXHIBIT 23.1





CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 of our report dated March 31, 2011, relating to the consolidated financial statements of Colombia Energy Resources, Inc., f/k/a Colombia Clean Power & Fuels, Inc., (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph regarding uncertainty about Colombia Energy Resources, Inc.’s ability to continue as a going concern), which appears in Colombia Energy Resources, Inc.’s Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2010.





/s/ Burr Pilger Mayer, Inc.San Francisco, CaliforniaDecember 9, 2011
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Charles Gerena, Appellant.

[800 NYS2d 511]

Appeal by the defendant from an order of the County Court, Suffolk County (Braslow, J), dated October 29, 2003, which, after a hearing pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C, adjudicated him a level three sex offender.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The application of New York’s Sex Offender Registration Act *(see*Correction Law § 168 *et seq.)*to the defendant, who committed sex crimes before its effective date, was proper *(see People v Hernandez,*264 AD2d 783 [1999]; *Doe v Pataki,*120 F3d 1263, 1285 [1997], *cert denied*522 US 1122 [1998]).

*886The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Adams, J.P., Ritter, Goldstein and Fisher, JJ., concur.
STATE v. Rodney Moucell JONES.

No. 271P14-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Nov. 25, 2015.

Rodney Moucell Jones, Spruce Pine, for Jones, Rodney Moucell.

Joseph L. Hyde, Assistant Attorney General, for State of North Carolina.

Todd Williams, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

**Opinion**

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 24th of November 2015 by Defendant to Proceed In Forma Pauperis:

> "Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 25th of November 2015."
Exhibit 23.1

                          Independent Auditors' Consent
                          -----------------------------


The Board of Directors
Electric Lightwave, Inc.



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration  Statement (No.
33-56243) on Form S-8, in the Registration Statement (No. 333-61009) on Form S-8
of Electric Lightwave,  Inc. of our reports dated March 8, 2001, relating to the
balance sheets of Electric Lightwave, Inc. as of December 31, 2000 and 1999, and
the related statements of operations, shareholders' equity (deficiency) and cash
flows for each of the years in the  three-year  period ended  December 31, 2000,
and the related  schedule,  which reports appear in the December 31, 2000 annual
report on Form 10-K of Electric Lightwave, Inc.



                                                        KPMG LLP


New York, New York
March 8, 2001
STATE v. John David WILLIAMS.

No. 235P08-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 26, 2008.

Elizabeth L. McKay, Special Deputy Attorney General, Rick Shaffer, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 13th day of June 2008 by Defendant for Petition for Discretionary Review:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference this the 26th day of August 2008."
Ardeal ROSEBORO v. John ROSEBORO, The Roseboro Law Firm, Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, City of Winston-Salem, Winston-Salem Police Department, Barry D. Roundtree, and M.L. Bowens.

No. 361P15.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Dec. 15, 2015.

John Roseboro, Durham, Attorney at Law, for Roseboro, John.

Anthony J. Baker, Assistant City Attorney, for City of Winston-Salem.

Ardeal Roseboro, for Roseboro, Ardeal.

Reid C. Adams, Jr., Winston-Salem, Attorney at Law, for Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Plaintiff on the 27th of October 2015 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order 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 15th of December 2015."
i i i i i i

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-07-00777-CV

WAVE ENERGY, INC., and Jeff Rand,

Appellants

v.

RAND ENERGY COMPANY,

Appellee

From the 229th Judicial District Court, Jim Hogg County, Texas

Trial Court No. DC-05-36

Honorable Alex William Gabert, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Delivered and Filed: August 27, 2008

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION

Appellants’ brief was originally due on May 5, 2008. On May 19, 2008, this court notified

appellants’ counsel, Mr. James Miller, that the brief was late and asked Mr. Miller to provide a

reasonable explanation for the delay no later than May 29, 2008. Neither the brief nor a response

has been filed. On June 18, 2008, this court ordered Mr. Miller to file appellants’ brief and a motion

for extension of time no later than July 14, 2008. Our order also informed Mr. Miller that if the brief

was not filed by July 14, 2008 this appeal would be subject to dismissal for want of prosecution.

 See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a). Neither the brief nor a motion for extension of time has been filed.
04-07-00777-CV

-2-

Accordingly, on July 30, 2008, this court ordered Mr. Miller to show cause in writing, no later than

August 8, 2008, why this appeal should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. See TEX.R. APP.

P. 38.8(a). See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a). Mr. Miller did not respond. 

Appellee has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. In light of

appellants’ failure to respond to this court’s orders, the motion is GRANTED and the appeal is

dismissed for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b). Costs of appeal are

taxed against appellants.

PER CURIAM
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 664 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 664

 To provide adequate funding for local governments harmed by Hurricane 
               Katrina of 2005 or Hurricane Rita of 2005.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 16, 2007

 Ms. Landrieu (for herself, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Reid, and Mr. Stevens) 
introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 
        Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide adequate funding for local governments harmed by Hurricane 
               Katrina of 2005 or Hurricane Rita of 2005.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Local Government Disaster Relief Act 
of 2007''.

SEC. 2. FEDERAL SHARE.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
Federal share of any assistance provided under section 406 of the 
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 
U.S.C. 5172) because of Hurricane Katrina of 2005 or Hurricane Rita of 
2005 shall be 100 percent.
    (b) Effective Date.--This section shall apply to any assistance 
provided under section 406 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief 
and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5172) on or after August 28, 
2005.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 10.50





AboveNet, Inc.


Common Stock Award Agreement





This Award Agreement between ______________ (the “Participant”) and AboveNet, Inc. (the “Company”) is dated December 20, 2010.





WHEREAS, the Company has declared a cash dividend (the “Dividend”) of $5.00 per share of Company common stock (the “Common Stock”) payable on December 27, 2010 to stockholders of record on December 6, 2010 (the “Record Date”);





WHEREAS, the Participant currently holds fully vested options to purchase shares of Common Stock (the “Vested Options”) granted under the Company’s 2003 Incentive Stock Option and Stock Unit Grant Plan (the “2003 Plan”) or 2008 Equity Incentive Plan (the “2008 Plan”) but was not the holder of the shares of common stock underlying the Vested Options on the Record Date; and





WHEREAS, because the Participant and the other holders of vested stock options granted under the 2003 Plan and 2008 Plan cannot participate in the Dividend with respect to the shares of Common Stock underlying their vested stock options, the Company’s Board of Directors deems it fair to grant to each such option holder the number of shares of Common Stock equal to the number, rounded down to the nearest whole share, determined by dividing (x) the product of (i) the number of shares of Common Stock underlying such option holder’s Vested Options, multiplied by (ii) $5.00, by (y) $56.17.





NOW THEREFORE, the Company agrees as follows:





Pursuant to the 2008 Plan and on the terms and subject to the conditions set forth herein, the Company hereby grants to the Participant _____ shares of Common Stock (the “Shares”).  The Company’s obligations with respect to the Shares granted under this Agreement shall be subject to the payment by the Participant of any applicable federal, state and local withholding tax, which payment shall be satisfied, to the extent permitted by law, by the Company’s deduction from the Shares granted hereunder of the number of shares of Common Stock the Fair Market Value (as defined in the 2008 Plan) of which equals the amount required to be withheld.  To the extent that the amount
required to be withheld requires the withholding of a fractional share, the number of shares withheld shall be rounded down to the nearest whole share and any residual withholding shall be made from the Participants regular payroll  After deducting for this share withholding amount, the remaining number of whole shares of Common Stock shall be delivered on December 27, 2010 at the discretion of the Company to the Participant’s account with the Company’s transfer agent, American Stock Transfer & Trust Company, LLC (“AST”), in book-entry form through AST’s Direct Registration System or to the Participant’s brokerage account maintained through the Company holding his or her options.





ABOVENET, INC.





By:Name:Title:
EXHIBIT 14.(a).1

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the previously filed
Registration Statements on Form S-8 (No No. 333-111932) of Tefron Ltd.
("Tefron") of our report dated March 16, 2005, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements of Tefron included in this Annual Report on Form 20-F for
the year ended December 31, 2004.



                                           /s/ Kost Forer Gabbay & Kasierer

Tel-Aviv, Israel                           Kost Forer Gabbay & Kasierer
April 21, 2005                             A Member of the Ernst & Young Global
EXHIBIT 13.2



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 on Form 20-F of Scottish Power plc (the Company) for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report) , I, Simon Lowth, the 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, to the best of my knowledge, 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 in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: June 29, 2005



/s/    Simon LowthSimon LowthExecutive Director, Finance and Strategy
STATE of North Carolina v. Charles Jacob RUMLEY.

No. 202P15.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Nov. 5, 2015.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 20th of June 2015 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 5th of November 2015."
Exhibit 99.2
                            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 Quarterly Report of NACO Industries, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form  10-QSB  for the  fiscal  quarter  ended May 31,  2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jeffrey
J. Kirby, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss.  1350,  as adopted  pursuant to ss. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,
that, to the best of my 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 result of  operations of the
Company.

/s/ Jeffrey J. Kirby
-----------------------------
Jeffrey J. Kirby
Chief Financial Officer
July 14, 2003
LILLIE v. BALL.

No. 421P10-3.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 13, 2015.

Catherine F. Jordan, Assistant Attorney General, for State of North Carolina.

Robert Alan Lillie, for Lillie, Robert Alan.

Patrick Nadolski, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

**Opinion**

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 9th of July 2015 by Petitioner to Proceed In Forma Pauperis:

> "Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 13th of July 2015."
# CE2004078EN.01013501.xml

| 27.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 78/135 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 78/135

---

(2004/C 78 E/0137)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2610/03

by Proinsias De Rossa (PSE) to the Commission

(28 August 2003)

Subject:   Charging consumers for returning waste household electrical equipment

Subject:

In its answer to Written Question E-1970/03 (1) given on 25 July 2003, the Commission acknowledged that charging consumers at the point of return may have a negative impact on the collection results for waste electrical and electronic equipment but that such charges would not contravene Community legislation until Article 5 (2a) of Directive 2002/96/EC (2) takes effect, i.e. by 13 August 2005 at the latest.

1

2

Has the Commission informed the Irish authorities of this situation and, if so, what has been their response? What steps is the Commission now considering taking so as to ensure that the Irish public will be able to return such goods free of charge after 13 August 2005, in accordance with Directive 2002/96/EC?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(26 September 2003)

(26 September 2003)

Directive 2002/96/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 27 January 2003 on waste from electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) requires Member States to ensure that, by 13 August 2005, systems are set up allowing final holders and distributors to return WEEE from private households at least free of charge.

The national laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive must be brought into force by 13 August 2004 and communicated to the Commission.

The Commission has not discussed the issue of charging consumers with Ireland specifically. Regular meetings between the Commission and the Member States take place in order to discuss questions of implementation. The Commission will take all necessary measures to ensure that the Directive is correctly implemented in all Member States.

---

(1)  See page 61.

1

(2)  OJ L 37, 13.2.2003, p. 24.

2

---
STATE of North Carolina v. Deonza Lamar CARMICHAEL.

No. 380P15.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Dec. 15, 2015.

Deonza Lamar Carmichael, for Carmichael, Deonza Lamar.

Robert C. Montgomery, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State of N.C.

N. Lorrin Freeman, District Attorney, for State of N.C.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 16th of November 2015 in this matter for a writ of mandamus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, Wake County:

> "Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 15th of December 2015."
STATE v. Charles Everette HINTON.

No. 449P11-12.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Aug. 20, 2015.

Charles E. Hinton, Cary, for Hinton, Charles Everette.

Robert C. Montgomery, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State of N.C.

**Opinion**

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 2nd of April 2015 by Defendant for Notice and Petition for the Chief Justice and Associate Justices to Take Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts and Findings by the Court:

> "Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 20th of August 2015."