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 for the quarter ended September 30, 2020 (the “Report”) of Hercules Capital, Inc. (the “Registrant”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Scott Bluestein, the Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, certify, 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, 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. 

 

| Date: October 29, 2020 | By:    | /S/ SCOTT BLUESTEIN

                        |
|------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------------|
|                   |   | Scott Bluestein                                   |
|                   |   | President, Chief Executive Officer, and |
|                   |   | Chief Investment Officer

         |
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

 No. 08-7470 

FRANK M. NEFF,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

WARDEN, Western Correctional Institution,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge.

(1:07-cv-03103-RDB)

Submitted: September 16, 2008 Decided: September 24, 2008

Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Frank M. Neff, Appellant Pro Se. Glenn William Bell, OFFICE OF THE

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
 2 

PER CURIAM:

Frank M. Neff appeals the district court’s order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm

for the reasons stated by the district court. Neff v. Warden, No.

1:07-cv-03103-RDB (D. Md. June 19, 2008). 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.

AFFIRMED
Zara Ellis Sadler, Plaintiff, v. Sheriff Chip Hall & Jackson County Sheriff's Office, Defendants.

No. COA16-547

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: December 20, 2016

AFFIRMED.
# C_2008079EN.01000802.xml

| 29.3.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 79/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.3.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 79/8

---

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 31 January 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v French Republic

(Case C-147/07) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directives 80/778/EEC and 98/83/EC - Quality of water intended for human consumption - Maximum concentrations of nitrates and pesticides - Incorrect application)

(2008/C 79/14)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: S. Pardo Quintillán, J. Hottiaux and J.-B. Laignelot, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: French Republic (represented by: G. de Bergues and S. Gasri, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to adopt, within the prescribed period, the measures necessary to comply with Article 4 of Council Directive 98/83/EC of 3 November 1998 on the quality of water intended for human consumption (OJ 1998 L 330, p. 32) — Failure, in certain départements, to remain within the chemical parameters laid down in Annex I, Part B to Directive 98/83 — Nitrates and pesticides

départements

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Declares that, by failing to take the measures necessary to comply with Article 4 of Council Directive 98/83/EC of 3 November 1998 on the quality of water intended for human consumption, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by failing to take the measures necessary to comply with Article 4 of Council Directive 98/83/EC of 3 November 1998 on the quality of water intended for human consumption, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

| 2. | Orders the French Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the French Republic to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 95, 28.4.2007.

1

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-2117

BLASIUS MVO KUM,

Petitioner,

v.

MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals.

Submitted: July 31, 2008 Decided: September 2, 2008

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Albert Isiaka Usumanu, Minneapolis, Minnesota, for Petitioner.

Gregory G. Katsas, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Linda S.

Wernery, Assistant Director, Leslie McKay, Senior Litigation

Counsel, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
*The Board analyzed Kum’s motions to recalendar and reissue as

motions to reopen, and Kum does not contest this on appeal.

Neither does he dispute the Board’s finding that the motions were

untimely.

- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Blasius Mvo Kum, a native and citizen of Cameroon,

petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration

appeals (Board) denying his untimely motions to recalendar removal

proceedings and reissue its order of October 1, 2004.* Kum asserts

that the Board erred in refusing to reopen his proceedings on

account of ineffective assistance of counsel that violated his

rights under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. We

find that such a claim is not cognizable in immigration

proceedings. See Afanwi v. Mukasey, 526 F.3d 788, 798 (4th Cir.

2008) (holding that retained counsel’s ineffective assistance in a

removal proceeding cannot deprive an alien of his Fifth Amendment

right to a fundamentally fair hearing).

We accordingly deny the petition for review. 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
Exhibit 10.4
 Manufacturing Initiation Payment
 Addendum to Master 
Services and Supply Agreement
 LifeScan UBS UBI
 Master Agreement
       
 *
    
    Confidential portion has been omitted and has been filed separately with the Securities and
Exchange Commission pursuant to a request for confidential treatment. Manufacturing Initiation Payment Addendum (execution)
    
    1




---



##### 



Executedby LifeScan, Inc.
    
    
    ))Name: Dean DalsonTitle: Vice PresidentExecutedby Universal Biosensors
    
    
    )Pty Ltd
    
    
    )Company Secretary/Director
    
    
    
    
    
    DirectorName of Company Secretary/Director
    
    
    
    
    
    Name of Director (print)(print)Executedby Universal Biosensors,
    
    
    )Inc.
    
    
    )NameTitle
  Manufacturing Initiation Payment Addendum (execution)
    
    2
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the amended Annual Report of Nevsun Resources Ltd. (the Company) on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Cliff T. Davis, the Executive VP and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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.



/s/ Cliff T. Davis

Cliff T. Davis

Executive VP & Chief Financial Officer



April 4, 2008





= "LAST PAGE ONLY"  =  0,  =  1) 0 = 1 9/22/2004 6:02 PM"
**Section302 Certifications**

|   | I, **Peter J. Hardie, Chief Financial Officer** of **NevsunResources Ltd.** certify that: |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 1. | Ihave reviewed this annual report on Form 40-F of**Nevsun Resources Ltd.** |
|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | Basedon my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report. |
|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Dated:**January 10, 2013**

| By: | */s/ Peter J. Hardie* |
|-----|-----------------------|

|   | Name: **Peter J. Hardie**Title: **Chief Financial Officer** |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------|

----
FIRST AMENDMENT
                                       TO
                    AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


        THIS FIRST AMENDMENT (this "Amendment") is made this 9th day of
February, 1999, by and between FRANK TWORECKE ("Executive") and JOS. A. BANK
CLOTHIERS, INC. ("Employer") to that certain Amended and Restated Employment
Agreement, dated as of September 19, 1998 (the "Employment Agreement").

        FOR GOOD AND VALUATION CONSIDERATION, the receipt and adequacy of which
are hereby acknowledged, Executive and Employer, being the sole parties to the
Employment Agreement, hereby amend the Employment Agreement as follows:

        1.     In Section 3.1, lines 2 and 7-8, delete the phrase "Chief
               Merchandising Officer" and insert in lieu thereof the phrase
               "Chief Operating Officer."

        2.     In Section 5.2, paragraph d, line 4, delete the phrase "Chief
               Merchandising Officer" and insert in lieu thereof the phrase
               "Chief Operating Officer."

        3.     In Section 5.3, delete clause (ii) and insert in lieu thereof the
               clause "(ii) the occurrence of a change in control (as
               hereinafter defined) of Employer provided that not more than 90
               days shall have elapsed subsequent to Executive's becoming aware
               of the occurrence of the change in control."

        Except as specifically amended hereby, the Employment Agreement shall
remain in full force and effect according to its terms. To the extent of any
conflict between the terms of this Amendment and the terms of the remainder of
the Employment Agreement, the terms of this Amendment shall control and prevail.
Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have those respective
meanings attributed to them in the Employment Agreement. This Amendment shall
hereafter be deemed a part of the Employment Agreement for all purposes.

               IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this
Amendment as of the date first above written.


                                      /s/ Frank Tworecke
                                      -------------------------------
                                      FRANK TWORECKE



                                      JOS. A. BANK CLOTHIERS, INC.


                                      By: /s/ Timothy F. Finley
                                         ----------------------------------
                                      Name: Timothy F. Finley
                                      Title: CEO
# Waiving Prohibition on Use of FY 2005 Economic Support Funds with Respect to Jordan 

# Memorandum for the Secretary of State

Consistent with the authority vested in me by section 574 of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2005 (the “Act”), Division D of Public Law 108-447, I hereby:

                        You are authorized and directed to report this determination to the Congress, and to arrange for its publication in the                         **Federal Register**                        .                    

[FR Doc. 05-18739

Billing code 4710-10-P
**Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 22 May 2008 – Degussa v Commission**

**(Case C-266/06 P)**

Appeal – Competition – Cartel – Market in methionine – Fine – Regulation No 17 – Article 15(2) – Nulla poena sine lege – Distortion of the facts – Principle of proportionality – Principle of equal treatment

1.                     *Community law – General legal principles – Legal certainty – Nulla poena sine lege – Scope (see paras 38-40, 44-46)*

2.                     *Competition – Fines – Amount – Determination – Discretion conferred on the Commission by Article 15(2) of Regulation No 17
(Council Regulation No 17, Art. 15(2); Commission Notice 98/C 9/03) (see paras 50-62)*

3.                     *Appeals – Grounds – Mistaken assessment of the facts – Inadmissibility – Review by the Court of Justice of the assessment
of the evidence – Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted (Art. 225(1) EC; Statute of the Court
of Justice, Art. 58, first para.) (see paras 72-74, 86, 94)*

4.                     *Appeals – Jurisdiction of the Court – Whether it may review, on grounds of fairness, the appraisal at first instance of the
amount of a fine imposed on an undertaking – Not included – Whether it may review that appraisal on the ground that the principle
of non-discrimination was infringed – Included (Art. 81(1), EC; Council Regulation No 17, Art. 15(2)) (see paras 95, 114)*

5.                     *Appeals – Grounds – Inadequate or contradictory grounds – Admissibility – Reliance by the Court of First Instance on implied
reasoning – Whether lawful – Conditions (Art. 225(1) EC; Statute of the Court of Justice, Arts 36, 53, first para., and 58,
first para.) (see paras 102-103)*

6.                     *Competition – Fines – Amount – Determination – Criteria – Need to distinguish between the undertakings involved in the same
infringement according to their total turnover – None (Council Regulation No 17, Art. 15(2); Commission Notice 98/C 9/03,
para. 1A, fifth subpara.) (see paras 119-123)*

**Re:**

| | | | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber) of 5 April 2006 in Case T-279/02 | Degussa AG | v | Commission | , in which that Court dismissed in part the action seeking annulment of Commission Decision 2003/674/EC of 2 July 2002 relating to a proceeding pursuant to Article 81 of the EC Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (OJ 2003 L 255, p. 1) – Cartel concerning the market in methionine – Requirements of the principle of | nulla poena sine lege | in relation to the system of fines laid down by Article 15(2) of Regulation No 17. |

**Operative part**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | Dismisses the appeal; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Orders Evonik Degussa GmbH to bear the costs; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 3. | | Orders the Council of the European Union to pay its own costs. |
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 22, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

136212 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, 

Justices 

v SC: 136212 

 COA: 280206 

Wayne CC: 91-008827-01

THEODORE R. WILLIAMS,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 21, 2008 order 

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

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). 

s0915 

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. 

September 22, 2008 

 Clerk
# C_2012006EN.01001102.xml

| 7.1.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 6/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.1.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 6/11

---

Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2011 — ASPLA v Commission

(Case T-76/06) (1)

1

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Plastic industrial bags sector - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Exchange of individualised information - Fixing of prices and sales quotas by geographic area - Allocation of customers - Concerted bidding in response to invitations to tender - Single and continuous infringement - Extent of the infringement - Definition of the product market and the geographic market - Guidelines for the calculation of fines - Principles of equal treatment and proportionality - Aggravating and attenuating circumstances - Ceiling of 10 % of turnover)

2012/C 6/16

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Plasticos Españoles, SA (ASPLA) (Torrelavega, Spain) (represented initially by: E. Garayar Gutiérrez and A. García Castillo, then by E. Garayar Gutiérrez, M. Troncoso Ferrer and C. Ruixó Claramunt, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment in part of Commission Decision C(2005) 4634 final of 30 November 2005 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] (Case COMP/F/38.354 — Industrial bags), concerning a cartel on the market for plastic industrial bags, and, in the alternative, for reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Plasticos Españoles, SA (ASPLA) to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Plasticos Españoles, SA (ASPLA) to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 108, 6.5.2006.

1

---
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 22, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

136874 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, 

Justices 

v SC: 136874 

 COA: 285226 

Jackson CC: 06-004533-FH 

TIMOTHY MILES MEDLEY,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 17, 2008 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

0915 

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. 

September 22, 2008 

 Clerk
Allscripts Healthcare, LLC v. Etransmedia Technology, Inc.

330A16-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 29, 2016

W. Swain Wood, Attorney at Law, Shannon R. Joseph, Attorney at Law, John T. Kivus, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, Christopher Jackson, Attorney at Law, Greensboro, for Allscripts Healthcare, LLC.

Tracie H. Brisson, Attorney at Law, for Etransmedia Technology, Inc.

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 22nd of December 2016 by Defendant:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 28th of December 2016."

Defendant shall have up to and including the 27th day of January 2017 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6025
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. THOMAS J. MACWILLIAMS, a/k/a Greg, a/k/a Corporal George, Defendant - Appellant.

No. 08-6027
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. THOMAS J. MACWILLIAMS, Greg, Corporal George, Defendant - Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, District Judge. (1:06-cr-00059-IMK-JSK-1; 1 :06-cr-00059-01-IMK-JSK) Submitted: May 22, 2008 Decided: May 28, 2008- 2 - Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas J. MacWilliams, Appellant Pro Se. Shawn Angus Morgan, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Clarksburg, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 3 - PER CURIAM: Thomas J. MacWilliams appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to compel the release of evidence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. MacWilliams , Nos. 1:06-cr-00059-IMK-JSK-1; 1:06-cr-00059-01-IMKJSK (N.D.W. Va. Nov. 15, 2007). We dispense w ith 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. AFFIRMED
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 22, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

136428 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Stephen J. Markman, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, Justices 

v SC: 136428 

 COA: 283539 

Wayne CC: 97-002795-FY

DERRICK L. BOYD,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 2, 2008 order 

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

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). 

p0915 

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. 

September 22, 2008 

 Clerk
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3802 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3802

To extend the legislative authority of the Adams Memorial Foundation to 
establish a commemorative work in honor of former President John Adams 
                and his legacy, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 19, 2013

   Mr. Lynch (for himself, Mr. Keating, Mr. Neal, Mr. McGovern, Mr. 
   Capuano, Mr. Tierney, Ms. Tsongas, Mr. Kennedy, and Ms. Clark of 
Massachusetts) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To extend the legislative authority of the Adams Memorial Foundation to 
establish a commemorative work in honor of former President John Adams 
                and his legacy, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY FOR MEMORIAL 
              ESTABLISHMENT.

    Section 1(c) of Public Law 107-62 (40 U.S.C. 1003 note), as amended 
by Public Law 111-169, is amended by striking ``2013'' and inserting 
``2020''.
                                 <all>
```