alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT
      32.1





Certification
      Pursuant to


Exchange
      Act Rule 15d-14(b) and


18
      U.S.C.
      Section 1350





In
      connection with the Annual Report of US Dry Cleaning Corporation
      (the ”Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the period ending September 30, 2007, as
      filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), I, Robert Y. Lee, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
      certify, to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 15d-14(b)
      and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes
      Oxley Act of 2002, that:





i.The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
                13(a) or
                15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





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





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
      authenticating, 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 US Dry Cleaning Corporation and will be
      retained by US Dry Cleaning Corporation and furnished to the Securities and
      Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.








Dated:  January
      15, 2008




/S/
      ROBERT Y. LEE


Name:  Robert
      Y. Lee


Title:  Chief
      Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 21 (Wednesday, February 2, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 5488]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-1977]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Technologies for Target Assessment

    Notice is hereby given that, on October 18, 2004, pursuant to 
section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), the Technologies for Target 
Assessment (``TATS member firm Icoria, Inc.'') has filed written 
notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal 
Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The 
notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's 
provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual 
damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Agilent 
Technologies, Inc., Santa Clara, CA has been added as a party to this 
venture and LION Bioscience, Inc., Cambridge, MA has withdrawn as a 
party to this venture. Also, Paradigm Genetics, Inc., Research Triangle 
Park, NC has changed its name to Icoria, Inc.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and TATS member firm Icoria, Inc. 
intends to file additional written notification disclosing all changes 
in membership.
    On August 1, 2002, TATS member firm Icoria, Inc. filed its original 
notification pursuant to section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of 
Justice published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to section 
6(b) of the Act on September 12, 2002 (67 FR 57853).

Dorothy B. Fountain,
Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 05-1977 Filed 2-1-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
----

(2004/C 84 E/0136)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3789/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(11 December 2003)

Subject:   Update on funding for the municipality of Prato the action programme to promote civil protection

In reply to my earlier question E-1101/03 (1) asking whether the municipality of Prato had submitted projects and obtained funding under the action programme to promote civil protection, the Commission said on 22 April 2003 that the municipality had not submitted any application.

Can the Commission say whether, since that date, any projects have been submitted and what the outcome was?

----

(1)OJ C 268 E, 7.11.2003, p. 144.

----
#### Alfredo NARBONA, Appellant, v. FLORIDA UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION and Garrison Protective Services of Florida, Inc., Appellee.

No. 3D03-332.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

July 9, 2003.

Rehearing and Clarification Denied July 30, 2003.

Alfredo Narbona, for appellant.

John D. Maher (Tallahassee), for appel-lee.

Before GREEN, SHEVIN and WELLS, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

As there is substantial, competent evidence to support the finding that the appellant voluntarily left his employment without good cause attributable to his employer when he remained away from work longer than his scheduled leave without informing his employer of his status, we affirm the order disqualifying him from receiving unemployment benefits. *See e.g., Garcia v. AT & T*Communications, *Inc.,*575 So.2d 730, 731 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (affirming the finding that appellant was not entitled to unemployment benefits where she requested a six-month leave of absence and was informed that reemploy*227ment would be dependent on position availability; employee voluntarily left employment and did not have a position upon her return) (quoting *Slusher v. State Dep’t of Commerce,*354 So.2d 450, 451 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978) (“Although the claimant’s reason for leaving may be considered a good personal reason, it cannot be considered attributable to the employer.”)). *See also Kacsir v. State Unemployment Appeals Comm’n,*456 So.2d 528 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) (reviewing court may not overturn hearing officer’s findings of fact which are supported by competent, substantial record evidence).
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 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 Jackson Hewitt Tax Service Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the
period ended October 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Harry W. Buckley, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, 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 contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ HARRY W. BUCKLEY                 
|Harry W. Buckley                     
|President and Chief Executive Officer
|                                     
|December 10, 2010
STATE of North Carolina v. Thomas Craig CAMPBELL

No. 252PA14-3

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 7, 2018

Ms. Barbara S. Blackman, Durham, Assistant Appellate Defender, for Campbell, Thomas Craig

Ms. Teresa M. Postell, Assistant Attorney General, for State of North Carolina

Ms. Hannah H. Love, Assistant Appellate Defender, for Campbell, Thomas Craig

Mr. Mike Miller, District Attorney, for State

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by State of NC on the 15th of February 2018 for Writ of Supersedeas of the judgment of the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 7th of June 2018."

Upon consideration of the petition for discretionary review, filed by State of NC on the 12th of March 2018 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 and the Appellate Rule 16(b) as to issues in addition to those presented as the basis for the dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the petition for discretionary review as to additional issues is

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 7th of June 2018."

Accordingly, the new brief of the State of NC shall be filed with this Court not more than 30 days from the date of certification of this order.
IZAB USTI /

H LANG-MIER Order entered October 

## 3 , 2012

In The 

### Court of Zippeatti jfiftb 

## 113 iotritt of Eexao at 3Daffaii

No. 05-12-00681-CV CHILDREN'S MEDICAL CENTER OF DALLAS ET AL. Appellant V. SHERI DURHAM AND DENISE JENKINS, AS ADMINSTRATOR OF THE ESTATE

OF JESSICA HALEY DURHAM, Appellees On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-11-01231-D



### ORDER The Court has before it appellants' September 28, 2012 unopposed joint motion for extension of time to file appellants' reply briefs. The Court GRANTS the motion and ORDERS that any reply briefs be filed by October 18, 2012.Order entered October 3, 2012

In The 

### Court of Zippeato jf iftb riiotritt of Texa5itMaui

No. 05-12-00587-CV BETTER BUSINESS BUREAU OF METROPOLITAN DALLAS, INC., Appellant V. BH DFW, INC., Appellee On Appeal from the 14th District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-12-00921



### ORDER The Court has before it appellee's September 27, 2012 fourth motion for enlargement of time to file appellee's brief The Court GRANTS the motion and ORDERS that the brief tendered by appellee on September 27, 2012 be timely filed as of today's date.ELIZ A H LANG-MIE S JU Order issued October3, 2012

In The 

### Tourt iii Apptats Ififtil Bistrirt uI &rxas at Dallas

No. 05-12-00303-CV STOVALL & ASSOCIATES, P.C., Appellant

V. HIBBS FINANCIAL CENTER, LTD., Appellee



### ORDER The Court has before it appellee's September 27, 2012 motion for leave to file sur-reply, which is unopposed. The Court DENIES the motion.
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 194 (Friday, October 7, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 58719]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-20238]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders; 
Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meetings.
    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Deafness and Other 
Communications Disorders Special Emphasis Panel, CDRC Conflicts.
    Date: October 27, 2005.
    Time: 1 p.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6120 Executive Blvd., 
Rockville, MD 20852, (Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Sheo Singh, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Scientific Review Branch, Division of Extramural 
Activities, Executive Plaza South, Room 400C, 6120 Executive Blvd., 
Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-8683.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.173, 
Biological Research Related to Deafness and Communicative Disorders, 
National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: September 16, 2005.
Anthony M. Coelho, Jr.,
Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 05-20238 Filed 10-6-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
STATE of Carolina v. Webster WALLER

No. 253P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 20, 2018.

Daniel P. O'Brien, Special Deputy Attorney General, Michael D. Waters, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

Webster Waller, for Waller, Webster.

*285***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 10th of August 2018 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:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 20th of September 2018."
ex10-20.htm


EXHIBIT 10.20


 




PROMISSORY NOTE EXTENSION AGREEMENT


 



	$50,000.00	 March 25, 2013





                                                                                                                       




For value received, Guardian 8 Holdings, a Nevada corporation (the “Maker”) promised to pay to C. Stephen Cochennet, or its registered assigns or successors in interest (the “Holder”) the Principal Amount and Interest (both as defined below) in the manner and upon the terms and conditions as set forth in that Term Note (“Note”) in the sum of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000), dated December 28, 2012, which Note becomes due and payable on or about March 28, 2013.


 


By execution by the parties herein, this Promissory Note Extension Agreement extends the Maturity Date of the Note to and including May 27, 2013. All terms and conditions of the Note shall remain the same other than the Maturity Date.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Maker and Holder have caused this Promissory Note Extension Agreement to be executed and delivered as of the day and year first above written.


 


“Maker”


Guardian 8 Holdings


a Nevada corporation




 


By: /s/ Kathleen Hanrahan                                                                


                                                                                                Kathleen Hanrahan, Chief Financial Officer




“Holder”




 


/s/ C. Stephen Cochennet                                                                


C. Stephen Cochennet
STATE of North Carolina v. Kenneth Wayne PILKINGTON

No. COA18-38

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: November 6, 2018

NO ERROR.
RE: EXPANSION OF ELECTRONIC FILING PILOT PROGRAM-COURT OF COMMON PLEAS

Appellate Case No. 2015-002439

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

August 9, 2018

ORDER

Pursuant to the provisions of Article V, Section 4 of the South Carolina Constitution,

IT IS ORDERED that the Pilot Program for the Electronic Filing (E-Filing) of documents in the Court of Common Pleas, which was established by Order dated December 1, 2015, is expanded to include Berkeley County. Effective September 4, 2018, all filings in all common pleas cases commenced or pending in Berkeley County must be E-Filed if the party is represented by an attorney, unless the type of case or the type of filing is excluded from the Pilot Program. The counties currently designated for mandatory E-Filing are as follows:

?

Attorneys should refer to the South Carolina Electronic Filing Policies and Guidelines, which were adopted by the Supreme Court on October 28, 2015, and the training materials available on the E-Filing Portal page at http://www.sccourts.org/efiling/ to determine whether any specific filings are exempted from the requirement that they be E-Filed. Attorneys who have cases pending in Pilot Counties are strongly encouraged to review, and to instruct their staff to review, the training materials available on the E-Filing Portal page.

*/s/ Donald W. Beatty*

Donald W. Beatty

Chief Justice of South Carolina
Sara Y. WILSON, Respondent, v. CHARLESTON COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, Petitioner.

Appellate Case No. 2017-001569

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

April 19, 2018

**641ORDER

Petitioners and respondents have filed a joint motion seeking dismissal of their petition *502for a writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals, indicating they have entered into a final settlement agreement with respondents, and they additionally ask the Court to vacate the opinion of the Court of Appeals in *Wilson v. Charleston County School District* , 419 S.C. 442, 798 S.E.2d 449 (Ct. App. 2017). We grant the motion and hereby dismiss the petition for a writ of certiorari and vacate the opinion of the Court of Appeals.

*/s/ Donald W. Beatty* C.J.

*/s/ John W. Kittredge* J.

*/s/ Kaye G. Hearn* J.

**642*/s/ John Cannon Few* J.

*/s/ George C. James, Jr.* J.
##### 



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 of
Corinthian Colleges, Inc. (the Company) on
Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), I, David G. Moore, 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 to 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/ DAVID G. MOORE     
| |                        
| | David G. Moore         
| | Chief Executive Officer




September 26, 2003




92
STATE of North Carolina v. Kathryn Elizabeth ROLLAND

No. COA17-168

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: August 15, 2017

DISMISSED.
#### STATE ex rel. Melvin SLOAN v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 2002-KH-1999.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Aug. 29, 2003.

In re Sloan, Melvin;—Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Sabine, 11th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 41630; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 02-00129.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; *State ex rel. Glover v. State,*93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189.
Exhibit 11.1

Interiors, Inc.
Computation of Weighted Average Number of Shares
Outstanding for the Year Ended June 30, 1999

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                        Class A &
                                                                          Class B
                                                                           Common      Weighted Basic   Weighted Diluted
                                                                            (000)               (000)              (000)
<S>                                                                       <C>                 <C>              <C>
Total Common Shares outstanding at June 30, 1998                           21,720
Escrow Shares at June 30, 1998                                             (8,750)

Class A Common and Class B Common for EPS at June 30, 1998                 12,970               7,251              8,154

Additional Common Shares                                                   19,659               7,693              7,693

Total Common Shares Outstanding at June 30, 1999                           32,629
Escrow Shares at June 30, 1999                                                (82)

Class A Common and Class B Common for EPS at June 30, 1999                 32,547              22,036             22,036
</TABLE>
* 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 set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-50352 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ENRIQUE DELGADO-PEREZ, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:03-CR-2097-ALL-PRM

-------------------- Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PICKERING, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Enrique DelgadoPerez concedes that the arguments raised are foreclosed by circuit precedent but seeks to preserve them for further review. The Government has moved for summary affirmance in lieu of filing an appellee’s brief. The motion is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## F I L E D August 18, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk
STATE v. Harvey Lee GRADY

250P18-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 24, 2018

Craig M. Cooley, Attorney at Law, for Grady, Harvey Lee.

Ashish K. Sharda, Assistant Attorney General, for State of North Carolina.

Jon David, District Attorney, for State.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 9th of August 2018 by Defendant in the Alternative to Deem Petition for Discretionary Review a Petition for Writ of Certioarari:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 24th of October 2018."
2013 Q1 FES-EX10.1




FORM OF FORBES ENERGY SERVICES LTD.
COMPENSATION RECOUPMENT POLICY


Executive Agreement


This AGREEMENT (this "Agreement") is entered into effective as of [_________], 2012, by and between Forbes Energy Services Ltd. (the "Company") and [__________] (the "Executive"), to acknowledge the Executive's agreement to comply with the Company's Compensation Recoupment Policy (the "Policy") that was recommended by the Compensation Committee and adopted by the Board of Directors of the Company (the "Board") on [________________], 2012.  


		
	1.
	The Executive understands and agrees that the Policy applies to all incentive-based compensation that has been paid or will be paid to the Executive and that is captured by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, including any regulations or rules promulgated thereunder (the "Covered Compensation").  The Executive further understands and agrees that the Policy may be amended from time to time by the Board, in its sole discretion, and that this Agreement shall apply to the Policy as amended.




		
	2.
	By signing below, the Executive hereby acknowledges and agrees that:




		
	•
	He or she has received the Policy, has had an adequate opportunity to review (and consult with legal counsel) the Policy, and fully understands the Policy;




		
	•
	If required by the Policy, the Covered Compensation shall be subject to forfeiture and/or reimbursement to the Company, as determined in the sole discretion of the Board (or a committee thereof);




		
	•
	He or she shall, upon receiving notice from the Board (or a committee thereof), take immediate and prompt action to effectuate any forfeiture and/or reimbursement that is required pursuant to the Policy;




		
	•
	The Policy applies to all Covered Compensation notwithstanding the terms (consistent or otherwise) of any existing or future compensation plan or arrangement, and notwithstanding the terms (consistent or otherwise) of any employment agreement, to which the Executive is a party; and




		
	•
	Any determination of the Board (or a committee thereof) in respect to the interpretation or application of the Policy to the Executive shall be conclusive and binding, and application of the Policy need not be applied uniformly among the executives.




		
	3.
	The Policy and this Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the internal laws of the State of Texas.




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Executive and the Company have executed this Agreement effective as of the day and year first written above.


EXECUTIVE                        FORBES ENERGY SERVICES LTD.


Print Name:                         By:                         







Sign Name:                         Its: