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

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. §1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of WPTEntertainment, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended April 1,2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, Steven Lipscomb, President and Chief Executive Officer ofthe Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.  The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.  Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| Date: May 10, 2007 | /s/ Steven Lipscomb                   |
|--------------------|---------------------------------------|
|               | Steven Lipscomb                       |
|               | President and Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**




**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**




In
      connection with the Annual Report of theglobe.com, inc. (the "Company") on
      Form
      10-K for the period ending December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities
      and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Edward A. Cespedes,
      Chief Financial 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,
      that
      to the best of my knowledge and belief:




(1)
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




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




*Date:March
      27, 2008*




*/s/
                Edward A. Cespedes**Edward
                A. Cespedes*
                *Chief
                  Financial Officer*
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ancetta Escalona, Appellant.

[719 NYS2d 556]

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alexander Hunter, J.), rendered May *5,*1999, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, and sentencing her to a term of 3 years probation, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis upon which to disturb the court’s determinations concerning credibility. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Rosenberger, Tom, Ellerin and Friedman, JJ.
EX-10.1


 Exhibit 10.1 
 First Amendment to 
 Fifth Amended and Restated 

Basic Energy Services, Inc. 2003 Incentive Plan. 
 (Effective May 22, 2013) 
 The Fifth Amended and Restated Basic Energy
Services, Inc. 2003 Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) is hereby amended by this First Amendment as follows: 
 1.
Section 4(a) of the Plan is amended and restated in its entirety as follows: 
 “(a)
Shares Available. Subject to adjustment as provided in Section 4(c), the aggregate number of Shares with respect to which Awards may be granted under the Plan shall be up to 10,350,000 Shares (including after giving effect
to a 5-for-1 stock split effected as a stock dividend on September 26, 2005). Except for withholding of Shares for payment of taxes or exercise price, if any Award is exercised, paid, forfeited, terminated or canceled without the delivery of
Shares, then the Shares covered by such Award, to the extent of such payment, exercise, forfeiture, termination or cancellation, shall again be Shares with respect to which Awards may be granted. Awards will not reduce the number of Shares that may
be issued pursuant to the Plan if the settlement of the Award will not require the issuance of Shares, as, for example, an Other Stock-Based Award that can be satisfied only by the payment of cash.” 

2. The first sentence of Section 11 of the Plan is amended and restated in its entirety as follows: 

“No Award shall be granted under the Plan after the 10th anniversary of March 12, 2013, the date the Plan, as amended on
May 22, 2013, was initially adopted by the Board subject to approval of the amendments of Section 4(a) and this Section 11 by the stockholders of the Company.”
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-07-00165-CV

Siemens Corporation, Siemens Aktiengesellschaft, and Efficient Networks, Inc., Appellants

// Brice Bartek, James Pickering, and Russell Young, Cross-Appellants

v.

Brice Bartek, James Pickering, and Russell Young, Appellees // Siemens Corporation,

Siemens Aktiengesellschaft, and Efficient Networks, Inc., Cross-Appellees

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 200TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. D-1-GN-04-001814, HONORABLE SCOTT H. JENKINS, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

The parties have filed a joint motion informing this Court that they have settled their

dispute. They ask this Court to set aside the trial court’s judgment and remand the cause for entry

of orders pursuant to their settlement. We grant the motion and set aside the trial court’s judgment.

See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(2)(B). We further grant the motion to expedite the issuance of our

mandate. See Tex. R. App. P. 18.1(c). The cause is remanded to the trial court for entry of orders

effectuating the parties’ settlement. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(2)(B).

___________________________________________

David Puryear, Justice

Before Chief Justice Law, Justices Puryear and Henson

Vacated and remanded

Filed: June 1, 2007
```

                      Certification of Chief Financial Officer
              Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

     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),  the
undersigned  officer of Scotia Pacific Company LLC, a Delaware limited liability
company (the "Company"), does hereby certify that:

     (a) the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December
31, 2004 of the Company (the "Report")  fully complies with the  requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

Dated: March 16, 2005

                                                    /S/  GARY L. CLARK
                                                    ___________________________
                                                         Gary L. Clark
                                                         Chief Financial Officer

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely 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).
```
ECMD, INC., Plaintiff, v. Neal Dunstan GRUBBS, Defendant.

No. COA18-377

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: November 6, 2018

DISMISSED.
MCDUFFIE v. OCMULGEE EMC et al.

A16A0092

Court of Appeals of Georgia.

August 23, 2018

Miller, Presiding Judge.

*207In *McDuffie v. Ocmulgee EMC* , 338 Ga.App. 200, 789 S.E.2d 415 (2016), this Court (1) affirmed the Administrative Law Judge's finding that Ocmulgee EMC ("EMC") met its burden of demonstrating that Kasabian McDuffie had returned to his pre-2009-injury condition when EMC suspended McDuffie's indemnity benefits; but (2) remanded this case for factual findings regarding whether EMC had shown that suitable work was available to McDuffie before terminating his benefits. Id. at 202-204 (1), (3), 789 S.E.2d 415.

In *Ocmulgee EMC v. McDuffie* , 302 Ga. 640, 806 S.E.2d 546 (2017), the Supreme Court of Georgia reversed this Court's decision, in part, determining that EMC was not required to show the availability of suitable employment and that no further factual findings were necessary in this regard. Id. at 643-645 (2), 806 S.E.2d 546. Thus, the Supreme *208Court affirmed in full the decision of the Appellate Division of the State Board of Workers' Compensation. Accordingly, we vacate Division 3 of our prior decision, and the judgment of the Supreme Court is adopted and made the judgment of this Court for Division 3.

*Judgment affirmed.*

Dillard, C.J., Ellington, P.J., McMillian, Mercier, Reese, Brown, JJ., concur. McFadden, P.J., dissents. Gobeil, J. recused.

McFadden, Presiding Judge, dissenting.

The parties filed cross-petitions for certiorari. As the majority explains, our Supreme Court granted Ocmulgee EMC's petition and reversed in part.

McDuffie's petition asked that my dissent be adopted. Our Supreme Court denied his petition and expressly declined to address the conclusion from which I dissented: "We did not grant McDuffie's certoriari petition seeking review of that fact-specific conclusion." *Ocmulgee EMC v. McDuffie* , 302 Ga. 640, 806 S.E.2d 546, (2017).

In light of this very particular set of circumstances, I respectfully adhere to my dissent.
STATE of North Carolina v. James Harold COURTNEY, III

No. 160PA18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 20, 2018

Amanda S. Zimmer, Assistant Appellate Defender, for Courtney, James Harold (III).

Glenn Gerding, Appellate Defender.

Jess D. Mekeel, Assistant Attorney General, N. Lorrin Freeman, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the notice of appeal from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, filed by the State of NC on the 19th of June 2018 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-30, and the motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question filed by the Defendant, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the motion to dismiss the appeal is

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 20th of September 2018."

*110Upon consideration of the petition filed by State of NC on the 31st of May 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 20th of September 2018."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 19th of June 2018 by State of NC 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:

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 20th of September 2018."

Therefore the case is docketed as of the date of this order's certification. Briefs of the respective parties shall be submitted to this Court within the times allowed and in the manner provided by Appellate Rule 15 (g)(2).
RE: EXPANSION OF ELECTRONIC FILING PILOT PROGRAM-COURT OF COMMON PLEAS

Appellate Case No. 2015-002439

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

September 6, 2018

**554ORDER

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 Florence County. Effective October 2, 2018, all filings in all common pleas cases commenced or pending in Florence 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:

```
Aiken Allendale Anderson Bamberg Barnwell Beaufort Berkeley Calhoun Cherokee Chester Clarendon Colleton Dorchester Edgefield Fairfield Georgetown Greenville Greenwood Hampton Horry Jasper Kershaw Lancaster Laurens Lee Lexington McCormick Newberry Oconee Orangeburg Pickens Richland Saluda Spartanburg Sumter Union Williamsburg York **Florence - Effective October 2, 2018**
```

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 **555on 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 *131training materials available on the E-Filing Portal page.

*/s/ Donald W. Beatty*

Donald W. Beatty

Chief Justice of South Carolina
# Official Journal L 77/15 M

| | ISSN 1725-2555 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 77 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 4915 March 2006 |

ISSN 1725-2555

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 77

English edition

Legislation

Volume 4915 March 2006

---

| Contents | | II   Acts whose publication is not obligatory | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | Commission |
| | * | Decision No 202 of 17 March 2005 on model forms necessary for the application of Council Regulations (EEC) No 1408/71 and (EEC) No 574/72 (E 001, E 101, E 102, E 103, E 104, E 106, E 107, E 108, E 109, E 112, E 115, E 116, E 117, E 118, E 120, E 121, E 123, E 124, E 125, E 126 and E 127) (1) | 1 |

Contents

II   Acts whose publication is not obligatory

page

Commission

*

Decision No 202 of 17 March 2005 on model forms necessary for the application of Council Regulations (EEC) No 1408/71 and (EEC) No 574/72 (E 001, E 101, E 102, E 103, E 104, E 106, E 107, E 108, E 109, E 112, E 115, E 116, E 117, E 118, E 120, E 121, E 123, E 124, E 125, E 126 and E 127) (1)

1

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance and for the EU/Switzerland Agreement. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance and for the EU/Switzerland Agreement.

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
STATE v. Kim SYDNOR

157P18-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 14, 2018

Kirby H. Smith, III, Kim Sydnor, Attorney at Law, for Sydnor, Kim.

Kathryn J. Thomas, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State of North Carolina

N. Lorrin Freeman, District Attorney, for State.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 22nd of May 2018 by Defendant to Have N.C. Court of Appeals Enforce Its Order:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 14th of August 2018."
In the MATTER OF: R.R.

No. COA16-1240

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: July 5, 2017

VACATED AND REMANDED.
#### George Harris, Sam Horton, J. C. Thomas, Susan Leonard and Mary Alexander, Trustees of New Hope Primitive Baptist Church of Orlando, et al., *Appellants,*v. J. B. Callahan, *Appellee.*

Division B.

Decision Filed April 17, 1928.

*Jones*& *Jones, J. J. Murray*and *J. B. Murrow,*for Appellants ;

*Dickenson & Dickenson,*for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the decree herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said decree; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said decree of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.
STATE of North Carolina v. Reginald Leon ALLEN

No. COA17-973

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: June 5, 2018

DISMISSED.
Exhibit 4.3


 





AMENDMENT
to


8% MANDATORILY
CONVERTIBLE NOTES


 


This
Amendment dated May 15, 2013 (the “Amendment”), to those certain 8% Mandatorily Convertible Notes held
by the undersigned holders thereof (the “Holders”), (as amended from time to time the “LOM Notes”),
by Green Ballast, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”).


 


WHEREAS, the Company
issued the LOM Notes to the Holders with a Stated Maturity Date, as defined therein, of October 16, 2013; and


 


WHEREAS, the Company
and the Holders desire to enter into this Amendment to memorialize the waiver of default due to the Company’s failure to
close a Qualified Financing (as defined in the LOM Notes) by April 15, 2013, as required by Section 6(c) of said LOM Notes.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, for
good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged and agreed, the Company and the Holders
agree as follows:


 


1.                 
As confirmed by the written consent herein of the Company and the Holders of the LOM Notes representing at least 50% of
the aggregate principal amount of LOM Notes currently outstanding, the default by the Company under the LOM Notes caused by the
failure to consummate a Qualified Financing on or before April 15, 2013, is hereby waived.


 


2.                 
Section 6(c) titled Event of Default of each of the LOM Notes is hereby amended to change the date to July 15, 2013.


 


3.                 
Except to the extent heretofore or herein amended, the LOM Notes shall remain in full force and effect.


 


4.                 
All capitalized terms used herein, and not otherwise defined herein, have the respective meanings given to such terms in
the LOM Notes.


 


5.                 
This Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original document. Electronic
signatures, whether by fax, e-mail, or other electronic means, shall be treated as original signatures.


 


 


 


[Signature page
to follow.]


 




    	 



    	 



    

 


IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be executed the day and year
first set forth above.


 





	 	COMPANY:
	 	 
	 	GREEN BALLAST, INC.
	 	 
	 	By: 	/s/ Kevin Adams
	 	Name:

        Title:
	Kevin
    Adams

    Chief Executive Officer




 


		HOLDERS:
	 	 
	 	NEXT GENERATION TSFBO ANDY ARNO IRA
	 	 
	 	By: 	/s/ Timothy Wilms
	 	 	 
	 	 
	 	C. Rodney O’Connor
	 	 
	 	 
	 	Pamela F. O’Connor
	 	 
	 	SAS Trust 1
	 	 
	 	By:	/s/ Scott Sampson
	 	 
	 	 
	 	James Kaufmann
	 	 
	 	 
	 	Charles DeBare
	 	 
	 	 
	 	Mary DeBare
	 	 
	 	JBA Investments, LLC
	 	 
	 	By:	 
	 	 
	 	Linda Gale Sampson Trust 2
	 	 
	 	By:	/s/ Linda Gale Sampson
	 	 
	 	By:	 
	 	 
	 	Elizabeth Arno
	 	Elizabeth Arno
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Robert Jones, Appellant.

[720 NYS2d 357]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Lefkowitz, J.), rendered October 7, 1999, convicting him of attempted robbery in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that-the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf., People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Ritter, J. P., Friedmann, H. Miller and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 18

- 1753

_____________________________
J OHN M C K AY , Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Gadsd en County

. Barbara K. Hobbs , Judge

.
June 13 , 2018

P ER C URIAM

.
D ISMISSED

. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.140(b)(3).

R OWE , K ELSEY , and W INOKUR , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________

John McKay, pro se
, Appellant.2 Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation

# time and date:

2 p.m., Monday, October 3, 2005.

# place:

NeighborWorks® America, 1325 G Street NW., Suite 800, Boardroom, Washington, DC 20005.

# status:

Open.

# contact person for more information:

                        Jeffrey T. Bryson, General Counsel/Secretary, (202) 220-2372;                         *jbryson@nw.org.*

# agenda:

 

I. Call to Order

II. Approval of Minutes: June 28, 2005, Annual Meeting

III. Resolution of Appreciation

IV. Finance and Budget Committee Report

V. Treasurer's Report

VI. Corporate Administration Committee Report

VII. Audit Committee Report

VIII. Creation of a Chief Financial Officer Position

IX. Appointment of Director of Finance as Primary Check Signer

X. CEO Quarterly Management Report

XI. NHSA Update

XII. Adjournment

Jeffrey T. Bryson,

General Counsel/Secretary

[FR Doc. 05-19898 Filed 9-29-05; 3:26 pm]

BILLING CODE 7570-01-M
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4416 Engrossed in House (EH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4416

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To redesignate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 161 Live Oak Street in Miami, Arizona, as the ``Staff Sergeant 
               Manuel V. Mendoza Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. STAFF SERGEANT MANUEL V. MENDOZA POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Redesignation.--The facility of the United States Postal 
Service located at 161 Live Oak Street in Miami, Arizona, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Staff Sergeant Manuel V. Mendoza Post 
Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Staff 
Sergeant Manuel V. Mendoza Post Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 14, 2014.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
113th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 4416

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To redesignate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 161 Live Oak Street in Miami, Arizona, as the ``Staff Sergeant 
               Manuel V. Mendoza Post Office Building''.
```