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

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Merisant Worldwide, Inc. (the “Company”)for the period ended June 30, 2006 (the “Report”),the undersigned, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

 

 
|        | /s/ Paul Block          |   |
|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|   | Paul Block              |   |
|   | Chief Executive Officer |   |
|   | August 11, 2006         |   |

 

----
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order
Lansing, Michigan

October 31, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice 128598 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: 128598 COA: 257954 Kalamazoo CC: 99-001368-FC PATRICK JAY GRAY, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appe al the April 7, 2005 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, a nd it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishi ng entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).

p1024 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

October 31, 2005

Clerk
STATE of North Carolina v. Pete MUHAMMAD

No. 81P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 5, 2018

Pete Muhammad, for Muhammad, Pete.

Daniel P. O'Brien, Special Deputy Attorney General, N. Lorrin Freeman, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

*596***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 14th of March 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 5th of April 2018."

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 14th of March 2018 by Defendant to Proceed In Forma Pauperis:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th of April 2018."
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF


THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the annual report on Form 10-K of Versa Cards, Inc. (the
"Company") for the year ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Covered Report"), I, William F.
Donavan, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, hereby
certify that:





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





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





IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, I have executed this certificate as of this 16th day of April
2009.





/s/ William F. DonavanBy:
      William F. Donavan, Chief Executive OfficerDate:
      April 16, 2009
##### 



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 filing of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of
BH/RE, L.L.C., a Nevada limited liability company (Company), for the period
ended June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned officers of the Company
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to such officers 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 results of
operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periods
expressed in the Report. Date: August 16, 2004 /s/  ROBERT EARLRobert EarlManager /s/  DOUGLAS P. TEITELBAUMDouglas P. TeitelbaumManager /s/  THOMAS AVALLONEThomas AvalloneActing Chief Financial Officer The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate
disclosure document.
#### Barbara A. K. Schwartz et al., Appellants, v Sandra R. Kurlander, Defendant. Guy Vitacco, Jr., Nonparty-Respondent.

[719 NYS2d 105]

In an action for the partition of real property, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Adams, J.), dated November 4, 1999, which denied their motion for leave to commence an action against the Referee appointed to sell the property.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,

Ordered that the plaintiffs’ time to serve the Referee with a summons and complaint is extended until 90 days after service upon them of a copy of this decision and order with notice of entry.

In this action for the partition of real property, the plaintiffs moved for permission to sue the Referee alleging, *inter alia,*that they sustained damages as a result of the Referee’s negligence. The motion was denied on the ground that the Referee was immune from suit and there was no evidence of misconduct, fraud, or malfeasance which would warrant granting leave to sue. We affirm, but do so solely on the basis that such an application was unnecessary.

Leave of the court must be obtained to sue a receiver in his or her representative, as opposed to individual, capacity *(see, Copeland v Salomon,*56 NY2d 222; *Chase Manhattan Bank v Kress,*131 AD2d 807). This rule is based on a concern for the protection of the assets in receivership, from which any judgment obtained against a receiver in his or her representative capacity would be paid *(see, Copeland v Salomon, supra,*at 228; *North Side Sav. Bank v Arieh,*234 AD2d 169).

There is no similar concern with respect to a Referee. The fact that a Referee, like other quasi-judicial officers, might benefit from immunity from liability under certain circumstances *466(see, *Harley v Perkinson,*187 AD2d 765; *Colin v County of Suffolk,*181 AD2d 653, 654), does not mean that pre-action leave to sue is necessary. The viability of the immunity defense should properly be litigated in the context of a motion to dismiss the complaint or for summary judgment, rather than in the context of a pre-action motion for leave *(see, Weitzner v New York City Dept. of Social Servs.,*212 AD2d 414; *Sher v Pellicano,*203 AD2d 273; *Harley v Perkinson, supra).*

To the extent our decision in *Ishaq v Batra*(212 AD2d 512) can be read as contrary to the foregoing, we decline to follow it. Nothing in the governing provisions of the CPLR or in the common law requires, or even authorizes, pre-action permission to sue Referees or similar quasi-judicial officers accused of negligence or misconduct in their official or individual capacities. Altman, J. P., Krausman, Goldstein and McGinity, JJ., concur.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-5039

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

GERMAN MILLON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, Jr.,

Chief District Judge. (3:05-cr-00341-1)

Submitted: April 23, 2008 Decided: May 2, 2008

Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit

Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tolly A. Kennon, III, KENNON & ASSOCIATES, Charlotte, North

Carolina, for Appellant. Amy Elizabeth Ray, OFFICE OF THE UNITED

STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

German Millon appeals his conviction and seventy-month

sentence imposed after he pled guilty, pursuant to a plea

agreement, to one count of conspiracy to possess with intent to

distribute marijuana and cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C.

§§ 841(a)(1), 846 (2000). On appeal, Millon states only a single

claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. The Government has

moved to dismiss Millon’s appeal based upon a waiver of appellate

rights in his plea agreement.

We deny the Government’s motion to dismiss. We have

reviewed Millon’s claim and conclude that it does not “conclusively

appear[]” on the record that counsel was ineffective. United

States v. Richardson, 195 F.3d 192, 198 (4th Cir. 1999) (internal

quotation marks omitted). Millon may raise his ineffective

assistance claim in proceedings under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). We

therefore affirm Millon’s conviction and sentence. 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
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Kevin R. Callahan, Chairman of the Board and Chief
Executive Officer of Affirmative Insurance Holdings, Inc. (the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 to the best of my knowledge, that:



|(1) | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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

This certificate is being furnished solely for purposes of Section 906.

Date: November 9, 2009



/s/ Kevin R. CallahanKevin R. CallahanChairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
COURTNEY NC LLC v. BALDWIN

219P17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 28, 2017

Monette Baldwin, for Baldwin, Monette.

A. Bartlett White, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, Stephanie D'Atri, Attorney at Law, for Courtney NC, LLC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 30th of August 2017 by Defendant to Make (Unrevised) Petition for Writ of Supersedeas/Motion to Stay Moot:

"Motion Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 28th of September 2017."

Beasley, J. and Morgan, J. recused
INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY DEVELOPMENTS, LLC d/b/a Signature Group, Plaintiff, v. K CONSTRUCTION & ROOFING, LLC, Evangel Worship Center, Inc., and Bank of the Ozarks as successor-in-interest to Bank of the Carolinas, Defendants.

No. COA17-509

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: November 20, 2018

DISMISSED IN PART; AFFIRMED IN PART.
STATE of North Carolina v. Kenneth James KEWISH, Defendant.

No. COA18-214

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: November 6, 2018

NO ERROR IN PART, VACATED. REMANDED IN PART.
EXHIBIT 32








CERTIFICATIONS
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 report of Ridgewood Energy K Fund, LLC (the “Fund”) on Form
10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of the undersigned
hereby certifies, 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 their
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 results of operations of the Fund.





Dated:
                October
      30, 2008
                
                
                
                RIDGEWOOD
      ENERGY K FUND, LLCBy:
                /s/
                
                ROBERT
      E. SWANSONName:
                
                Robert
      E. SwansonTitle:
                
                President
      and Chief Executive Officer(Principal
      Executive Officer)Dated:
                October
      30, 2008By:
                /s/
                
                KATHLEEN
      P. MCSHERRYName:
                
                Kathleen
      P. McSherryTitle:
                
                Executive
      Vice President and Chief Financial Officer(Principal
      Financial and Accounting Officer)





A signed
original of this written statement or other document authenticating,
acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form
within the electronic version of this written statement has been provided to
Ridgewood Energy K Fund, LLC and will be retained by Ridgewood Energy K Fund,
LLC and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
SURGICAL CARE AFFILIATES, LLC v. NORTH CAROLINA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION

No. 435P17

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 5, 2018

Amar Majmundar, Senior Deputy Attorney General, for North Carolina Industrial Commission

Bethany A. Burgon, Assistant Attorney General

Renee J. Montgomery, Attorney at Law, Matthew W. Wolfe, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Surgical Care Affiliates, LLC

Christopher G. Browning, Jr., Attorney at Law, Raleigh

Charles George, Attorney at Law, Raleigh

Andrew Ellen, Attorney at Law

J. Michael Carpenter, General Counsel

Amy Y. Bason, General Counsel

Kimberly S. Hibbard, General Counsel

Gregory F. Schwitzgebel, III, Associate General Counsel

T. John Policastro, General Counsel

H. Julian Philpott, Jr., Attorney at Law, Raleigh *163***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 22nd of December 2017 by Petitioner 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 April 2018."
IN RE: Charles Everette HINTON

449P11-21

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 8, 2018

Charles E. Hinton, for Hinton, Charles Everette.

Daniel P. O'Brien, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State of N.C.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 4th of October 2018 by Plaintiff to Amend:

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 8th of October 2018."

Ervin, J. recused
#### Elliott Glenn JANIGAN v. STATE.

CR-01-0930.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

Aug. 30, 2002.

Elliott Glenn Janigan, pro se.

William H. Pryor, Jr., atty. gen., and Hense R. Ellis II, asst. atty. gen., for appellee.

McMILLAN, Presiding Judge.

The appellant, Elliott Glenn Janigan, filed a Rule 32, Ala. R.Crim. P., petition, *1045attacking his 1993 guilty plea convictions for murder and first-degree robbery and his sentence of life imprisonment. In his petition, Janigan argued that, although a previous Rule 32 petition had been denied on September 28, 2000, he was not notified of that dismissal until December 12, 2001. Therefore, he contended, he failed to appeal the trial court’s decision within the prescribed time, but that failure was without fault on his part. Janigan stated in this petition that he had filed several pleadings in an attempt to learn the status of the previous petition and that he had been advised by the State on March 23, 2001, that that petition was pending. Without requiring a response from the State, the trial court summarily denied Janigan’s current Rule 32 petition.

The State has requested this Court to remand this petition for the Macon Circuit Court to grant Janigan an out-of-time appeal on the dismissal of his previous Rule 32 petition. The State contends that Jani-gan did not receive timely notice of the trial court’s September 28, 2000, denial of his previous petition. The record on appeal supports the State’s position.

Accordingly, this matter is remanded to the Macon Circuit Court with directions for that court to grant Janigan an out-of-time appeal from the September 28, 2000, order denying his previous Rule 32 petition. Due return shall be made within 28 days of the date of this order.

REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS. 

COBB, BASCHAB, SHAW, and WISE, JJ., concur.
James and Lara BARNHILL v. Richard W. FARRELL and The Farrell Law Group, PC

No. 379P12-2

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 20, 2018

John Walter Bryant, Amber Jean Ivie, Attorneys at Law, Raleigh, for Barnhill, James, et al.

Richard W. Farrell, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Farrell, Richard W., et al.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 9th of April 2018 by Defendants 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 20th of September 2018."
#### Timothy HARRIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 5D02-1010.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Aug. 26, 2003.

*520James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Allison Havens, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Patrick W. Kreehowski, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. See *Faison v. State,*426 So.2d 963 (Fla.1983).

SAWAYA, C.J., THOMPSON and TORPY, JJ., concur.
<Page>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

                             LISTING OF SUBSIDIARIES

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                Country, State
                                                                or Province
                                                                of Incorporation
                                                                ----------------
<S>                                                             <C>
Metallurg, Inc.                                                 Delaware
   Metallurg International Resources, LLC                       Delaware
   Shieldalloy Metallurgical Corporation                        Delaware
   Metallurg Services, Inc.                                     New York
   MIR (China), Inc. (dormant)                                  Delaware
   Metallurg (Canada) Limited                                   Quebec, Canada
   Metallurg Holdings Corporation                               New York
      Metallurg Europe Limited                                  England
         London & Scandinavian Metallurgical Co Limited         England
            S. A. Vickers Limited (dormant)                     England
            H. M. I. Limited (dormant)                          England
            Metal Alloys (South Wales) Limited (dormant)        England
            Metalloys Limited (dormant)                         England
            The Aluminium Powder Company Limited                England
               Alpoco Developments Limited (dormant)            England
               Benda-Lutz-Alpoco Sp.zo.o.                       Poland
            M & A Powders Limited (dormant)                     England
            Hydelko AS                                          Norway
         Companhia Industrial Fluminense                        Brazil
      Metallurg (Far East) Limited                              Japan
      Metallurg Mexico S. A. de C. V.                           Mexico
      Metallurg Servicios S de RL de CV                         Mexico
      Caribbean Metals & Alloys Limited (dormant)               Jersey, CI
      Brandau y Cia S. A. (dormant)                             Spain
      Aleaciones Metalurgicas Venezolanas  C. A.  (dormant)     Venezuela
</TABLE>

Notes
Dormant subsidiaries have no operations.

As at March 30, 2005
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4644 

To designate the buildings occupied by the Department of Transportation 

located at 1200 New Jersey Avenue, Southeast, in the District of Columbia as the ‘‘James L. Oberstar United States Department of Transportation Building Complex’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 9, 2014 

Mr. LIPINSKI (for himself, Mr. NOLAN, Mr. PETERSON, Ms. MCCOLLUM, Mr. 

KLINE, Mr. ELLISON, Mrs. BACHMANN, Mr. WALZ, Mr. PAULSEN, Mr. 

NADLER, Mr. CAPUANO, Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee, Ms. NORTON, Mr. 

DEFAZIO, Mr. RAHALL, Mr. CUMMINGS, Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON

of Texas, Mr. MICHAUD, Mr. COHEN, and Mr. SIRES) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and 

Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To designate the buildings occupied by the Department of 

Transportation located at 1200 New Jersey Avenue, 

Southeast, in the District of Columbia as the ‘‘James 

L. Oberstar United States Department of Transportation 

Building Complex’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

4 The buildings occupied by the Department of Trans5 portation located at 1200 New Jersey Avenue, Southeast, 


dlhill on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4644 IH

1 in the District of Columbia shall be known and designated 

2 as the ‘‘James L. Oberstar United States Department of 

3 Transportation Building Complex’’ during the period in 

4 which the buildings are occupied by the Department of 

5 Transportation. 

6 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

7 With respect to the period in which the buildings re8 ferred to in section 1 are occupied by the Department of 

9 Transportation, any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

10 document, record, or other paper of the United States to 

11 those buildings shall be deemed to be a reference to the 

12 ‘‘James L. Oberstar United States Department of Trans13 portation Building Complex’’. 

Æ 


dlhill on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

April 30, 2010 

p0427 

Order 

 

April 30, 2010 

140142 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 140142 

 COA: 285287 

Huron CC: 07-004595-FC 

MITCHELL JAMES CLAPPER, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 15, 2009 

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

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

KELLY, C.J., would grant leave to appeal for the reasons set forth in her dissenting 

statement in People v Xiong, 483 Mich 951 (2009). 

CAVANAGH, J., would grant leave to appeal to consider the McDougall v Schanz, 

461 Mich 15 (1999), issue.