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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Mack-Cali Realty, L.P. (the “Operating Partnership”) for the year ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Mitchell E. Hersh, as President and Chief Executive Officer of Mack-Cali Realty Corporation, its general partner, and Barry Lefkowitz, as Chief Financial Officer of Mack-Cali Realty Corporation, its general partner, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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 Operating Partnership. 

 

 
| Date: | March 2, 2005 | By: | /s/ Mitchell E. Hersh |  
 
Mitchell E. Hersh

 
 
President and Chief Executive Officer

 
of Mack-Cali Realty Corporation,

 
 
the general partner of Mack-Cali

 
 
Realty, L.P.

 
 

Date:

March 2, 2005

By:

/s/ Barry Lefkowitz

 
 
Barry Lefkowitz

 
 
Executive Vice President and

Chief Financial Officer**

of Mack-Cali Realty Corporation,

the general partner of Mack-Cali

 
Realty, L.P.

 
 

 

This certification accompanies each Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Operating Partnership for purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Operating Partnership and will be retained by the Operating Partnership and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. 

 

 

  |
|-------|---------------|-----|-----------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
**Exhibit
      32. Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of
      Atlantic**


**Coast
      Federal Corporation Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
      2002**








Robert
      J.
      Larison, Jr., President and Chief Executive Officer, and Dawna R. Miller, Senior
      Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Atlantic Coast Federal Corporation
      (the “Company”), each certify in their capacity as an officer of the Company
      that they have reviewed the quarterly report of the Company on Form 10-Q for
      the
      quarter ended June 30, 2008 and that to the best of their
      knowledge:





1.
            the
                report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) 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.





The
      purpose of this statement is solely to comply with Title 18, Chapter 63, Section
      1350 of the United States Code, as amended by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002.





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 Securities
      and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





Date:
      August 13, 2008





/s/
                Robert J. Larison, Jr.
            
            /s/
                Dawna R. MillerRobert
                J. Larison, Jr.
            
            Dawna
                R. MillerPresident
                and
            
            Senior
                Vice President andChief
                Executive Officer
            
            Chief
                Financial Officer




34
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-1071

GAIL W. GODWIN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

JUMBO SPORT, formerly known as Richmond Sports,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge.

(CA-97-669-3)

Submitted: March 26, 1998 Decided: April 9, 1998

Before WIDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gail W. Godwin, Appellant Pro Se. Curtis McKinley Hairston, Jr.,

WILLIAMS, MULLEN, CHRISTIAN & DOBBINS, Richmond, Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing her

claims of harassment and religious discrimination. We have reviewed

the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. Godwin v. Jumbo Sport, No. CA-97-669-3 (E.D. Va. Dec. 18,

1997). 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
STATE of North Carolina v. Stanley Demon DOWD, Defendant.

No. COA18-491

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: December 4, 2018

NO ERROR.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001063761
<NAME> SIMON PROPERTY GROUP INC
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                        127,626
<SECURITIES>                                        0         
<RECEIVABLES>                                 232,286
<ALLOWANCES>                                   14,488
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    0<F1>
<PP&E>                                     11,816,325
<DEPRECIATION>                                710,012
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             13,269,129
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               0<F1>
<BONDS>                                     7,972,381
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                   717,916
<COMMON>                                           17
<OTHER-SE>                                  2,676,209 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               13,269,129<F2>
<SALES>                                             0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            1,405,072
<CGS>                                               0         
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 755,917 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                6,610
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            420,282
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               235,790
<INCOME-TAX>                                  235,790
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           235,790
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 7,146
<CHANGES>                                           0 
<NET-INCOME>                                  166,941
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    1.05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    1.05
<FN>
<F1>The Registrant does not report using a classified balance sheet.
<F2>Includes limited partner's interest in the SPG Operating Partnership of 
$1,009,646 and preferred stock of subsidiary of $339,329
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
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.                  

###### Department of Transportation

###### Office of the Secretary 

The following Agreements were filed with the Department of Transportation under the sections 412 and 414 of the Federal Aviation Act, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1382 and 1384) and procedures governing proceedings to enforce these provisions. Answers may be filed within 21 days after the filing of the application. 

*Docket Number:*                     OST-2005-22408.                 

*Date Filed:*                     September 7, 2005.                 

*Parties:*                     Members of the International Air Transport Association.                 

*Subject:*                     Geneva, 4-8 July 2005, TC2 Europe Middle-East Resolutions, r1-r22.                 

*Minutes:*                     TC2 Within Middle East, Europe-Middle East (Memo 0208).                 

*Tables:*                     TC2 Europe-Middle East specified fare table (Memo 0104).                 

*Intended effective date:*                     1 January 2006.                 

*Docket Number:*                     OST-2005-22412.                 

*Date Filed:*                     September 7, 2005.                 

*Parties:*                     Members of the International Air Transport Association.                 

*Subject:*                     TC2 Within Middle East, (Memo 0147), r1-r15                 

*Minutes:*                     TC2 Within Middle East, Geneva, 4-8 July 2005, (Memo 0150).                 

*Tables:*                     Geneva, 4-8 July 2005, TC2 Within Middle East (Memo 0054).                 

*Technical Correction:*                     Geneva, 4-8 July 2005, TC2 within Middle East, (Memo 0055).                 

*Intended effective date:*                     1 January 2006.                 

Renee V. Wright,

Program Manager, Docket Operations, Federal Register Liaison. 

[FR Doc. 05-19701 Filed 9-30-05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910-62-P
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Kerry ORGERON.

No. 2002-KO-2754.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 5, 2003.

In re Orgeron, Kerry;—Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. I, No. 95-6403; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 02-KA-276.

Denied.
* Pursuant to 5th Cir. 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 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-30666 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ROCHELLE RENE JONES, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 96-CR-20058-3

- - - - - - - - - - April 15, 1999 Before JONES, SMITH, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Court-appointed counsel for Rochelle Rene Jones has filed a brief as required by Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Jones has not filed a response to this brief. Our independent review of the brief and record discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED.
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 196 (Wednesday, October 12, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59366-59367]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-20373]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service


Issuance of Permits

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of issuance of permits for marine mammals.

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

SUMMARY: The following permits were issued.

ADDRESSES: Documents and other information submitted with these 
applications are available for review, subject to the requirements of 
the Privacy Act and Freedom of Information Act, by any party who 
submits a written request for a copy of such documents to: U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service, Division of Management Authority, 4401 North 
Fairfax Drive, Room 700, Arlington, Virginia 22203; fax (703) 358-2281.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Division of Management Authority, 
telephone (703) 358-2104.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that on the dates 
below, as authorized by the provisions of the Marine Mammal Protection 
Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), the Fish and Wildlife 
Service issued the requested permits subject to certain conditions set 
forth therein. For each permit for an endangered species, the Service 
found that (1) the application was filed in good faith, (2) the granted 
permit would not operate to the disadvantage of the endangered species, 
and (3) the granted permit would be consistent with the purposes and 
policy set forth in Section 2 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 
amended.

Marine Mammals

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Receipt of application
  Permit number          Applicant            Federal Register notice              Permit issuance date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          102916  Larry D. Atkinson......  70 FR 51838; August 31, 2005  September 20, 2005.

[[Page 59367]]

 
          105483  John L. Pouleson.......  70 FR 41782; July 20, 2005..  September 20, 2005.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Dated: September 23, 2005.
Michael L. Carpenter,
Senior Permit Biologist, Branch of Permits, Division of Management 
Authority.
[FR Doc. 05-20373 Filed 10-11-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
The Honorable Elsijane Trimble Roy, United States District Judge for the

1

Eastern District of Arkansas.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 98-3526

___________

Trish Goman Fischiettie, *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. *

* Appeal from the United States

Mustangs and More Auto Sales; * District Court for the

Turnbo Auto Sales; John Doe I * Eastern District of Arkansas.

(“Gary”); John Doe II (“David”), *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellees. *

___________

 Submitted: January 19, 1999

 Filed: January 25, 1999

___________

Before RICHARD S. ARNOLD, WOLLMAN, and BEAM, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Trish Goman Fischiettie appeals the district court’s order dismissing her action 1

with prejudice. Having reviewed the record, we conclude that the dismissal with

prejudice of purported federal claims was proper. As to such claims, we affirm. See

8th Cir. R. 47B. We modify the dismissal to be without prejudice, however, as to any

state law claims Fischiettie may have against these defendants. 
-2-

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
The Honorable Carol E. Jackson, United States District Judge 1

for the Eastern District of Missouri.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 96-3964

___________

James Brooks, *

 *

Appellant, *

 * Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

 * Eastern District of Missouri.

Normandy Middle School; John *

Fredrics, * [UNPUBLISHED]

 *

Appellees. *

___________

 Submitted: March 4, 1997

 Filed: March 7, 1997

___________

Before BOWMAN, WOLLMAN, and BEAM, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

James Brooks appeals the district court's dismissal without

1

prejudice of his employment discrimination action for failure to

obtain a right-to-sue letter. Having reviewed the record and the

parties' briefs, we conclude that the judgment of the district

court was correct. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:
-2-

CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Gail M. Sasaki, certify that:

 

1.               I have reviewed this Amendment No.1 to Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Netlist, Inc.; and

 

2.               Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.

 

 

Date: July 7, 2011

 

 
| /s/   Gail M. Sasaki                         |   |
|----------------------------------------------|--------|
| Gail   M. Sasaki                             |   |
| Vice   President and Chief Financial Officer |   |

 

----
This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Appellate Reports.

Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum

opinions. Please also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain

computer-generated errors or other deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of

Appeals and does not include the filing date. 

1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO

2 STATE OF NEW MEXICO,

3 Plaintiff-Appellee,

4 v. NO. 34,338

5 JOSE OROZCO-LUJAN,

6 Defendant-Appellant.

7 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF LUNA COUNTY

8 Daniel Viramontes, District Judge

9 Hector H. Balderas, Attorney General

10 Santa Fe, NM

11 for Appellee

12 D. Eric Hannum

13 Albuquerque, NM

14 for Appellant

15 MEMORANDUM OPINION

16 GARCIA, Judge.

17 {1} Defendant Jose Orozco-Lujan (Defendant) appeals from the district court’s

18 denial of his motion to suppress evidence. [RP 191–92; DS 2] Following the district
2

1 court’s denial of Defendant’s motion, Defendant entered a conditional guilty plea to

2 distribution of marijuana or synthetic cannabinoids. [RP 196, 200–02; DS 2] In this

3 Court’s second notice of proposed disposition, we proposed to affirm the denial of

4 Defendant’s motion to suppress and his conviction. [CN 1, 6–7] Defendant filed a

5 memorandum in opposition, which we have given due consideration. Remaining

6 unpersuaded, we affirm.

7 {2} Defendant asserts in his memorandum in opposition that his conviction must

8 be reversed, because there was no testimony regarding whether the trained dog alerted

9 differently to a controlled substance than to a concealed person. [MIO 2–3] Thus,

10 Defendant argues, the fact that the dog alerted first to Defendant’s vehicle, then to his

11 seat lacks “any meaningful evidentiary value[.]” [MIO 2–3] Defendant does not

12 explain how a lack of specificity about the type of contraband indicated by the dog

13 affects reasonable suspicion or why further detention based on the dog sniff was

14 unreasonable. We therefore conclude Defendant has failed to point out any actual

15 errors in fact or in law with this Court’s notice. See Hennessy v. Duryea,

16 1998-NMCA-036, ¶ 24, 124 N.M. 754, 955 P.2d 683 (“Our courts have repeatedly

17 held that, in summary calendar cases, the burden is on the party opposing the proposed

18 disposition to clearly point out errors in fact or law.”).

19 {3} Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in our notice of proposed disposition and
3

1 herein, we affirm Defendant’s conviction.

2 {4} IT IS SO ORDERED.

3 ________________________________

4 TIMOTHY L. GARCIA, Judge

5 WE CONCUR:

6 _______________________________

7 RODERICK T. KENNEDY, Judge

8 _______________________________

9 J. MILES HANISEE, Judge
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF INTERIM CHIEF FINANCIAL
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 Visual Management Systems, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, J.D. Gardner, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, do hereby 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 §13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, 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.

|                   |     |                          | 
|------------------ | --- | ------------------------ | 
|November 23,
 2009 | By: | /s/ J.D.
 Gardner        | 
|                   |     |                          | 
|                   |     | Chief
 Financial Officer

25

---
EX-10.7



 Exhibit 10.7 
 2009 AMENDMENT TO 
 THE ENPIRION, INC. 

2004 STOCK OPTION PLAN 
 THIS 2009 AMENDMENT TO THE ENPIRION, INC. 2004 STOCK OPTION PLAN (this “Amendment”), dated as of January 26, 2009, is entered into by Enpirion, Inc., a company organized under the
laws of the State of Delaware (“Company”). 
 WHEREAS, the Company adopted the Enpirion, Inc. 2004 Stock Option
Plan (the “Plan”) to compensate the Company’s officers, employees, directors, consultants and other key persons with awards of stock options; and 
 WHEREAS, the Company intends to amend the Plan to increase the total number of shares of common stock of the Company that may be issued or transferred under the Plan by 21,933,333 shares, so that a total
of 30,286,264 shares may be issued or transferred under the Plan. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, the Company hereby agrees as follows:

 1.    Section 3 of the Plan shall be amended by replacing the term “8,352,931” therein with the term
“30,286,264”. 
 2.    In all respects not amended, the Plan is hereby ratified and confirmed. 

3.    This Amendment shall be construed, interpreted and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of New York without regard
to its provisions governing conflict of law. 







 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, and as evidence of the adoption of this Amendment to the Plan as set
forth herein, the Board of Directors of the Company has caused this Amendment to be executed by the undersigned officer of the Company as of the date set forth above. 

 

			
	ENPIRION, INC.
		
	By:	 	/s/ Denis Regimbal
	Name: Denis Regimbal
	Title: Chief Executive Officer


 Option Plan Amendment