alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>


                                                                    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 Entech Environmental
Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December
31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Steven D. Rosenthal, 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, that:

         1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 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.

         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.



                                   /s/ Steven D. Rosenthal
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                                   Steven D. Rosenthal, Chief Executive Officer
                                   Date: March 30, 2004
#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. GEORGE JORDAN

No. 757SC77

(Filed 16 April 1975)

Appeal by defendant from *Peel, Judge.*Judgments entered 26 August 1974 in Superior Court, Wilson County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 8 April 1975.

*Attorney General Edmisten, by Associate Attorney Robert W. Kaylor, for the State.*

*Farris, Thomas and Fmris, by Robert A. Farris, for defendant appellant.*

MORRIS, VAUGHN and CLARK, Judges.

No error.
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Appeal of

-- Ameresco Select, Inc. Under Contract No. N47408-00-D-8131 APPEARANCE FORTHE APPELLANT: ) ) ) ) )

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: ASBCA No. 61496

Ron R. Hutchinson, Esq.

Doyle & Bachman, LLP Arlington, VA Craig D. Jensen, Esq.

Navy ChiefTrial Attorney David L. Koman, Esq.

Trial Attorney ORDER OF DISMISSAL The dispute has been settled. The appeal is dismissed with prejudice. Dated: 18 April 2018

' Administrative Judge Chairman Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals
I certify that the foregoing is a true copy ofthe Order ofDismissal ofthe Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals in ASBCA No. 61496, Appeal ofAmeresco Select, Inc., rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. Dated:

JEFFREY D. GARDIN Recorder, Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals
#### FRANCES W. KEYES v. HARDIN OIL CO., INC.

No. 7218DC174

(Filed 23 February 1972)

1. Appeal and Error § 39— failure to docket record in apt time

Appeal is dismissed for failure to docket the record on appeal within 90 days after the date of the judgment appealed from, no order extending the time for docketing the record having been entered by the trial court. Court of Appeals Rule 5.

2. Appeal and Error § 39— extension of time to docket appeal — order extending time to serve case on appeal

An order extending the time “within which to prepare the statement of case on appeal or record on appeal” did not extend the time for docketing the record on appeal.

3. Appeal and Error § 36— service of case on appeal — extension of time — trial judge

Only the judge who tried the case has authority to sign an order extending the time for service of the case on appeal.

Appeal by defendant from *Kuykendall, Chief District Judge,*August 1971 Civil Session of District Court held in Guil-ford County.

Civil action to recover damages for breach of an implied warranty of fitness of a travel trailer. The jury answered issues in favor of the plaintiff, and from judgment on the verdict, defendant appealed.

*Parker, Mazzoli & Rice by Gerald C. Parker for plaintiff appellee.*

*Walker, Short & Alexander by Perry N. Walker for defendant appellant.*

*646PARKER, Judge.

[1] The judgment appealed from was dated 21 August 1971. The record on appeal was not docketed in this Court until 28 December 1971, which was more than ninety days after the date of the judgment appealed from. No order extending the time for docketing the record on appeal appears in the record. For failure of appellant to docket the record on appeal within the time allowed by the rules of this Court, this appeal is dismissed. Rule 5, Rules of Practice in the Court of Appeals. *Phillips v. Wrenn Brothers,*12 N.C. App. 35, 182 S.E. 2d 285; *State v. Burgess,*11 N.C. App. 430, 181 S.E. 2d 120; *Williford v. Williford,*10 N.C. App. 541, 179 S.E. 2d 118; *State v. Squires,*1 N.C. App. 199, 160 S.E. 2d 550.

The record does contain an order, signed by District Judge Alexander, extending the time “within which to prepare the statement of case on appeal or record on appeal.” This order did not extend the time for *docketing*the record on appeal. *Horton v. Davis,*11 N.C. 592, 181 S.E. 2d 781; *Smith v. Starnes,*1 N.C. App. 192, 160 S.E. 2d 547. In addition, we call attention to the fact that Judge Alexander, who was not the trial judge, did not have authority to sign an order extending the time for service of the case on appeal. *State v. Lewis,*9 N.C. App. 323, 176 S.E. 2d 1; *State v. Shoemaker,*9 N.C. App. 273, 175 S.E. 2d 781.

Nevertheless, we have carefully reviewed the record and prejudicial error sufficient to warrant a new trial is not shown.

Appeal dismissed.

Chief Judge Mallard and Judge Morris concur.
#### Will Cole, *Plaintiff in Error,*v. The State of Florida, *Defendant in Error.*

En Banc.

Opinion Filed February 13, 1928.

*144
      *J. Carl Lamb din,*for Plaintiff in Error;

*Fred H. Davis,*Attorney General, and *H. E. Carter,*Assistant, for the State.

Per Curiam.

The judgment of conviction herein of murder in the first degree with a recommendation to mercy is reversed on the authority of Platt v. State, 65 Fla. 253, 61 South. Rep. 502; Nims v. State, 70 Fla. 530, 70 South. Rep. 565; Davis v. State, 76 Fla. 179, 79 South. Rep. 450; Watson v. State, 85 Fla. 383, 95 South. Rep. 861.

Reversed for a new trial.

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.
STATE v. Rayford Lewis BURKE

181A93-4

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 19, 2019

Franklin E. Wells, Jr., Attorney at Law, Asheboro, Gretchen Engel, Attorney at Law, Malcolm Ray Hunter, Jr., Attorney at Law, Durham, for Burke, Rayford Lewis

Danielle Marquis Elder, Special Deputy Attorney General, Mikko Red Arrow, Assistant District Attorney, Jonathan Babb, Special Deputy Attorney General, Jonathan P. Babb, Special Counsel to Attorney General, for State of N.C.

Christopher A. Brook, Legal Director, Burton Craige, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, James Coleman, Attorney at Law, Irving Joyner, Attorney at Law, Durham, Cassandra Stubbs, Attorney at Law, for ACLU Capital Punishment Project, et al.

Carlos E. Mahoney, Attorney at Law, Durham, for NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.

Brian W. Stull, Attorney at Law, Henderson Hill, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, for Promise of Justice Initiative, et al.

Sarah Kirkman, District Attorney, for State of N.C.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 15th of February 2019 by Amicus to admit W. Kerrel Murray Pro Hac Vice:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 19th of February 2019."

Ervin, J. recused
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2009-1371

TRIUNE STAR, INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

THE WALT DISNEY COMPANY and WDIG MOBILE, LLC (doing business

as Disney Mobile),

Defendants,

and

PANTECH & CURITEL COMMUNICATIONS, INC., PANTECH CO. LTD.,

PANTECH WIRELESS, INC., LG ELECTRONICS, INC.,

and LG ELECTRONICS MOBILECOMM USA, INC.,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois

in case no. 07-CV-1256, Judge Michael M. Mihm.

ON MOTION

ORDER

The appellees submit an objection to the official caption and abbreviated caption.

Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 12(a), it is the court's usual practice to include all

parties in the official caption, even if the parties are not participating on appeal.

Pursuant to that rule, the court also usually lists the parties in the order listed on the

district court's docket sheet. Thus, The Walt Disney Company should have been

included first in the official caption and in the abbreviated caption.
The abbreviated caption is a permissible substitute for using the entire official

caption on certain documents, but it has no other significance

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

The revised official caption is reflected above. The abbreviated caption shall

read "TRIUNE STAR v. WALT DISNEY CO., 2009-1371".

FOR THE COURT

JUN 2 6 2009	/s/ Jan Horbalv

Date	

Jan Horbaly

Clerk

cc:	Keith V. Rockey, Esq.

Patrick J. Kelleher, Esq.

s8

US. HeHarm' TOR

THE F	CIRCUIT

JUN 2 6 2009

JAN HORBALY

CLERK

2009-1371	 - 2 -
EXHIBIT 32.2

                              CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
              RULE 13A-14(1) OR RULE 15D-14(B) AND 18 U.S.C. SEC. 1350,
                      AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                              SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In  connection with the quarterly report of Petrosearch Energy Corporation, (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 as filed with
the  Securities  Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, David
Collins,  Chief  Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

     (1)  The report  fully  complies  with  the  requirements  of Section 13(a)
          or  15(d)  of  the  Securities  Exchange  Act  of  1934;  and
     (2)  The information  contained  in  the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of
          the  company.


     Date: November 14, 2006


By:      /s/ David Collins
         ------------------
         David Collins
         Chief Financial Officer
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 Homeland Security

# AGENCY:

National Communications System (NCS), Department of Homeland Security.

# ACTION:

Committee management; notice of advisory committee renewal.

# SUMMARY:

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has renewed the charter for the Telecommunications Service Priority (TSP) System Oversight Committee.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463, as amended (5 U.S.C. App. 2,                     *et seq.*) the Secretary of Homeland Security has renewed the charter for the TSP System Oversight Committee. This renewal follows consultation with the Committee Management Secretariat, General Services Administration and has been determined by the Secretary to be in the public interest in connection with the performance of duties imposed on DHS by law.                

The TSP System Oversight Committee identifies and reviews any problems developing in the TSP System and recommends actions to correct them or prevent recurrence. The TSP System Oversight Committee Designated Federal Officer is Lt. Col. Joanne Sechrest, USAF.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Susan Flint, NCS Office of Priority Telecommunications, 703-607-4932. Media or press should contact Mr. Steve Barrett at 703-607-6211.

Peter M. Fonash,

Acting Deputy Manager, National Communications System.

[FR Doc. 05-2093 Filed 2-2-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-10-M
##### 



Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER  PURSUANT TO SECTION 302  OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of General Nutrition Centers, Inc.;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;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 (a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is
made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this report is being prepared;(b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report
based on such evaluation; and(c)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter
(the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
 (a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely
affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial
information; and(b)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting.
 Date: August 5, 2005
    
    /s/ Bruce E. BarkusBruce
E. BarkusChief Executive Officer
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
142 CA 10-02061 PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., FAHEY, CARNI, SCONIERS, AND GORSKI, JJ.

RUSSELL YOUKER, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, ET AL., PLAINTIFF,
V ORDER VILLAGE OF DOLGEVILLE, ET AL., DEFENDANTS, MICHAEL SWARTZ AND FRANK BEAULIEU, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS. (ACTION NO. 1.)

------------------------------------------ VILLAGE OF DOLGEVILLE, PLAINTIFF,
V
THE NEW YORK MUNICIPAL INSURANCE RECIPROCAL, DEFENDANT. (ACTION NO. 2.) (APPEAL NO. 1.)

TOWNE, RYAN & PARTNERS, P.C., ALBANY (CLAUDIA A. RYAN OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT MICHAEL SWARTZ. FITZGERALD MORRIS BAKER FIRTH P.C., GLENS FALLS (JILL E. O’SULLIVAN OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT FRANK BEAULIEU. CHRISTOPHER J. PELLI, UTICA, FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT. MCLANE SMITH AND LASCURETTES, LLP, UTICA (TODD M. LASCURETTES OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF VILLAGE OF DOLGEVILLE. CONGDON FLAHERTY O’CALLAGHAN REID DONLON TRAVIS & FISHLINGER, UNIONDALE (RICHARD NICOLELLO OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT THE NEW YORK MUNICIPAL INSURANCE RECIPROCAL.
Appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Herkimer County (Anthony F. Shaheen, J.), entered August 26, 2010. The order, among other things, denied in part the motions of defendants Michael Swartz and Frank Beaulieu for summary judgment. Now, upon reading and filing the stipulation of withdrawal signed by the attorneys for the parties on February 3, 26 and 29, 2012 and March 5 and 7, 2012, It is hereby ORDERED that said appeals are dismissed without-2- 142 CA 10-02061 costs upon stipulation. All concur except G ORSKI , J., who is not participating.

Entered: March 16, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
---

**EXHIBIT 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION OF 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 The Stallion Group
(the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended August 31, 2005, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Periodic
Report), I, Gerald W. Williams, 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:

|3. | the Periodic Report fully complies with the requirements
        of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                                       
|-- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   |                                                                                                                                                                              
|4. | the information contained in the Periodic Report
        fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
        results of operations of the Company.

Date: October 13, 2005

/s/ Gerald W. Williams

Gerald W. Williams Chief Financial Officer

---
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5017 Engrossed in House (EH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5017

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To ensure the availability of loan guarantees for rural homeowners.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Rural Housing Preservation and 
Stabilization Act of 2010''.

SEC. 2. LOAN GUARANTEE FEES.

    (a) Up-front Fees.--Paragraph (8) of section 502(h) of the Housing 
Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1472(h)(8)) is amended to read as follows:
            ``(8) Guarantee fees.--With respect to a guaranteed loan 
        under this subsection, the Secretary may collect from the 
        lender, at the time of issuance of the guarantee, a fee equal 
        to not more than 4.0 percent of the principal obligation of the 
        loan, as determined sufficient by the Secretary to cover the 
        costs (as such term is defined in section 502 of the Federal 
        Credit Reform Act of 1990 (2 U.S.C. 661a)) of loan guarantees 
        under this subsection.''.
    (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 739 of the Agriculture, Rural 
Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies 
Appropriation Act, 2001 (as enacted by Public Law 106-387; 114 Stat. 
1549A-34) is hereby repealed.
    (c) Authorization of Amount of Loan Guarantees.--Section 513 of the 
Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1483) is amended by adding at the end 
the following new subsection:
    ``(f) Authorization for Loan Guarantees.--The Secretary may, to the 
extent approved in appropriation Acts, guarantee loans under section 
502(h) in aggregate amounts not to exceed $30,000,000,000 for fiscal 
year 2010.''.

SEC. 3. BUDGETARY EFFECTS.

    The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of complying 
with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, shall be determined by 
reference to the latest statement titled ``Budgetary Effects of PAYGO 
Legislation'' for this Act, submitted for printing in the Congressional 
Record by the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the House of 
Representatives, provided that such statement has been submitted prior 
to the vote on passage.

            Passed the House of Representatives April 27, 2010.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
111th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 5017

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

  To ensure the availability of loan guarantees for rural homeowners.
```
EXHIBIT 10.27



                  Schedule of Omitted Documents in the Form of
                   Exhibit 10.23, including Material Detail in
                 Which Such Documents Differ From Exhibit 10.23


         Stock Option Agreement, dated as of October 1, 2001, with the
Registrant.

         The form of document listed above does not differ in material detail
from the form of Exhibit 10.23 except with respect to the following:

Name                                 Number of Options            Exercise Price

David O. Lindner                     33,141                       $1.1737
Anthony J. Kirincic                  33,141                       $1.1737
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 report of China Architectural Engineering, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2010 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of
the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, 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 his
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.





/s/  Luo
      Ken YiLuo
      Ken YiChief
      Executive OfficerMay
      19, 2010/s/  Gene
      Michael BennettGene
      Michael BennettChief
      Financial OfficerMay
      19, 2010





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