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  of Cubic  Energy,  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-KSB for the period ending June 30, 2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, CEO,
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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
Company.

         Date:  September 28, 2006


         Signature:  /s/ Calvin A. Wallen, III
                     ---------------------------
                     Calvin A. Wallen, III, CEO
#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. JIMMY T. DICKERSON

No. 7314SC239

(Filed 14 March 1973)

Appeal by defendant from *Bailey, Judge,*28 August 1972 Session of Superior Court held in Durham County.

*Attorney General Robert Morgan by Emerson D. Wall, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.*

*Jerry B. Clayton for defendant appellant.*

VAUGHN, Judge.

This is another appeal at the State’s expense by an indigent defendant after a plea of guilty. Defendant’s plea of guilty to *597escape was accepted by the court only after due inquiry and proper adjudication that the same was freely and voluntarily made. The one year sentence imposed was well within the statutory limit. The appeal is without merit.

Affirmed.

Judges Britt and Morris concur.
**Exhibit99.1**

# ** **

# ** **

# **Certification of the Chief Executive Officer**

**Pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,**

**AsAdopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report ofInternational Multifoods Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for theperiod ended May 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the “Report”), Gary E. Costley, the Chairman of the Boardand Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

 

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

 

(2)   The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company, for the period covered by the Report.

 

 
|   | **/s/ Gary E. Costley**                                  |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------|
|   | **Gary  E. Costley**                                     |
|   | **Chairman  of the Board & Chief Executive Officer** |

 

 

Date:  July 11, 2003

 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 hasbeen provided to International Multifoods Corporation and will be retained byInternational Multifoods Corporation and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
* 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. 06-11206

Conference Calendar

DANIEL TILLI

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

EXXON MOBIL OIL CORPORATION; LEE RAYMOND, CEO; REX

TILLERSON

Defendants-Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:05-CV-2409

Before REAVLEY, BARKSDALE, and GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Daniel Tilli seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) to appeal the

dismissal of his civil suit against the defendants for failure to state a claim on

which relief may be granted. Tilli filed the suit contending that the defendants

had violated the Consumer Protection Act,the Interstate Commerce Act, and the

Sherman Act by illegally raising the price of gas and oil for personal gain. He

alleged that the defendants had violated his civil rights by forcing him to use his

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

December 11, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 06-11206

2

pension to pay for the excessive cost of their products. Tilli also moved to have

the district court judge recused from his case. By moving for leave to proceed

IFP, Tilli is challenging the district court’s certification that his appeal was not

taken in good faith. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997).

Failure to identify an error in the district court’s analysis is the same as

if the appellant had not appealed the judgment. Brinkmann v. Dallas County

Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). Although pro se briefs

are liberally construed, even pro se litigants must brief arguments in order to

preserve them. Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir. 1993).

Tilli provides only minimal briefing regarding the claims he seeks to raise

on appeal. He does not challenge the district court’s denial of his motion for

recusal or the court’s determination that he failed to state a civil rights violation.

Accordingly, he has abandoned these issues on appeal. See Yohey, 985 F.2d at

224-25. As to his remaining claims, Tilli makes only conclusory assertions that

the defendants have violated the Consumer Protection Act, the Interstate

Commerce Act, and the Sherman Act by raising their gas prices. Accordingly,

his request for leave to proceed IFP is denied and his appeal is dismissed as

frivolous. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202 n.24; 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

IFP DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                             323
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,240
<ALLOWANCES>                                       760
<INVENTORY>                                      3,389
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 9,641
<PP&E>                                           7,819
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,796
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  14,629
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           12,754
<BONDS>                                         10,353
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           46,722
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           348
<OTHER-SE>                                      10,610
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    14,629
<SALES>                                         64,892
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                64,892
<CGS>                                           51,906
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   51,906
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                57,510
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,050
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (49,072)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       533
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (49,605)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (49,605)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (7.86)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (7.86)
        

</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of the Estate of Clarence D. Braunfeld, Deceased.

Surrogate’s Court, Bronx County,

June 5, 1936.

*Nachamie & Benjamin,*for the petitioner, Charlotte Braunfeld, as administratrix.

*Melvin S. Brotman,*for the respondent.

Henderson, S.

In this discovery proceeding the respondent in her answer alleges “ that she is the owner and entitled to the possession of the property set forth in the petition herein; that such property was transferred to her for a valuable consideration by the said” decedent at certain specified dates: “ November, 1929, * * * January, 1935, * * * December, 1935.”

The decedent’s ownership of the three items of personalty described in the petition, at such respective dates, is thus conceded. The presumption is that his ownership continued *(Matter of Housman,*224 N. Y. 525, 526) and the petitioner’s *prima facie*case has been made out without further proof. Proof of the decedent’s alleged transfer of each item for valuable consideration thereupon became the burden of the respondent. *(Matter of Housman, supra; Grey*v. *Grey,*47 N. Y. 552, 555.)

*688The term “ burden' of proof ” is often used to express one of two entirely distinct ideas. The true burden of proof never shifts. The duty to proceed with the adduction of evidence, however, shifts whether either party makes a *prima facie*case. *(Toube*v. *Rubin-Blankfort Co.,*63 Misc. 298.)

The respondent was given the privilege of opening to the jury. It is a substantial right. Her formal objection thereto was, in effect, merely a disclaimer of any *prima facie*case for the petitioner. The petitioner did not claim such right. The respondent called one witness and rested without any examination of the witness. There was no evidence to controvert the petitioner’s *prima fade*case, and the petitioner’s motion to direct a verdict is granted.

Upon the directed answers of the jury, I find that the three items of personalty described in the petition are the property of the decedent’s estate and that the petitioning administrator is entitled to the possession thereof. The respondent is directed to deliver the same to the petitioner.

Settle decree accordingly.
Exhibit
4.2


 


DESCRIPTION
OF THE REGISTRANT’S SECURITIES


REGISTERED
PURSUANT TO SECTION 12 OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934


 


Where
Food Comes From, Inc. (“Company” or “our”) has one class of securities registered under Section 12 of the Securities
Exchange Act, as amended: common stock. The following description of our common stock is a summary and does not purport to be complete.
It is subject to, and qualified in its entirety by reference to, our Articles of Incorporation, as amended, and Bylaws, each of which
are incorporated by reference as exhibits to our Annual Report on Form 10-K, and applicable provisions of Colorado law.


 


Description
of Common Stock


 


Authorized
Capital Stock. Our authorized capital stock consists of 95,000,000 shares of common stock, $0.001 par value per share, and 5,000,000
shares of preferred stock, $0.001 par value. The outstanding shares of our common stock are fully paid and nonassessable.


 


Liquidation
Rights. Upon our liquidation, dissolution or winding up, holders of common stock will be entitled to share ratably in our assets
after the payment of all debts and other liabilities, subject to the prior rights of any preferred stock then outstanding.


 


Dividend
Rights. Subject to limitations under Colorado law and preferences that may be applicable to any then outstanding preferred stock,
holders of common stock are entitled to receive dividends, if any, as may be declared by our board of directors out of legally available
funds.


 


Voting
Rights. Holders of common stock are entitled to one vote for each share held of record on all matters submitted to a vote of stockholders.
There are no cumulative voting rights.


 


Other
Rights. Holders of common stock have no preemptive or conversion rights. There are no redemption or sinking fund provisions applicable
to the common stock.


 


Listing.
Our common stock is traded on The NASDAQ Capital Market under the symbol “WFCF.”
<Page>


                                                                 ARTHUR ANDERSEN



                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
                    -----------------------------------------


As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the use of our reports
(and to all references to our Firm) included in or made a part of this
Registration Statement File No. 333-39620 for Hartford Life and Annuity
Insurance Company Separate Account One on Form N-4.


Hartford, Connecticut                                    /s/ Arthur Andersen LLP
April 8, 2002
#### James C. MORRISON, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 1D03-2209.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

July 14, 2003.

Petition Alleging Ineffective Assistance of Appellate Counsel — Original Jurisdiction.

James C. Morrison, petitioner, pro se.

Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

James C. Morrison petitions for relief on a claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. However, inasmuch as his direct appeal is still pending before the court, his petition is premature and we deny it on that basis. Moreover, we note that the substantive issue raised in the petition is also raised in Morrison’s pro se initial brief in the direct appeal, and thus will necessarily be considered by the panel determining the merits of that proceeding.

PETITION DENIED.

ERVIN, PADOVANO and POLSTON, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>




                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

     We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Forms S-8 (File Nos. 33-10631, 33-56772, 33-82560, 333-19265,
333-31391, 333-45348, 333-31393, 333-63304, 333-65547 and 333-103462) and Forms
S-3 (File No's. 333-27189, 333-37946, 333-86617 and 333-48097) of our report
dated March 7, 2003, relating to the consolidated financial statements and
financial statement schedule of International Remote Imaging Systems, Inc. and
subsidiaries for each of the two years ended December 31, 2002, which appears in
this Form 10-K.

/s/BDO Seidman, LLP

Los Angeles, California
March 27, 2003
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5168 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the first-time 

homebuyer tax credit through December 31, 2010, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 28, 2010 

Mr. ELLSWORTH introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend 

the first-time homebuyer tax credit through December 

31, 2010, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF FIRST-TIME HOMEBUYER CRED4 IT. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (1) of section 36(h) of 

6 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking 

7 ‘‘May 1, 2010’’ and inserting ‘‘January 1, 2011’’. 

8 (b) BINDING CONTRACT EXCEPTION.—Paragraph 

9 (2) of section 36(h) of such Code is amended— 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5168 IH

1 (1) by striking ‘‘May 1, 2010’’ each place it ap2 pears and inserting ‘‘January 1, 2011’’, and 

3 (2) by striking ‘‘July 1, 2010’’ each place it ap4 pears and inserting ‘‘March 1, 2011’’. 

5 (c) SPECIAL RULE FOR INDIVIDUALS ON QUALIFIED

6 OFFICIAL EXTENDED DUTY OUTSIDE THE UNITED

7 STATES.—Paragraph (3) of section 36(h) of such Code 

8 is amended— 

9 (1) by striking ‘‘May 1, 2010’’ in the matter 

10 preceding subparagraph (A) and inserting ‘‘January 

11 1, 2011’’, 

12 (2) by striking ‘‘ ‘May 1, 2011’ for ‘May 1, 

13 2010’ ’’ and inserting ‘‘ ‘January 1, 2012’ for ‘Janu14 ary 1, 2011’ ’’, and 

15 (3) by striking ‘‘ ‘July 1, 2011’ for ‘July 1, 

16 2010’ ’’ and inserting ‘‘ ‘March 1, 2012’ for ‘March 

17 1, 2011’ ’’. 

18 (d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

19 this section shall apply to residences purchased after April 

20 30, 2010. 

Æ 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11


                STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS

                   INTERNATIONAL REMOTE IMAGING SYSTEMS, INC.
                   NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                        Year Ended December 31,
                                                                         -----------------------------------------------
                                                                              1993             1994             1995
                                                                         -----------------------------------------------
                                                                                                           (as restated)
 <S>                                                                        <C>              <C>              <C>
 Actual Weighted Average Shares Outstanding for the
   Period  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .              5,123,665        5,383,849        5,994,739

 Dilutive Effects of Stock Options and Warrants Using
   Average Market Price  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                231,632          292,741          356,066
                                                                         ------------     ------------     ------------
 Total Shares Based on Shares Outstanding and the
   Assumption that All Share Equivalents Are Exercised
   at Average Stock Market Price . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .              5,355,297        5,676,590        6,350,805
   
 Additional dilutive effect of Stock Options and
   Warrants Being Exercised Using Ending Market Price  . . . .                     --           22,030           67,713
                                                                         ------------     ------------     ------------

 Total Shares Based on Shares Outstanding and the
   Assumption That All Stock Options and Warrants are
   Exercised At Ending Market Price  . . . . . . . . . . . . .              5,355,297        5,698,620        6,418,518
                                                                         ============     ============     ============
 Net Income Applicable to Fully Diluted Earnings Per
   Share . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .             $1,322,637       $1,621,564       $2,126,412
                                                                         ============     ============     ============

 Fully Diluted Net Income Per Share  . . . . . . . . . . . . .           $       0.25     $       0.28     $       0.33
                                                                         ============     ============     ============
</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.14


                                 ASPENBIO, INC.


Number of Shares: 100,000        Date of Grant:                  August 21, 2001


                             STOCK OPTION AGREEMENT

AGREEMENT made this 21st day of August, 2001, between ("Optionee"), and
AspenBio, Inc., a Colorado corporation ("Company").

         1. Grant of Option. The Company, hereby grants to the Optionee, subject
to the terms and conditions set forth or incorporated herein, an Option to
purchase from the Company all or any part of an aggregate of Common Shares, as
such Common Shares are now constituted, at the purchase price of $1.00 per
share.

         2. Exercise. The Option evidenced hereby shall be exercisable in whole
or in part (but only in multiples of 10,000 Shares unless such exercise is as to
the remaining balance of this Option) on or after and on or before August 20,
2006, provided that the cumulative number of Common Shares as to which this
Option may be exercised shall not exceed the following amounts:

<Table>
<Caption>
                Cumulative Number                         Prior to Date
                    of Shares                           (Not Inclusive of)
                -----------------                       ------------------
<S>                                                     <C>
                    100,000                              August 20, 2006
</Table>


The Option evidenced hereby shall be exercisable by the delivery to and receipt
by the Company of (i) a written notice of election to exercise; (ii) accompanied
by payment of the full purchase price thereof in cash or certified check payable
to the order of the Company, and (iii) by return of this Stock Option Agreement
for endorsement of exercise by the Company.

         3. Transferability. The Option evidenced hereby is NOT assignable or
transferable by the Optionee, except with the Company's consent.

AspenBio, Inc.


By:          /s/ Roger Hurst                               8-21-01
     --------------------------------           --------------------------------
     Roger Hurst, President                     Date

Optionee:


             /s/ Bruce Deal                               ###-##-####
-------------------------------------           --------------------------------
     Bruce Deal                                 Social Security or Tax ID #


                  8100 Southpark Way, B-1 . Littleton, CO 80120
                       (303) 794-2000 . Fax (303) 798-8332
                               www.aspenbioinc.com
##### 



Exhibit 32 CERTIFICATION
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 as adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 Each of the undersigned, Alan J. Lacy, Chairman of the Board of Directors, President and Chief
Executive Officer of Sears, Roebuck and Co. (the Company) and Glenn R. Richter, Executive Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, has executed this certification in connection
with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of an amendment to the Companys annual
report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 3, 2004 (the Report). Each of the undersigned hereby certifies that:  1.
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  2.
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. February 11, 2005  /s/Alan J. LacyAlan J. LacyChairman of the Board of Directors,President and Chief Executive Officer/s/Glenn R. RichterGlenn R. RichterExecutive Vice Presidentand Chief Financial Officer
#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. MALACHI FAISON

No. 724SC645

(Filed 20 December 1972)

Appeal by defendant from *Rouse, Judge,*April-May 1972 Session, Sampson Superior Court.

By two warrants issued on 5 May 1971, defendant was charged with (1) illegal possession and sale of whiskey on 13 February 1971 and (2) illegal possession and sale of whiskey on 20 February 1971. In superior court a jury found defendant guilty as charged in the warrants and from judgment imposing-prison sentence, suspended on certain conditions, defendant appealed.

*Attorney General Robert Morgan by George W. Boylan, Associate Attorney, for the State.*

*Chambliss, Paderick and Warrick by Joseph B. Chambliss for defendant appellant.*

BRITT, Judge.

Although defendant has filed a motion to withdraw his appeal, we have elected to deny the motion and consider the *169case on its merits. After careful consideration of the record on appeal and the briefs, we find no prejudicial error.

No error.

Chief Judge Mallard and Judge Brock concur.