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

CERTIFICATION

The undersigned, as the Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board, and as the Chief Financial Officer of CompuCredit Corporation, respectively, certify
that, to the best of their knowledge and belief, the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2003, which accompanies this certification fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of CompuCredit Corporation at the dates and for the periods indicated. The foregoing certifications are made pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350) and shall not be relied upon for any other purpose.

This
1st day of March 2004.

| |  | /s/DAVID G. HANNADavid G. Hanna Chief Executive Officer and
Chairman of the Board
| |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |  | /s/J.PAUL WHITEHEAD, IIIJ.Paul Whitehead, III Chief Financial Officer            

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the
electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to CompuCredit Corporation and will be retained by CompuCredit Corporation and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---

QuickLinks
#### WILLIAM J. ROSE, Appellant, v. FRED H. RUSHTON, Respondent

No. 3444

August 24, 1946.

172 P. 2d 157.

*Lewis & Hawkins,*of Las Vegas, for Appellant.

*C. D. Breeze,*of Las Vegas, for Respondent.

OPINION

By the Court,

Taber, C. J.:

This case and that of Botts v. Rushton, 172 P. 2d 147, decided this day, grew out of the same accident. At the beginning of the trial in the instant case the court, upon stipulation of counsel, ordered “that the record and the evidence, oral and documentary, heretofore given by the witnesses testifying at the trial before this court in the case of M. L. Botts, plaintiff, against Fred H. Rushton, defendant, No. 21425, together with the records and files in this court, which trial was held during the month of December, and the testimony received subject to all objections, motions to strike, and rulings of the court, as though the same were given in *448the case at bar; save and except the injury here is different.” The two cases, upon stipulation in this court, were ordered consolidated for argument on the appeals.

Some additional testimony was given in the case at bar, most of it relating to the nature and extent of plaintiff’s injuries. One witness, John S. Dorough, of Las Vegas, gave some testimony bearing on the question of negligence. He testified that he was working for the fire department at Basic Magnesium, that he followed the Rushton truck out to the intersection on the morning of the accident, and that it was traveling approximately 50 miles an hour. According to witness the Rushton truck did not slow down before it swerved to the left. “The only thing that I noticed, the car drove out in front of Mr. Rushton’s truck. I don’t know whether it stopped or whether it went on; but I did notice that he swerved to miss the car that drove out in front of him.” He testified further that in his opinion if Mr. Rushton had not swerved to the left there would probably have been a crash. This witness’s testimony was not referred to by counsel for either party in the arguments in this court. His testimony that Rushton was traveling approximately 50 miles an hour, when considered with all the other testimony, is not sufficient to make it clear that the truck was going more than 45 miles per hour.

For the reasons given in the Botts case, the judgment and order appealed from are affirmed.

Horsey, J., concurs.
#### State of Connecticut *v.*Edward Dennis

*G. Douglas Nash,*public defender, in support of the petition.

*Susann E. Gill,*supervisory assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.

Decided May 17, 1993

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 30 Conn. App. 416 (AC 11010 through 11024 and 11158), is denied.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.SECTION1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACTOF 2002

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report ofInternational Aluminum Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the periodending December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission (the “Report”), I, David C. Treinen, the President and ChiefOperating 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, thatto my knowledge:

 

1.                    The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934; and

 

2.                    The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 

 
| Date: February 10, 2005 | /s/ DAVID C. TREINEN    |
|-------------------------|-------------------------|
|                    | David C. Treinen        |
|                    | President and           |
|                    | Chief Operating Officer |

 

1

----
**Exhibit 32(a)**







**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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of New River Pharmaceuticals Inc. (the Company) for the period ending June 27, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Randal J. Kirk, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, 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 Company.







/s/ Randal J. Kirk_________


Randal J. Kirk


Chairman, President and


Chief Executive Officer


(Principal executive officer)


September 17, 2004
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.3


            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the following Registration
Statements:

         (1)      Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-102372) of Accredo
                  Health, Incorporated and in the related Prospectus,

         (2)      Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-76399) pertaining to
                  the Accredo Health, Inc. and its Subsidiaries Stock Option and
                  Restricted Stock Purchase Plan, as amended and restated; the
                  Accredo Health, Incorporated 1999 Employee Stock Purchase
                  Plan; the Accredo Health, Incorporated 1999 Long-Term
                  Incentive Plan and the Accredo Health, Incorporated 2002
                  Long-Term Incentive Plan, and

         (3)      Registration Statement (Form S-8) pertaining to the
                  registration of 3,000,000 shares of Accredo Health,
                  Incorporated common stock to be issued under the Accredo
                  Health, Incorporated 2002 Long-Term Incentive Plan;

of our report dated August 16, 2002, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements and schedule of Accredo Health, Incorporated for the year ended
June 30, 2002, included in this Form 10-K/A (Amendment No. 1).



                                                /s/ Ernst & Young LLP


Memphis, Tennessee
June 28, 2005
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed February 28, 2013.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14
- 12
- 00511
- CV
IN THE ESTATE OF NED THEODORE GORDON, DEC EASED

On Appea l from the County Court at Law No. 4

Fort Bend County, Texas Trial Court Cause N o. 09
- CPR
- 022104


### M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N On May 21, 2012, appellant, Marshall Gordon, filed a notice of appeal from a portion of a judgment signed August 8, 2011, which was purportedly made final and appealable by a final summary judgment signed April 20, 201 2. No record has been filed. On June 19, 2012, appellant filed an opposed motion to abate this appeal pending resolution of his motion to dismiss a related appeal docketed under our case number 14

- 11

- 00812

- CV, and styled Patricia Vickery v. Marshall Gordon & Clardy, Davis & Knowles . On July 11, 2012, we granted appellant’s motion to2

abate this appeal. The motion to dismiss in case number 14

- 11

- 00812

- CV was denied in this court’s opinion issued July 31, 2012. See Vickery v. Gordon, No. 14

- 11

- 00812

- CV, 2012 W L 3089409 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] July 31, 2012, no pet.) (mem. op.). Mandate ha s issued and the appeal in case number 14

- 11

- 00812

- CV is final. Accordingly, o n January 15, 2013, we ordered this appeal reinstated. We also ordered a ppellant to make p ayment arrangements for the clerk’s record and arrange for the record to be filed in this appeal on or before February 15, 2013. In our order, we notified appellant that failure to comply would result in dismissal of this appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b ), 42.3(c). Appellant did not respond to this court’s January 15, 2013, order. The clerk’s record has not been filed, and no request for an extension of time to file the record has been received. Accordingly, we order the appeal dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Pa nel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Boyce and Donovan.
Exhibit 32.2


CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Gramercy Capital Corp. (the “Company”)
on Form 10-Q as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the “Report”), I, Jon W. Clark, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby 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) or 15(d), as
applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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/
      Jon W. ClarkName:
                Jon
      W. ClarkTitle:
                Chief
      Financial OfficerDate:  November
      5, 2010
EXHIBIT 31.1

**SAND HILL IT SECURITY ACQUISITION CORP.**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, Humphrey P. Polanen, Chief Executive Officer of Sand Hill IT Security Acquisition Corp., certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Sand Hill IT Security Acquisition Corp. (“Registrant”);

 

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.

 

 

| /s/ Humphrey P. Polanen |
|-------------------------|
| Humphrey P. Polanen     |  
Chief Executive Officer

 
May 15, 2006

 
 

 

 

 

 

  |
SCWC-20-0000370

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

 

BRYAN SUITT, 

Petitioner/Petitioner-Appellant,

vs.

 STATE OF HAWAI#I, 

Respondent/Respondent-Appellee.

 

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

(CAAP-20-0000370; CASE NO. 1PR161000011)

ORDER ACCEPTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.)

Petitioner/Petitioner-Appellant Bryan Suitt’s

application for writ of certiorari, filed on July 27, 2022, is

hereby accepted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no oral argument will be

held, subject to further order of this court. Any party may,

within ten days and pursuant to Rule 34(c) of the Hawai#i Rules

of Appellate Procedure, move for retention of oral argument.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, September 8, 2022.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Michael D. Wilson

/s/ Todd W. Eddins

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCWC-20-0000370

08-SEP-2022

12:30 PM

Dkt. 6 OGAC
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 September 30, 2007 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 OfficerNovember
                  14, 2007/s/
                  Wang XinWang
                  XinChief
                  Financial OfficerNovember
                  14, 2007
 
 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.
**Exhibit 32(b)**
  
  **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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of New River Pharmaceuticals Inc. (the Company) for the period ending September 26, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Krish S. Krishnan, Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary of the Company, certify, 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, as amended; 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/ Krish S. Krishnan
 Krish S. Krishnan
 Chief Operating Officer,
 Chief Financial Officer and Secretary
 (Principal financial and accounting officer)
 November 8, 2004
<Page>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


Implant Sciences Corporation
Wakefield, MA

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-3 (No.'s 333-76846 333-101141 and 333-64499) and Form S-8
(No. 333-42816) of Implant Sciences Corporation of our report dated August 19,
2003, except with respect to the matter discussed in Note 17 as to which the
date is August 28, 2003, relating to the financial statements which appears in
this Form 10-KSB.



/s/ BDO Seidman, LLP
Boston, MA

September 26, 2003
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

December 28, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
131611 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: 131611 COA: 269771 Ottawa CC: 04-028504-FC MICHAEL SCOTT ENGDAHL, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, th e application for leave to ap peal the May 30, 2006 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.

t1218 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.

December 28, 2006

Clerk
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4718 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4718

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to suspend the taxation of 
                 unemployment compensation for 3 years.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 2, 2010

Mrs. Bono Mack 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 suspend the taxation of 
                 unemployment compensation for 3 years.

    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 ``Stop Unfair Taxes Act of 2010''.

SEC. 2. SUSPENSION OF TAX ON UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION.

    Section 85 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to 
unemployment compensation) is amended by adding at the end the 
following new subsection:
    ``(d) Temporary Suspension.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to 
taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009, and before January 1, 
2013.''.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>
                                                                 EXHIBIT 10.15.1

                  CONSENT TO ASSIGNMENT OF EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

         Pursuant to Section 7.5 of the Employment Agreement dated as of August
10, 2000, between Heritage Holdings, Inc., a Delaware corporation ("Heritage"),
and the undersigned (the "Employee"), the undersigned Employee does hereby
consent and agree to (i) the assignment of said Employment Agreement by Heritage
to U.S. Propane, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership ("U.S. Propane"), and U.S.
Propane's assumption of the duties and responsibilities of Heritage arising
under said Employment Agreement.

         DATED as of February 3, 2002.



                                              ---------------------------------
                                              Curtis L.Weishahn
**Exhibit 32(b)**






**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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of New River Pharmaceuticals Inc. (the Company) for the period ending June 27, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Krish S. Krishnan, Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary of the Company, certify, 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, as amended; 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/ Krish S. Krishnan_____________


Krish S. Krishnan


Chief Operating Officer,


Chief Financial Officer and Secretary


(Principal financial and accounting officer)


September 17, 2004


|
|
|
|

|
|
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Barry Douglas GEARHART, Appellant.

No. 72-1126.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

April 14, 1972.

Jerry Berg (argued), of Collins, Hays, Stewart, Berg, Pott & Sanford, Inc., San Jose, Cal., for appellant.

Frederic F. Tilton, Asst. U. S. Atty. (argued), F. Steele Langford, Asst. U. S. Atty., James L. Browning, Jr., U. S. Atty., San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee.

Before CHAMBERS, and ELY, Circuit Judges, and TAYLOR, District Judge.***

***

 The Honorable Fred M. Taylor, United States District Judge for the District of Idaho, sitting by designation.

PER CURIAM:

The judgment of conviction is reversed. We are of the opinion that Chernekoff v. United States, 219 F.2d 721 (9th Cir. 1955) governs and that United States v. Lewis, 448 F.2d 1228 (9th Cir. 1971) is distinguishable from Chernekoff. Cf. Parrott v. United States, 370 F.2d 388 (9th Cir. 1966), cert. denied Lawrence v. United States, 387 U.S. 908, 87 S.Ct. 1690, 18 L.Ed.2d 625.