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 Somerset International Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the twelve months ending December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, John X. Adiletta, President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, 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) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

 (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the Company as of the dates presented and the results of operations of the Company.

 

 
|  
/s/ John X. Adiletta

 
John X. Adiletta

 
Chief Executive Officer

Chief Financial Officer

 
 

 

Dated: March 31, 2006

 

 

 

 

  |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                         461,108
<SECURITIES>                                 1,375,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                  743,633
<ALLOWANCES>                                    34,700
<INVENTORY>                                    761,295
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,042,801
<PP&E>                                       2,140,676
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,008,130
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,685,965
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          440,200
<BONDS>                                        379,551
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        17,555
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,828,659
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,685,965
<SALES>                                      4,587,126
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,587,126
<CGS>                                        1,566,156
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,566,156
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,232,984
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              42,043
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                904,670
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            904,670
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   904,670
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.72
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.65


</TABLE>
#### TOMMY D. KERLEY, Appellant, v. THE AETNA CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY, Respondent.

No. 9534

November 10, 1978

585 P.2d 1339

*Ralph M. Crow,*Carson City, for Appellant.

*Leggett and Hamilton,*Reno, for Respondent.

*711OPINION

*Per Curiam:*

Appellant, plaintiff below, appeals from a judgment dismissing his suit with prejudice, for willful failure to comply with the district court’s order directing discovery.

As authorized by NRCP 34(b), respondent moved for an order under NRCP 37(a), compelling appellant to produce certain specified documents. The motion was served upon counsel for appellant, who failed to comply or to raise any objection thereto. The method for raising an objection to such discovery is by motion for a protective order under NRCP 26(c). *See*8 Wright & Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure: Civil § 2291, at 810-11 (1970); Fed. Advis. Comm. Notes, 4 Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 26.01 [18] (2d. ed. 1976). Appellant’s counsel, however, never sought such an order, nor does he now contend that he has valid objections to the discovery sought by respondent.

After a full evidentiary opportunity hearing, the court below found that appellant’s failure to comply with the court’s order was willful, and the court, therefore, entered the judgment of dismissal. We find, after reviewing the record, that there is no showing of an abuse of discretion in the court’s decision to dismiss which was completely proper under NRCP 37(b)(2)(C). Lange v. Hickman, 92 Nev. 41, 544 P.2d 1208 (1976); Riverside Casino v. J. W. Brewer Co., 80 Nev. 153, 390 P.2d 232 (1964). *See*National Hockey League v. Metropolitan Hockey Club, Inc., 427 U.S. 639 (1976).

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed, with costs to respondent.
Exhibit (99.5)

         Written Statement of the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
                     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

      Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, I, the
undersigned Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Wisconsin Power and Light
Company (the "Company"), hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended September
30, 2002 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.




/s/  Erroll B. Davis, Jr.
-------------------------
Erroll B. Davis, Jr.
November 14, 2002
(b) (2)
(b) (2)
(b) (2)
(b) (2)
(b) (2)
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth ___________________________

No. 02-23-00246-CV

___________________________

On Appeal from the 48th District Court

Tarrant County, Texas

Trial Court No. 048-341152-23

Before Bassel, Womack, and Wallach, JJ.

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

OLU WHITEHEAD, Appellant

V.

BARBARA KAY, Appellee
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT

We have considered “Appellant’s Motion to Withdraw Premature Notice of 

Appeal Without Prejudice.” We grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. 

App. P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f).

Appellant must pay all costs of this appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(d), 43.4.

Per Curiam

Delivered: August 3, 2023
#### MANESS v. BULLINS

No. 170 PC.

Case below: 33 N.C. App. 208.

Petition by plaintiff for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 14 July 1977.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense POW/MIA Accounting AgencyFulfilling Our Nation's Promise

Search
Search

Search

              - 
              - 
              - 

-  Home		 
-  Families		 
-  Our Missing    -  Searchable List of the Missing             
  -  Searchable Map of the Missing             
  -  Recently Accounted For             
  -  World War II      -  World War II Summary             
    -  Battle of Tarawa             
    -  Attack on Pearl Harbor 
  -  Korean War      -  Korean War Summary             
    -  Battle of Chosin Reservoir             
    -  Battle of Unsan             
    -  Korean Air Battles             
    -  The Inchon Campaign             
    -  The Pusan Perimeter             
    -  The DMZ Campaigns             
    -  Korean War Disinterments             
    -  Operation Glory             
    -  POW Camps 
  -  Vietnam War      -  Vietnam War Summary             
    -  Vietnam War Identification Project             
    -  Tet Offensive             
    -  Battle of Khe Sanh             
    -  Mayaguez Incident             
    -  Battle of Ia Drang             
    -  Lam Son 
  -  Cold War             
  -  Gulf Wars & Libya             
  -  Unknowns 
-  News & Stories    -  Our Stories             
  -  Press Releases             
  -  DPAA In The News             
  -  Year In Review 
-  Multimedia    -  Livestreams             
  -  Podcast             
  -  Briefing Videos             
  -  Science Videos             
  -  DPAA Laboratory             
  -  Media Gallery 
-  Resources    -  FAQs             
  -  AFMES DNA Laboratory             
  -  Publicly Released Documents             
  -  Family/VSO Update Notes             
  -  Family Member Guide             
  -  POW/MIA Day Toolkit             
  -  USRJC 
-  About    -  Leadership             
  -  Vision-Mission-Values             
  -  DPAA Organizational Chart 
-  Contact    -  Contact Us             
  -  Join Us      -  Careers 
  -  Report a Site             
  -  Donate to the Mission 
-  Volunteer		 

## 

## Image Gallery

Search

Search

                              - Upload Date
                              - Photo Date
                              - Title

Share

----

Download Image: Small ()Medium ()Full Size (0.12 MB)

Tags:

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
#### PIANO CO. v. EXHIBIT WORLD

No. 203 PC

Case below: 46 NC App 122

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 15 August 1980.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5512 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5512

 To expand the boundary of Booker T. Washington National Monument, and 
                          for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 10, 2010

Mr. Perriello introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To expand the boundary of Booker T. Washington National Monument, and 
                          for other purposes.

    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 ``Booker T. Washington Boundary 
Expansion Act''.

SEC. 2. BOUNDARY MODIFICATION AND CORRECTIONS.

    The Act entitled ``An Act to provide for the establishment of the 
Booker T. Washington National Monument'', approved April 2, 1956 (16 
U.S.C. 450ll et seq.) is amended as follows:
            (1) by striking section 4;
            (2) by redesignating section 5 as section 4;
            (3) by amending section 4(a), as redesignated by subsection 
        (b), to read as follows:
    ``(a) Lands Added to Monument.--The boundary of the Booker T. 
Washington National Monument is modified to include--
            ``(1) the approximately 15 acres, as generally depicted on 
        the map entitled `Boundary Map, Booker T. Washington National 
        Monument, Franklin County, Virginia', numbered BOWA 404/80,024, 
        and dated February 2001; and
            ``(2) the approximately 67.5 acres, as generally depicted 
        on the map entitled `________', numbered ____ and dated 
        _______.'';
            (4) by adding after section 4(c), as redesignated by 
        subsection (b), the following new subsection--
    ``(d) Availability of Maps.--The maps referenced in subsection (a) 
shall be on file and available for inspection in the appropriate 
offices of the National Park Service, Department of the Interior.''; 
and
            (5) by adding at the end the following new section:

``SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    ``There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be 
necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act.''.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 15
                             ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP



To Jacobson Stores Inc.:

We are aware that Jacobson Stores Inc. has incorporated by reference in its
Form S-8 Registration Statements File Nos. 2-88295, 033-53469, 333-31989 and
333-59031 and Form S-2 File No. 33-10532 its Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
August 1, 1998, which includes our report dated August 14, 1998, covering the
unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial information contained
therein. Pursuant to Regulation C of the Securities Act of 1933, that report
is not considered a part of the registration statement prepared or certified
by our firm or a report prepared or certified by our firm within the meaning
of Sections 7 and 11 of the Act.


                                            Very truly yours,



                                            /s/  Arthur Andersen LLP
                                            ------------------------
                                            ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

Detroit, Michigan
September 11, 1998
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 220 (Wednesday, November 16, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 69582]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-22688]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


Center for Scientific Review; Amended Notice of Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the Skeletal 
Muscle and Exercise Physiology Study Section, November 14, 2005, 8:30 
a.m. to November 15, 2005, 4 p.m., Wyndham Washington, DC, 1400 M 
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005 which was published in the Federal 
Register on November 1, 2005, 70 FR 65919-65922.
    The meeting will be held at the Marriott Crystal Hotel, 1999 
Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA 22202. The meeting dates and 
time remain the same. The meeting is closed to the public.

    Dated: November 4, 2005.
Anna Snouffer,
Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 05-22688 Filed 11-15-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
Opinion issued October 31, 2017

In The 

## Court of Appeals
For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01
- 17
- 00743
- CR

——————————— IN RE CONNIE HARRISO N , Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION Connie Harrison, the complainant in an alleged assault against a family
member that was no billed by a grand jury , has filed a petition and amended petition
for a writ of mandamus challenging the trial court’s denial of her “Amended Emergency Motion for He aring to Recuse the Harris County District Attorney ’ s2

Office, For the Appointment of an Attorney Pro Tem to Present This Matter to the
178 th Grand Jury . . . and To Stay the Statute of Limitation.” 1 We deny the petition.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Bland, and Brown. Do not publish. T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 47.2(b).

1 The underlying case is Ex Parte Connie Harrison , cause number 1438685 in the 178th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Kelli Johnson presiding.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5615 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5615

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the medical device 
                      tax, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 28, 2010

 Mr. Bilbray introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
   Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on 
   Appropriations, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 
  Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall 
           within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the medical device 
                      tax, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. REPEAL OF MEDICAL DEVICE TAX.

    Section 1405 of the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 
2010, and the amendments made by such section, are hereby repealed, and 
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall be applied and administered as 
if such section and amendments had never been enacted.

SEC. 2. REVENUE OFFSET.

    Effective on the date of the enactment of this Act, the unobligated 
balance of the discretionary appropriations made available by division 
A of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 
111-5) is hereby rescinded.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-50816

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

DANIEL AGUILAR-MORENO,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:08-CR-1036-1

Before KING, STEWART, and HAYNES, Circuit Juges.

PER CURIAM:

*

Daniel Aguilar-Moreno appeals the 77-month term of imprisonment

imposed for his guilty plea conviction of violating 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2)

by being found in the United States without permission, following removal. He

argues that his sentence, which fell within his advisory sentencing guidelines

range, is substantively unreasonable because it was greater than necessary to

achieve the sentencing goals set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Aguilar-Moreno

contends that his sentence overstates the seriousness of his illegal reentry

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

July 23, 2010

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

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.

Case: 09-50816 Document: 00511183926 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/23/2010
No. 09-50816

offense and does not properly account for his personal history and

characteristics, including his motive for reentering the United States.

Citing Kimbrough v. United States, 552 U.S. 85, 109-10 (2007), AguilarMoreno contends that his sentence should not be accorded an appellate

presumption of reasonableness because U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, the Guideline

applicable to violations of § 1326, is not empirically based and double-counts a

defendant’s criminal history. However, Aguilar-Moreno concedes that his

challenge to the presumption of reasonableness is foreclosed by our precedent.

See United States v. Duarte, 569 F.3d 528, 529-31 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 130

S. Ct. 378 (2009); United States v. Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d 357, 366-67

(5th Cir.), cert. denied, 130 S. Ct. 192 (2009); see also § 2L1.2, comment. (n.6).

Before imposing Aguilar-Moreno’s sentence, the district court judge

considered the advisory sentencing guidelines range,the information in AguilarMoreno’s presentence report, and the § 3553(a) factors. The judge also

considered the arguments presented at sentencing and determined that a

guideline sentence would be appropriate. Aguilar-Moreno’s arguments do not

establish that the district court abused its discretion in imposing that sentence.

See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). He has not rebutted the

presumption of reasonableness that attaches to his within-guidelines sentence.

See United States v. Alonzo, 435 F.3d 551, 554 (5th Cir. 2006).

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

2

Case: 09-50816 Document: 00511183926 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/23/2010
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 217 (Thursday, November 10, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68401-68407]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-22412]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

[Transmittal No. 06-16]


36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification

AGENCY: Department of Defense, Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text 
of a seciton 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. This is published to 
fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 
July 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. J. Hurd, DSCA/DBO/ADM, (703) 604-
6575.
    The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives, Transmittal 06-16 with attached transmittal, policy 
justification and Sensitivity of Technology.

    Dated: November 4, 2005.
L.M. Bynum,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M

[[Page 68402]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN10NO05.307


[[Page 68403]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN10NO05.308


[[Page 68404]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN10NO05.309


[[Page 68405]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN10NO05.310


[[Page 68406]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN10NO05.311


[[Page 68407]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN10NO05.312

[FR Doc. 05-22412 Filed 11-9-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-C