alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|                                               |
|-----------------------------------------------|
| EXHIBIT 13.2                                  |
|                                          |
| 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 |

I, Kam Shah, Chief Financial Officer of Portage Biotech Inc. (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, to the best of my knowledge: 

(i) the Annual Report on Form 20-F of the Company for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2016 (the “Annual Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and 

(ii) the information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

| Date: 

July 27, 2016 

 

 

  

/s/ Kam Shah

By: 

Kam Shah 

Title: 

Chief Financial  Officer 

*This written statement is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 20-F. A signed original of this statement 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.*

*This certification accompanies this Annual Report on Form 20-F pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.* |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
#### WHITFIELD v. WAKEFIELD

No. 132 PC.

Case below: 51 N.C. App. 124.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 2 June 1981.
!y F{y Y1'Y ': l ELKC;':*'.:: ~:c;,L., 1 *-& !; C'NITEU STATES DIS'I'RICT COIJRT ? i ! ! DOC 2: ;r S(lU'l'1 IERN DISTRICT Ol NEW YORK i _.__._l.r_ _ E, i \\;~gr~;~-{i,i:,-;:): --- 5:3&-cR ..," 7; I. - t 

:,__ .--" .--.- ---. .u.-,rrF---"-' .,'+--., .-. .I <.- ' 

IK RE: 

j MAS-I'EK FlLE 

FOSAhl,AX PRODTJCTS LI;\131LI'l'Y I I I'IG.4TION 

I 1 106-MD- 1789 (Jl'K) 

l'hir. Ur)c./,nrr.n~ Kt~/tr!c.s Tu All Acriotw 

OKI)EK FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC \'1C E 

Considcring thc Ccrtiticate oS Good Sta~ldi~~g and all nthcr documents required by Case 

Managenlent Order No. 3 submitted by counsel. IT IS HFREI31' 0RT)ERE':T) that: 

Applicant's Name: S. Lccnan C';irter 

Firm Name: iVnllcr. Lansden. Dortch & Davis, I .I .P 

Address: 51 1 1 Inion Streil.l. Suite 2700 

is adulirtcd to practice pro hac \.ice as cou~lsel for hlcrck & Co., lnc, in the above captionrd case 

\ in the United States District Court for the Suulhel.n Ilistrict of Ncw Ynrk. 

A 

'" Jlaled: ~a~'.. 7008 

New Yorli. Kt.\v I'rlrh 

. . . . . . .- . LfA, - . 

llnitcd Status Ilist rid Judge 

Case 1:07-cv-03459-JFK Document 32 Filed 05/30/2008 Page 1 of 2
CEItTIFICATE OF GOOD STANDING 

; ss, 

.\.lIUULE DISTRICT OF TENNKSSI'II 

1. KEI'I'H 'I'HIIOClihlOII'I'I~.U. Clerk ui' the L'nilcd Slates Ilistrict C:ourt for the Middle 

1)istr.icl of'l'cnncsscc. 

110 I Il-,KIX3Y C'ER'I I1 Y I hat S. KEENAN CARTER lvas duly ndmittcd li! jlrdct~cc in said 

('our1 on ,lutlc 2Sih, 2004, :ind IS in good standing as a rneu~bcr 01' ~hu b;~r 01-said Courr. 

Case 1:07-cv-03459-JFK Document 32 Filed 05/30/2008 Page 2 of 2
1

The Honorable Robert T. Dawson, United States District Judge for the

Western District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the

Honorable Beverly Stites Jones, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western

District of Arkansas.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 03-2593

___________

Mark Randall Davis, *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

Frank Atkinson, Sheriff, Sebastian * Western District of Arkansas.

County, Arkansas; John Doe, Jailer, * [UNPUBLISHED]

Sebastian County Detention Center, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

 Submitted: August 29, 2003

 Filed: September 4, 2003

___________

Before BYE, BOWMAN, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Arkansas inmate Mark Randall Davis appeals from the district court’s1

preservice dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Upon careful review of the
-2-

record, we conclude that dismissal was proper for the reasons the district court stated.

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47A(a).

A true copy.

Attest:

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

| /s/  David                L.                Cheek                                                  David                L. CheekPresident                and Chief Executive OfficerNovember                13, 2007 | /s/  Bert                E. Downing,                Jr.                                                                  Bert                E. Downing, Jr.Vice                President, Chief Financial Officer,Corporate                Controller and TreasurerNovember                13, 2007 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     |
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 09-7259

JOSEPH EUGENE HOWARD, 

 Petitioner – Appellant, 

 v. 

DAVID BALLARD, Warden, 

 Respondent – Appellee. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern 

District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, 

Jr., Senior District Judge. (5:08-cv-00112-FPS-JSK) 

Submitted: January 7, 2010 Decided: January 15, 2010 

Before WILKINSON and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, 

Senior Circuit Judge. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Joseph Eugene Howard, Appellant Pro Se. R. Christopher Smith, 

Charleston, West Virginia; Dawn Ellen Warfield, Deputy Attorney 

General, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

Joseph Eugene Howard seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate 

judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) 

petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice 

or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not 

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). A 

prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that 

reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the 

constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or 

wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district 

court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 

322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); 

Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have 

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Howard has 

not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a 

certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the 

court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
Exhibit 31.2 

CERTIFICATION 

I, Jesus Diaz, CFO, certify that: 

1.              I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Abazias, Inc.; 

2.              Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly          report; 

3.              Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information          included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report; 

4.              I am 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 we 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 is made known to us by others          within the Corporation, particularly during the period in which this quarterly          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 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to          materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial          reporting; and 

5.              I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over          financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee          of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent          function): 

    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: April 14, 2004
EVALUATION OF MUSCLE ACTIVITY, FORCES, STRESSES, AND MOMENTS AT THE KNEE DURING KNEELING 

AND SQUATTING TASKS 

MOORE S.M., POLLARD J.P., PORTER W.L., GALLAGHER S., MAYTON A.G. 

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, USA 

 

Aims: 

Knee injury rates in low working height mines are 10 times greater than in higher mines and may be attributed to 

exposure to musculoskeletal disorder risk factors (prolonged kneeling, crawling, and twisting on ones knees). 

Therefore, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health has investigated muscle activity, forces, 

stresses, and moments at the knee (with and without kneepads) while subjects assumed the following postures: 

bilateral kneeling in full flexion, bilateral kneeling at 90° of flexion, kneeling on one knee, and squatting 

(performed with 48” simulated mine roof). 

Methods: 

The forces, stresses, and moments at the knee were first statically evaluated for these postures. Muscle activity 

of the knee extensors and flexors was then evaluated while subjects lifted a block (25 lbs) from their right side, 

transferred it across their body, and placed it on the ground on their left side. 

Results: 

The majority of the stress (>60%) was transmitted to the knee via the tibial tubercle with some transmitted via 

the inferior aspect of the patella. Kneepads reduced the peak pressure at the knee, but had little effect on the 

mean stress across the patella and tibial tubercle. The failure of current kneepad designs to reduce this stress 

may explain the high incidence of bursitis in these mines demonstrating a need for kneepads that better 

distribute these forces across a larger area. 

The results suggest that squatting and kneeling on one knee be avoided as they result in higher muscle activity 

with squatting having high flexion and varus moments and kneeling on one knee having increased shear loading. 

Kneeling near full flexion required the least amount of muscle activity of the postures studied lending to 

decreased energy demands and making it likely to be the predominant posture used in these environments. 

Unfortunately, high joint flexion may pinch the posterior meniscus leading to meniscal tears. When kneeling near 

full flexion, a large amount of bodyweight is transmitted through the feet reducing the loading at the knee. It may 

be possible to design support devices that increase the load transmitted through the feet effectively reducing the 

flexion moment at the knee. 

Conclusion: 

The results also indicated that kneeling near 90° flexion created the least hazardous loading condition and 

should be primarily utilized when in low working heights. Implementing postural rotation strategies with minimal 

usage of squatting and kneeling on one knee may decrease the detrimental effects of prolonged kneeling and 

squatting.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

JOSE OLIVO

- NOBLE,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 713 MAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 30th day of April, 2019

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
#### STATE v. SEYMOUR

No. 33 PC.

Case below: 38 N.C. App. 243.

Application by defendant for further review denied 1 May 1979.
#### STATE v. BRANCH

No. 37 PA 82.

Case below: 54 N.C. App. 693.

Petition by defendant for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals allowed 3 March 1982.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32 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 The Liberty Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), we
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of our 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 result of operations of
the Company. /s/ Hayne Hipp
    
    /s/ Howard L. SchrottHayne Hipp
    
    Howard L. SchrottChief Executive Officer
    
    Chief Financial OfficerMay 4, 2004
    
    May 4, 2004
 17
Case 1:07-cv-03582-LLS Document 16 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 1 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03582-LLS Document 16 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 2 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03582-LLS Document 16 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 3 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03582-LLS Document 16 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 4 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03582-LLS Document 16 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 5 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03582-LLS Document 16 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 6 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03582-LLS Document 16 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 7 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03582-LLS Document 16 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 8 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03582-LLS Document 16 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 9 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03582-LLS Document 16 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 10 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03582-LLS Document 16 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 11 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03582-LLS Document 16 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 12 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03582-LLS Document 16 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 13 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03582-LLS Document 16 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 14 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03582-LLS Document 16 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 15 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03582-LLS Document 16 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 16 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03582-LLS Document 16 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 17 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03582-LLS Document 16 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 18 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03582-LLS Document 16 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 19 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03582-LLS Document 16 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 20 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03582-LLS Document 16 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 21 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03582-LLS Document 16 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 22 of 23
Case 1:07-cv-03582-LLS Document 16 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 23 of 23
Exhibit 10.10

EIGHTH AMENDMENT TO EXECUTIVE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

THIS EIGHTH AMENDMENT TO EXECUTIVE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (the “Eighth Amendment”) is made and entered into this 4th day of February, 2020 by and between ANDREA ELECTRONICS CORPORATION (the “Company”), a New York corporation, and DOUGLAS J. ANDREA (the “Executive”).

WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive are parties to an Executive Employment Agreement dated as of August 1, 2014, as amended (collectively with all amendments, the “Agreement”),which provides that the Agreement would terminate on January 31, 2020, unless extended under its terms;

WHEREAS, the Company desires to continue to employ the Executive as the Chief Executive Officer of the Company and the Executive wishes to accept such continued employment under the terms and conditions set forth in the Agreement, as further modified by this Eighth Amendment; and

WHEREAS, the parties desire to retroactively extend the term of the Agreement until July 31, 2020, subject to the terms of this Eighth Amendment.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and mutual covenants contained herein and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is mutually acknowledged, the Company and the Executive (individually a “Party” and together the “Parties”) agree as follows:

1. Amendment.

The term of the Agreement is hereby extended for the period beginning on February 1, 2020 and ending on July 31, 2020.

2. Ratification.

Except as modified and amended by this Eighth Amendment, the Parties hereto hereby agree and confirm that the Agreement remains in full force and effect.

3. Counterparts.

This Eighth Amendment may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and all of which, when taken together, shall constitute one and the same instrument.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Eighth Amendment as of February 4, 2020

	 	 
		ANDREA ELECTRONICS CORPORATION 
	 			
		By: 	/s/ Gary A. Jones	
			Gary A. Jones	
			Director	
				 
		By:	/s/ Louis Libin	
			Louis Libin	
			Director	
				 
		By:	/s/ Joseph J. Migliozzi	
			Joseph J. Migliozzi	
			Director	
		 		
		By:	/s/ Jonathan D. Spaet	
			Jonathan D. Spaet	
			Director	
	 			
	 			
		EXECUTIVE	
	 			
			/s/ Douglas J. Andrea	
			Douglas J. Andrea
#### LUDWIG v. HART

No. 96 PC.

Case below: 40 N.C. App. 188.

Petition by plaintiffs for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 5 June 1979.
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350/ SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT RULE 13a-14(b), AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES – OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Cytori Therapeutics, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2015 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 11, 2016, as amended (the “Report”), Marc H. Hedrick, as President & Chief Executive Officer of Cytori Therapeutics, Inc., and Tiago Girão, as VP of Finance and Chief Financial Officer of Cytori Therapeutics, Inc., each hereby certifies, respectively, that:

| 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Cytori Therapeutics, Inc. |
|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

|                            | By:    |   | /s/ Marc H. Hedrick, MD                   |
|---------------------------------|--------|--------|-------------------------------------------|
| Dated:  September 30, 2016 |   |   | Marc H. Hedrick, MD                       |
|                            |   |   | President & Chief Executive Officer   |
|                            |   |   |                                      |
|                            | By:    |   | /s/ Tiago M. Girão                   |
| Dated:  September 30, 2016 |   |   | Tiago M. Girão                       |
|                            |   |   | VP of Finance and Chief Financial Officer |