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 Intraware, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended February
28, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Form 10-K"), I, Peter H. Jackson,
Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President 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 Form 10-K fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

(2)   The information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.

Dated: April 25, 2007

|/s/  PETER H. JACKSON
                Peter H. JacksonChairman, Chief Executive Officer and President of
                   Intraware, Inc.
                   (Chief Executive Officer) | 
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 



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 Intraware, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ended February 28,
2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Form 10-K"), I, Wendy A. Nieto, Executive
Vice President and Chief Financial 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 Form 10-K fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

(2)   The information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.

Dated: April 25, 2007

|/s/  WENDY A. NIETO
                Wendy A. NietoExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of
                   Intraware, Inc.
                   (Chief Financial Officer) | 
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 

---
**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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Universal Solar Technology,
      Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter ending June 30, 2008 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Wensheng
      Chen ,
      Chief
      Executive Officer of the Company, 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 her 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.




Dated: November 5, 2008
            By:
            /s/ Wensheng
                ChenWensheng
                ChenChief
                Executive Officer
CHIEF JUSTICE

 ROGELIO VALDEZ

JUSTICES

 NELDA V. RODRIGUEZ

 DORI CONTRERAS GARZA

 GINA M. BENAVIDES

 GREGORY T. PERKES

 NORA L. LONGORIA

CLERK

 DORIAN E. RAMIREZ

NUECES COUNTY COURTHOUSE

901 LEOPARD, 10TH FLOOR

CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS 78401

361-888-0416 (TEL)

361-888-0794 (FAX)

HIDALGO COUNTY

ADMINISTRATION BLDG.

100 E. CANO, 5TH FLOOR

EDINBURG, TEXAS 78539

956-318-2405 (TEL)

956-318-2403 (FAX)

www.txcourts.gov/13thcoa

Court of Appeals 

Thirteenth District of Texas 

October 27, 2015

Hon. Mark Skurka

District Attorney

901 Leopard Street, Room 205

Corpus Christi, TX 78401

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Hon. Douglas K. Norman

Asst. District Attorney

901 Leopard, Room 206

Corpus Christi, TX 78401

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Hon. Danice L. Obregon

Attorney at Law

802 N. Caranchua, Suite 2100

Corpus Christi, TX 78401

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Re: Cause No. 13-11-00786-CR

Tr.Ct.No. 10-CR-4228-G

Style: MICKEY BOSWELL v. THE STATE OF TEXAS

Appellant’s motion for rehearing and motion for rehearing en banc in the above 

cause were this day DENIED by this Court.

Very truly yours,

Dorian E. Ramirez, Clerk

DER:ch
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 37 (Monday, February 25, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 10006]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 08-845]


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

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

Agency Holding The Meeting: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Time and Date: 11 a.m., Friday March 14, 2008.

Place: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission 
Conference Room.

Status: Closed.

Matters To Be Considered: Surveillance Matters.

For Further Information Contact: Sauntia S. Warfield, 202-418-5084.

 David A. Stawick,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 08-845 Filed 2-21-08; 11:53 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Commerce

###### National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

          - 50 CFR Part 226
          - RIN 0648-AV35

# AGENCY:

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

# ACTION:

Proposed rule; correction.

# SUMMARY:

                        This document corrects a map in the regulatory language of a proposed rule published in the                         **Federal Register**                         of February 6, 2008.  This correction makes the map of the Florida area of critical habitat for elkhorn and staghorn corals consistent with the textual description.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jennifer Moore or Sarah Heberling at 727-824-5312; or Marta Nammack at 301-713-1401.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

## Correction

In proposed rule FR Doc. 08 497, beginning on page 6895 in the issue of February 6, 2008, make the following correction, in the Regulatory Language section.  On page 6912, replace the map labeled “Critical Habitat for Elkhorn and Staghorn Corals, Area 1: Florida” with the following map:
      ( print page 12069)    

Dated: February 29, 2008.

John Oliver,

Deputy Assistant Administrator for Operations, National Marine Fisheries Service.

BILLING CODE 3510-22-S

[FR Doc. 08-973 Filed 3-5-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-22-C
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5684 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5684

 To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to expand eligibility 
for medication therapy management programs established under part D of 
the Medicare program to include certain individuals who are at risk for 
                        prescription drug abuse.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 7, 2018

  Mr. Kelly of Pennsylvania (for himself, Mr. Thompson of California, 
   Mrs. McMorris Rodgers, and Mr. Michael F. Doyle of Pennsylvania) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
   Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and 
 Means, 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 title XVIII of the Social Security Act to expand eligibility 
for medication therapy management programs established under part D of 
the Medicare program to include certain individuals who are at risk for 
                        prescription drug abuse.

    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 ``Protecting Seniors From Opioid Abuse 
Act''.

SEC. 2. EXPANDING ELIGIBILITY FOR MEDICATION THERAPY MANAGEMENT 
              PROGRAMS UNDER PART D.

    Section 1860D-4(c)(2)(A)(ii) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
1395w-104(c)(2)(A)(ii)) is amended--
            (1) by redesignating subclauses (I) through (III) as items 
        (aa) through (cc), respectively, and adjusting the margins 
        accordingly;
            (2) by striking ``are part D eligible individuals who--'' 
        and inserting ``are the following:
                                    ``(I) Part D eligible individuals 
                                who--''; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following new subclause:
                                    ``(II) Beginning January 1, 2021, 
                                at-risk beneficiaries for prescription 
                                drug abuse (as defined in paragraph 
                                (5)(C)).''.
                                 <all>
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-1107 

QIAN FAN, a/k/a Kunio Otsuka,

Petitioner,

versus

ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals. (A77-997-923)

Submitted: May 20, 2005 Decided: June 13, 2005

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Qian Fan, Petitioner Pro Se. M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright, Assistant

Director, Carol Federighi, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil

Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C.,

for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Qian Fan, a native and citizen of the People’s Republic

of China, petitions for review of an order of the Board of

Immigration Appeals (Board) denying Fan’s second, identical motion

to reopen. We agree with the Board that the motion should be

construed as Fan’s second motion to reconsider. As such, it

exceeds the number limitations of 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(5)(A) (2000)

and 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(b)(2) (2005). Even construing the motion as

a motion to reopen, it is beyond the ninety-day deadline of 8

U.S.C. § 1229a(6)(C)(i) (2000) and 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2) (2005).

Therefore, we conclude that the Board did not abuse its discretion

in denying the motion. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a) (2005); INS v.

Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 323-24 (1992); Stewart v. INS, 181 F.3d 587,

595 (4th Cir. 1999). We deny the petition for review; 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.

PETITION DENIED
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>         0001029102
<NAME>        Statia Terminals Canada, Incorporated
<MULTIPLIER>  1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         9264
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  12934
<ALLOWANCES>                                   769
<INVENTORY>                                    4969
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               50530
<PP&E>                                         204,110
<DEPRECIATION>                                 923
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 260,155
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          26,750
<BONDS>                                        135,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       6
<OTHER-SE>                                     98,494
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   260,155
<SALES>                                        106,142
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               155,954
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  151,465
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               407
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             5,712
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,224)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   761
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,985)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                792
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,777)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
        


</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.3

                                  LEGENDS GOLF

              CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

    We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
No. 333-46657, No. 333-39628 and No. 333-46659 on Form S-8 and Registration
Statements No. 333-56251, No. 333-39624 and No. 333-39622 on Form S-3 of our
report dated March 12, 2001, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of
Golf Trust of America, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2000.

Charlotte, North Carolina                          /s/ Daniel, Ratliff & Company
March 13, 2001
Status of Upcoming

Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) Pe

LaVon B. Rutherford, CHP

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

Division of Compensation Analysis and Support

July 2013

Idaho Falls, ID
Purpose

 Provide an update to the Advisory Board on 

current number of qualified petitions under

evaluation and sites being evaluated throug

83.14 process

 Provide SEC information to the Advisory Boa

support of its preparations for future Work G

sessions and Advisory Board meetings
SEC Summary Table

(as of July 5, 2013)

 Petitions received  Petitions in qualification process  Petitions qualified for evaluation 

• NIOSH evaluation in progress 1

• NIOSH evaluation completed 128

– SEC Evaluation Reports

with the Advisory Board

for recommendation 8

 Petitions not qualifying for evaluation Note: Petitions not qualifying include five petitions received prio

rule becoming final and Petition 34 where the site was de‐
SEC Petition Currently under Adv

Board Review

 Petition Evaluations the Advisory Board has 

action on, but are under continued evaluatio

• Feed Materials Production Center (Fernald)• Hanford• Pantex Plant• Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL)

• Savannah River Site

• Brookhaven National Laboratory

• Baker Brothers

• Joslyn Manufacturing and Supply Co.
SEC Petition Currently under Adv

Board Review—cont.

 Petition Evaluations with the Advisory Board 

initial action:

• Rocky Flats Plant
Potential SEC Petitions (83.1

 Sandia National Laboratory – Livermore

 Sandia National Laboratory – Albuquerque (

1948)

 General Atomics (modify existing class defin

 Dayton Project Monsanto (modify based on 

in facility designation)

• Modify based on change in facility designation t

facility

• Modify to add the 9 month period when operati

being shifted from “The Dayton Project” to Mou
SEC Petitions in

Qualification/Evaluation

Qualification Process K‐25 – 1993‐1997 LANL – Will not qualifyEvaluation Process Kansas City Plant – 1949 – 1993
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, the undersigned, as Chief Executive Officer of GigOptix, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify that to the undersigneds knowledge:

1) the Companys Form 10-Q for the three months ended July 4, 2010 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 Companys Form 10-Q for the three months ended July 4, 2010 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                          
|--------------------------
|/s/    Dr. Avishay S. Katz
|Dr. Avishay S. Katz       
|Chief Executive Officer   

Dated: August 2, 2010
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002

Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, the undersigned, as acting chief financial officer of GigOptix, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify that to the undersigneds knowledge:

1. The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended July 5, 2009 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 Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended July 5, 2009 fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company at the dates and for the periods indicated.

This certification has not been and shall not
be deemed, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.



|                      |  |                               
|--------------------- |  | ------------------------------
|Date: August 18, 2009 |  | /S/ DAWN CASTERSON            
|                      |  | Dawn Casterson                
|                      |  | Acting Chief Financial Officer
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 Periodic Report of Sinocom Pharmaceutical, Inc (the Company) on Form 10-Q/A for the transitional period ended March 31, 2010, (the Report), I, Tuck Wing Pang,  Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 1) The Report fully complies with the requirement 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 Company's financial position and results of operations.  October 6, 2010 /s/ Tuck Wing Pang Chief Financial Officer
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm







The Board of Directors

Davis Variable Account Fund, Inc.:



We consent to the use of our report, dated February 7, 2020, with respect to the financial statements and financial highlights of Davis Value Portfolio,
    Davis Financial Portfolio, and Davis Real Estate Portfolio (each a series of Davis Variable Account Fund, Inc.), as of December 31, 2019, incorporated by reference herein, and to the references to our firm under the headings “Financial Highlights” in
    the Prospectuses and “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in the Statement of Additional Information.



KPMG LLP



Denver, Colorado

April 28, 2020
United States Court of Appeals,

Fifth Circuit.

No. 91-4727.

Hung Duc BUI and Richard Lan Bui, Plaintiffs-Appellees, Cross-Appellants,

v.

ST. PAUL MERCURY INSURANCE CO., Defendant-Appellant, Cross-Appellee,

Huey T. Littleton Claim Service of Texas, Inc., Defendant, Cross-Appellee.

Jan. 14, 1993.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.

Before GOLDBERG, JOLLY, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

E. GRADY JOLLY, Circuit Judge:

St. Paul Insurance Co. ("St. Paul"), the defendant in this case, insured a boat that Hung Duc

Bui and Richard Lan Bui owned. When the boat partially sunk, St. Paul paid $53,000 to the bank

that held the mortgage on the Buis' boat. St. Paul, however, refused to pay the Buis because its

investigator, Huey T. Littleton Claims Service of Texas, Inc. ("Littleton"), found that the Buis had

negligently maintained their boat. The Buis sued St. Paul and Littleton claiming, inter alia, that

Littleton negligently investigated their claimand that St. Paul breached its contract with the Buis and

willfully violated its duty of good faith and fair dealing in handling the Buis' claim.

After a full trial, the jury found that St. Paul breached its insurance contract with the Buis.

The jury further found that the St. Paul willfully violated its duty of good faith and fair dealing in

handling the Buis' claims. The jury then awarded the Buis $150,000 in actual damages, $5,000 in

exemplary damages, and $60,000 in attorney's fees. St. Paul now contends that it is entitled to an

offset of $53,000 because of the funds it paid to the bank.

Unfortunately, the offset issue was never properly presented to the jury. It is not clear

whether the $150,000 in damages the jury awarded represents contract damages or whether the it

represents damages that arose because St. Paul willfully violated its duty of good faith and fair

dealing. Because of the way this case was argued to the jury, we cannot say that as a matter of law
St. Paul was entitled to the offset. Given the procedural problems in this case and the way it comes

to us on appeal, we find no reversible error, and consequently, we affirm.

We now turn to the Buis' cross-appeal. The Buis have cross-appealed claiming that the

district court erred when it denied them pre-judgment interest and when it dismissed their claims

against Littleton. The district court denied the Buis pre-judgment interest because the jury awarded

them damages based on the cost of repairing their boat at the time of trial and not the time their boat

was damaged. The district court correctly reasoned that, under these circumstances an award of

pre-judgment interest would be duplicative. Finally, the district court did not err when it dismissed

the Buis' claims against Littleton because Littleton was not a party to the contract and, under the

particular facts of this case, owed no duty to the Buis under Texas law.

AFFIRMED.