alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32







CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002







In connection with the Annual Report of Energy Exploration Technologies (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the Report), I, George Liszicasz, Chief Executive Officer and interim Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





|Date:  April 14, 2004 | By: | /s/ GEORGE LISZICASZName:
George Liszicasz
Title:
Chief Executive Officer and interim Chief Financial Officer (Principal Executive and Accounting Officer)
|--------------------- | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Tower Bancorp, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for theperiod ending June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Franklin T. Klink, III, ChiefFinancial 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 requirements of Section13(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 ofthe Company.
|        | /s/ Franklin T. Klink, III    |   |
|--------|-------------------------------|--------|
|   | Treasurer                     |
|   | (Principal Financial Officer) |
|   | August 9, 2006                |

 

----
United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

February 8, 2018

ERRATUM

______________________ 

Appeal No. 2016-1253

DIAMOND SAWBLADES MANUFACTURERS 

COALITION,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

UNITED STATES,

Defendant-Appellee

v.

BEIJING GANG YAN DIAMOND PRODUCTS 

COMPANY, GANG YAN DIAMOND PRODUCTS, 

INC.,

Defendants-Appellants

CLIFF INTERNATIONAL, LTD.,

Defendant

Decided: August 7, 2017

Precedential Opinion

______________________ 
2 DIAMOND SAWBLADES MANUFACTURER v. UNITED STATES

Please make the following change:

On page 16, footnote 6, line 18, replace “CIT” with 

“United States.”
* Judge Motz did not participate in consideration of this

case. The opinion is filed by a quorum of the panel pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 46(d) (1994).

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-1327

MORRIS D. SQUIRES,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

FLUOR DANIEL, INCORPORATED; WALLACE L. OWENS;

BARRY M. CARROLL; E. I. DUPONT DE NEMOURS &

COMPANY; CHARLES LEABERRY,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Florence. Patrick Michael Duffy, District

Judge. (CA-96-1139-4-23)

Submitted: May 29, 1997 Decided: June 6, 1997

Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MOTZ,* Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
2

Morris D. Squires, Appellant Pro Se. Benjamin Phillip Glass, OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, Greenville, South Carolina;

Robert Thomas Lyles, Jr., OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK, STEWART,

L.L.P., Charleston, South Carolina; Joy Scherffius Goodwin, LEVY &

GOODWIN, Columbia, South Carolina; Gardner G. Courson, Jamie G.

Miller, GLASS, MCCULLOUGH, SHERRILL & HARROLD, Atlanta, Georgia;

Laura H. Walter, GLASS, MCCULLOUGH, SHERRILL & HARROLD, Washington,

D.C., for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order granting summary

judgment in favor of Defendants and dismissing Appellant's civil

action brought under the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C.

§ 12101 (1994). We have reviewed the record and the district

court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate

judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the

reasoning of the district court. Squires v. Fluor Daniel, Inc.,

No. CA-96-1139-4-23 (D.S.C. Feb. 6, 1997). 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.

AFFIRMED
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6673
MARCUS LANE, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. C.T. WOODY, Sheriff; LT. COL. BURNETT; DR. FURMA, Head Doctor Richmond City Jail Medical Department, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, Senior District Judge. (1:08-cv-00109-TSE-JFA) Submitted: August 14, 2008 Decided: August 21, 2008 Before MICHAEL, Circuit Judge, and WILKINS and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marcus Lane, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Marcus Lane, Sr., appeals a district court order dismissing without prejudice his complaint for failing to provide a current mailing address. Because Lane was obligated to keep the district court informed of any change of address, we affirm the court’s order. We deny Lane’s motions for transcript at government expense and appointment of counsel. 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. AFFIRMED
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 on Form 10-Q,
filed pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, of NBC Capital Corporation (the Company) for the period ended March 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), I, Richard T. Haston, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | 3) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 4) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Richard T. HastonName:

Richard HastonTitle:

Executive Vice President and Chief Financial OfficerDate:

May 5, 2004




A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to NBC Capital Corporation and will be retained by NBC Capital Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Eugene Farkas, Plaintiff, *v.*Harry Metz and Another, Defendants.

City Court of New York, Special Term, Bronx County,

June 22,1936.

*Cornelius P. Cotter,*for the motion.

*Lester A. Kent,*opposed.

Donnelly, J.

The complaint sets forth four causes of action. The second cause of action is upon twelve non-negotiable promissory notes, the total of which is $1,819.90. In his complaint plaintiff alleges that each of the notes was made by the corporate defendant.

In the first, third and fourth causes of action, plaintiff claims damages from the defendants in amounts which aggregate the sum of $1,037.12.

The prayer for judgment is set forth in the complaint as follows: *“*Wherefore, the plaintiff demands judgment of $1,037.12 from the defendant Harry Metz and $2,857.02 from the defendant Farmet Corporation.” The amount, $2,857.02, is reached by adding to the sum of $1,819.90 alleged to be due by the corporate defendant on the notes, the total of the sums demanded in the first, third and fourth causes of action.

On this motion it is unnecessary to decide whether the complaint sets forth in the first, third and fourth causes of action the joint or joint and several liability of the individual and corporate defendants or the separate liability of the individual defendant. Plaintiff demands a separate judgment against each defendant. I think plaintiff is entitled to a separate adjudication of the character of the liability of each of the two defendants. As to each of the defendants, there is a separate complaint in which the total of the *10amounts sued for respectively in the first, third and fourth causes of action and in the second cause of action, is less than $3,000. In this instance, the complaint may not be held to be offensive to this court’s jurisdictional limitation. *(Curtain Mfg. Co., Inc.,*v. *Law Union & Rock Ins. Co.,*138 Misc. 556.)

Motion denied.
II

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1664

To clarify the legal effect on the United States of the acquisition a parcel

of land in the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve in the State of Utah.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 29, 1999

Mr. BENNETT introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

A BILL

To clarify the legal effect on the United States of the acquisition a parcel of land in the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve

in the State of Utah.

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

3 SECTION 1. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN LAND IN RED CLIFFS

4 DESERT RESERVE, UTAH, ACQUIRED BY EX5 CHANGE.

6 (a) LIMITATION ON LIABILITY.—In support of the

7 habitat conservation plan of Washington County, Utah,

8 for the protection of the desert tortoise and surrounding

9 habitat, the transfer of the land described in subsection

10 (b) from the city of St. George, Utah, to the United States
2

•S 1664 IS

1 shall convey no liability on the United States that did not

2 already exist with the United States on the date of the

3 transfer of the land.

4 (b) DESCRIPTION OF LAND.—The land referred to in

5 subsection (a) is a parcel of approximately 15 acres of

6 land located within the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve in

7 Washington County, Utah, that was formerly used as a

8 landfill by the city of St. George.

Æ
#### Wadsworth Stone *&*Paving Co. v. Whalin.

(Decided April 26, 1911.)

Appeal from Edmonson Circuit Court.

Damages — Supersedeas.—Damages "will not oe awarded where it *s shown that no supersedeas Issued- (See 143 Ky. 140-)

JOHN A. LOGAN and GRIDER *&*HARLAN for appellant.

LOGAN & HAZELIP for appellee

Opinion op the Court by

Chiep Justice Hobson

On motion to modify mandate.

Unless a supersedeas is issued damages may not be awarded under section 764, although a supersedeas bond is executed. Reed v. Lander, 5 Bush, 598; Jones v. Green, 12 Bush, 127. It is now shown that a supersedeas was not issued and that this fact has been learned since the motion to dismiss the appeal with damages was *358passed on. The motion to set aside the award of ten per cent, damages is sustained.
Dismissed and Opinion Filed November 19, 2015 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-14-00620-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF: T.H. M. AND C.A.M., CHILDREN On Appeal from the 219th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 219-53138-2012



### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright, Justi ce Lang-Miers, and Justice Stoddart Opinion by Chief Justice Wright Appellant's brief in this case is overdue. By postcard dated July 28, 2015, we notified appellant the time for filing her brief had expired. We directed appellant to file both her brief and an extension motion within ten da ys. We cautioned appellant that fa ilure to file her brief and an extension motion would result in the dismissal of this appeal without further notice. Thereafter, we granted appellant's motion to extend time to f ile her brief and ordered appellant's brief to be filed by August 31, 2015. We expressly cautioned a ppellant that no further extension of time would be granted absent extraordinary circumstan ces. To date, appellant ha s not filed her brief, requested an additional extension of time to file her brief, or otherwis e corresponded with the Court regarding the status of this appeal.–2– Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 38.8(a)(1); 42.3(b), (c).

140620F.P05 /Carolyn Wright/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE–3– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT

IN THE INTEREST OF: T.H.M. AND C.A.M., CHILDREN
No. 05-14-00620-CV V. On Appeal from the 219th Judicial District Court, Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 219-53138-2012. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright. Justices Lang-Miers and Stoddart participating. In accordance with this Court’s opi nion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED

. It is ORDERED that appellee ANTHONY JOSEPH MAZZU recover his costs of this appeal from appellan t SUSAN DAWAN MAZZU.
Judgment entered November 19, 2015.
Market & Research Corp. 10-K for September 30,
2009
 
 Exhibit
32.2






CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO
 18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350
 ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES—OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  In
connection with the Annual Report of Market & Research Corp. (the “Company”)
on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, John Grippo, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that to my
knowledge:
 
 (1)
                  The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
      applicable, 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
      at the dates and for the periods
indicated.
 
 By:
                  /s/
      John
      GrippoJohn
      GrippoChief
      Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)Date:  January
      13, 2010
 
 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 Market & Research Corp. and will be
retained by Market & Research Corp. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
Slip Op. 01 - 129

J U D G M E N T

 UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE

Thomas J. Aquilino, Jr., Judge

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x

FORMER EMPLOYEES OF CREATEC CORP., :

 Plaintiffs, :

 v. : Court No. 01-00619 

 

 : 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, 

 : 

Defendant. 

 : 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x

The U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training

Administration, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance having on

March 30, 2001 issued a Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility To Apply for NAFTA - Transitional Adjustment Assistance with

regard to certain employees of Createc Corporation, Harrodsburg,

Kentucky, NAFTA-TAA 4599; and notice of that determination having

been published sub nom. Dep't of Labor, Employment and Training

Admin., Notice of Determinations Regarding Eligibility To Apply for

Worker Adjustment Assistance and NAFTA Transitional Adjustment

Assistance, 66 Fed.Reg. 22,005, 22,007 col. 2 (May 2, 2001); and

one such employee having corresponded with this Court about that

determination; and the Clerk having received on July 30, 2001 a

letter from that individual, which it deemed as fulfilling in

principle the requirements for commencement of the above-numbered
Court No. 01-00619 Page 2

action; and the defendant having filed on September 27, 2001 a

motion to dismiss this action on the ground of lack of subjectmatter jurisdiction in that it was not commenced within the sixty

days after notice of such determination prescribed in 19 U.S.C.

§2395(a) and 28 U.S.C. §2636(d); and the plaintiffs having failed

to respond to this motion; and it not otherwise clearly appearing

that earlier correspondence on the record could be deemed timely

commencement of this action; Now therefore, after due deliberation, it is 

ORDERED that defendant's motion to dismiss this action

be, and it hereby is, granted; and it is further

ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that this action be, and it

hereby is, dismissed.

Dated: New York, New York

 November 6, 2001

 

________________________________

 Judge
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000743456
<NAME> 83A.83A.TXT
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                         172,633
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  180,254
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               352,887
<PP&E>                                      17,830,231
<DEPRECIATION>                              14,050,689
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,132,429
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           54,648
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,077,781
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,132,429
<SALES>                                      1,063,146
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,071,619
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  919,947
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                151,672
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            151,672
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   151,672
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     3.89
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
II

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2104

To amend the Tax Reform Act of 1984.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

FEBRUARY 24, 2000

Mr. GRAMM (for himself and Mrs. HUTCHISON) introduced the following bill;

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To amend the Tax Reform Act of 1984.

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

3 SECTION 1. MODIFICATION OF SPECIAL ARBITRAGE RULE

4 FOR CERTAIN FUNDS.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (1) of section 648 of

6 the Tax Reform Act of 1984 is amended to read as fol7 lows:

8 ‘‘(1) such securities or obligations are held in a

9 fund—

10 ‘‘(A) which, except to the extent of the in11 vestment earnings on such securities or obliga12 tions, cannot be used, under State constitu-
2

•S 2104 IS

1 tional or statutory restrictions continuously in

2 effect since October 9, 1969, through the date

3 of issue of the bond issue, to pay debt service

4 on the bond issue or to finance the facilities

5 that are to be financed with the proceeds of the

6 bonds, or

7 ‘‘(B) the annual distributions from which

8 cannot exceed 7 percent of the average fair

9 market value of the assets held in such fund ex10 cept to the extent distributions are necessary to

11 pay debt service on the bond issue,’’.

12 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Paragraph (3) of

13 such section is amended by striking ‘‘the investment earn14 ings of’’ and inserting ‘‘distributions from’’.

15 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

16 this section shall take effect on January 1, 2000.

Æ
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



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of Integrated Security Systems, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:



The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 (the Form 10-QSB) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in the Form 10-QSB.





May 22, 2008

/s/ VERNON H. FOERSTERLING , JR.

Vernon H. Foersterling, Jr.

President and Chief Executive Officer

Principal Executive and Financial Officer





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Integrated Security Systems, Inc. and will be retained by Integrated Security Systems, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



The foregoing certification is being furnished as an exhibit to Form 10-QSB pursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-B and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) and, accordingly, is not being filed as part of the Form 10-QSB for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.