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



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), I, Frank C. McDowell
hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 (the Form 10-K) of BRE Properties, Inc. fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable,
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of BRE Properties, Inc.



|                         |  |                                                            
|------------------------ |  | -----------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: February 13, 2004 |  | /s/ Frank C. McDowell                                      
|                         |  | Frank C. McDowell Vice Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
SCWC

- 21

- 0000 584

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI ʻ I

________________________________________________________________

IN THE INTEREST OF A K Q (CAAP

- 21

- 0000584; FC

- S NO. 19

- 0 039K)

AND

IN THE INTEREST OF Q CHILDREN (CAAP

- 21

- 0000585; FC

- S NO. 18

- 0 016K)

________________________________________________________________

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

ORDER REJECTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.)

Petitioner/ Mother

- Appellant’s Application for Writ of

Certiorari, filed on December 1 , 2022, is hereby rejected.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai ʻ i, January 24 , 202 3

.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Michael D. Wilson

/s/ Todd W. Eddins Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCWC-21-0000584 24-JAN-2023 07:48 AM Dkt. 12 ODAC
II

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2469

To suspend for 3 years the duty on 3-Amino-3-methyl-1-pentyne.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

APRIL 26, 2000

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

to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To suspend for 3 years the duty on 3-Amino-3-methyl-1-

pentyne.

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

3 SECTION 1. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF DUTY ON 3-

4 AMINO-3-METHYL-1-PENTYNE.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of

6 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is

7 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following

8 new heading:

‘‘ 9902.32.84 3-Amino-3-methyl-1-

pentyne (CAS No. 18369–

96–5) (provided for in subheading 2921.19.60) .......... Free No change No change On or before

12/31/2002 ’’.
2

•S 2469 IS

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

2 this section shall apply with respect to goods entered, or

3 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after

4 the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.

Æ
ON REHEARING

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-7877

DONALD EUGENE MEDLIN,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

JAY CLARK,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle

District of North Carolina, at Durham. Paul Trevor Sharp,

Magistrate Judge. (CA-02-393-1)

Submitted: July 21, 2004 Decided: August 26, 2004

Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Bruce Tracy Cunningham, Jr., THE LAW OFFICE OF BRUCE T. CUNNINGHAM,

JR., Southern Pines, North Carolina, for Appellant. Clarence Joe

DelForge, III, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
*

This case was decided by a magistrate judge upon consent of

the parties under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1) (2000).

- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Donald Eugene Medlin seeks to appeal the magistrate

judge’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.

§ 2254 (2000).*

 An appeal may not be taken from the final order in

a § 2254 proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). 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) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his

constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive

procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or

wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003);

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d

676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the

record and conclude that Medlin 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
United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Submitted March 29, 2013*

Decided March 29, 2013

Before

WILLIAM J. BAUER, Circuit Judge

RICHARD A. POSNER, Circuit Judge

ANN CLAIRE WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge

No. 12‐2244

SAMUEL LEE ANDERSON,

Plaintiff–Appellant,

v.

ROBERT BALES, et al.,   

Defendants–Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District

Court for the Northern District of Illinois,

Western Division.

No. 09 C 50196

Frederick J. Kapala,

Judge.

O R D E R

Samuel Anderson, an Illinois state prisoner, sued a prison doctor and two nurses for

deliberate indifference to his hernia, hematuria, and cardiomyopathy, 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The

district court granted summary judgment for the defendants, concluding that Anderson

failed to present evidence challenging their medical judgment that his hernia could be

treated adequately with non‐surgical measures, and that Anderson had abandoned his

claims regarding his other conditions.

NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with

Fed. R. App. P. 32.1

*

After examining the briefs and the record, we have concluded that oral argument is

unnecessary. Thus, the appeal is submitted on the briefs and the record. See FED. R. APP. P.

34(a)(2)(C).
No. 12‐2244 Page 2

Anderson appeals, but his scant brief is inadequate. We liberally construe pro se

filings, Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007); Arnett v. Webster, 658 F.3d 742, 751 (7th Cir.

2011), but Anderson still must make a cogent argument with citations to the record and

supporting authority, see FED. R. CIV. P. 28(a)(9); Correa v. White, 518 F.3d 516, 517 (7th Cir.

2008); Anderson v. Hardman, 241 F.3d 544, 545 (7th Cir. 2001). Anderson has failed to do so

and thus has not preserved any issue for appeal. See Wehrs v. Wells, 688 F.3d 886, 891 n.2

(7th Cir. 2012); Mathis v. New York Life Ins. Co., 133 F.3d 546, 548 (7th Cir. 1998).

Even if Anderson had properly preserved his claim, it lacks merit. As the district

court explained, the evidence showed that a doctor and nurse examined Anderson at least

nine times (not including medicine renewals) between October 2008 and October 2009,

diagnosed him with a reducible hernia, manually reduced the hernia, showed him how to

reduce it on his own, and prescribed him pain killers and an abdominal binder to treat the

hernia. Anderson’s claim boils down to a disagreement with the doctor’s medical judgment

(he wanted surgery and the doctor concluded that he could be treated effectively without

it), and a disagreement with a method of treatment does not support a claim of deliberate

indifference. See Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 103–05 (1976); Johnson v. Doughty, 433 F.3d

1001, 1014 (7th Cir. 2006); Taylor v. Turner, 884 F.2d 1088, 1090 (8th Cir. 1989).

DISMISSED.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANTTO

18 U.S.C. Section 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of XETATechnologies, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter endedApril 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”),I, Robert B. Wagner, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)                                  TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
|   | /s/ Robert B. Wagner    |   |
|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|   | Robert B. Wagner        |
|   | Chief Financial Officer |
|   | May 23, 2006            |

 

----
1

NO. 03-15-00209-CR

IN THE

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRD DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

DEANDREE DWIGHT JOSEPH

aka DEANDRE DWIGHT PARKS § APPELLANT

VS. §

THE STATE OF TEXAS § APPELLEE

APPEAL FROM THE 403RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS

CAUSE NO. D1-DC-15-904009

STATE'S FIRST MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS:

The State of Texas respectfully moves for an extension of the deadline for

filing the State’s brief and, in accordance with Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure

38.6 and 10.5(b), advises the Court as follows:

(a) Following his conviction for Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon

and Attempted Arson, the appellant filed his notice of appeal in the above cause on

April 7, 2015. Appellant filed a brief on July 20, 2015.

(b) The State’s brief is currently due on August 19, 2015.

ACCEPTED

03-15-00209-CR

6554925

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

8/19/2015 9:11:35 AM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 8/19/2015 9:11:35 AM JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk
2

(c) This request is that the deadline for filing the State’s brief be extended

by 30 days.

(d) The number of previous extensions of time granted for submission of

the State’s brief is: none.

(e) The State relies upon the following facts to reasonably explain the

need for an extension of the deadline:

1. During the period since this brief was filed, the attorney assigned

to this case has been working on other pressing appellate matters

and has not had sufficient time to prepare an adequate response to

this brief.

2. This request is not made for the purpose of delay, but to ensure

that the Court has a proper State’s brief to aid in the just

disposition of the above cause.
3

WHEREFORE, the State of Texas respectfully requests that the deadline for

filing the State’s brief be extended to September 18, 2015.

Respectfully submitted,

ROSEMARY LEHMBERG

District Attorney

Travis County, Texas

/s/ Lisa Stewart

Lisa Stewart

Assistant District Attorney

State Bar No. 06022700

P.O. Box 1748

Austin, Texas 78767

(512) 854-9400

Fax No. 854-4810

Lisa.Stewart@traviscountytx.gov

AppellateTCDA@traviscountytx.gov
4

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.4(i), I hereby certify, based

upon the computer program used to generate this motion, that this motion contains

233 words, excluding words contained in those parts of the motion that Rule 9.4(i)

exempts from inclusion in the word count. I certify, further, that this motion is

printed in a conventional, 14-point typeface.

/s/ Lisa Stewart

Lisa Stewart

Assistant District Attorney

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that, on the 19th day of August, 2015, a true and correct copy

of this motion was served, by U.S. mail, electronic mail, facsimile, or

electronically through the electronic filing manager, to the Appellant’s attorney,

Randy Schaffer, Attorney at Law, 1301 McKinney, Suite 3100, Houston, Texas

77010, noguilt@swbell.net.

/s/ Lisa Stewart

Lisa Stewart

Assistant District Attorney
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 96 (Wednesday, May 19, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 28073]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-12071]


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

NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION


Sunshine Act; Notice of Matter To Be Deleted From the Agenda of a 
Previously Announced Agency Meeting

TIME AND DATE: 11:15 a.m., Thursday, May 20, 2010.

PLACE: Board Room, 7th Floor, Room 7047, 1775 Duke Street, Alexandria, 
VA 22314-3428.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTER TO BE DELETED:
    1. Member Business Loan Waiver Appeal. Closed pursuant to Exemption 
(8).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Rupp, Secretary of the Board, 
Telephone: 703-518-6304.

Mary Rupp,
Board Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-12071 Filed 5-17-10; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE P
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                          9
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         1,256
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               2,508
<TRADING-ASSETS>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    15,685
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         17,795
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           17,496
<LOANS>                                        116,896
<ALLOWANCE>                                    1,252
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 165,380
<DEPOSITS>                                     145,755
<SHORT-TERM>                                   0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            1,798
<LONG-TERM>                                    0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       18,132
<OTHER-SE>                                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 165,380
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                8,490
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              1,886
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               10,376
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             3,994
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             3,999
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          6,378
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  240
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                             27
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                3,593
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                3,425
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     3,425
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   2,223
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  1.13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  1.13
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                 0.0917
<LOANS-NON>                                    166
<LOANS-PAST>                                   1,317
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                               61
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                1,483
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               1,236
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  392
<RECOVERIES>                                   168
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              1,252
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           1,252
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                            0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        0
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 97 (Thursday, May 20, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 28303]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-12115]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-71,401]


Setco Automotive, Inc., Paris, TN; Notice of Revised 
Determination on Reconsideration

    By application dated April 5, 2010, the Tennessee AFL-CIO Technical 
Assistance Office (Union) requested administrative reconsideration of 
the negative determination regarding workers' eligibility to apply for 
Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) applicable to workers and former 
workers of the subject firm.
    The initial investigation resulted in a negative determination, 
issued on March 9, 2010, that was based on the finding that there was 
no increase in imports by the workers' firm or customers of the subject 
firm, nor was there a shift or acquisition by the workers' firm, and 
neither the workers' firm nor its customers reported imports of 
articles like or directly competitive with articles into which the 
automotive clutch products produced by the workers' firm was directly 
incorporated into. The Department's Notice of determination was 
published in the Federal Register on April 23, 2010 (FR 75 21358).
    The reconsideration investigation revealed that, during 2008 and 
2009, the subject firm sold component parts (automotive clutch 
products) to be incorporated into an article to a firm that employed a 
worker group currently eligible to apply for TAA, and that the article 
was the basis for the certification. The subject firm's sales to that 
customer in each of those two years amounted to approximately twenty 
percent of the subject firm's total sales.

Conclusion

    After careful review of the additional facts obtained on 
reconsideration, I determine that workers of Setco Automotive, Inc., 
Paris, Tennessee meet the worker group certification criteria under 
Section 222(c) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. 2272(c). In accordance with 
Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. 2273, I make the following 
certification:

    All workers of Setco Automotive, Inc., Paris, Tennessee, who 
became totally or partially separated from employment on or after 
June 25, 2008, through two years from the date of this 
certification, and all workers in the group threatened with total or 
partial separation from employment on date of certification through 
two years from the date of certification, are eligible to apply for 
adjustment assistance under Chapter 2 of Title II of the Trade Act 
of 1974, as amended.

    Signed in Washington, DC, this 4th day of May, 2010.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2010-12115 Filed 5-19-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
                      
<MULTIPLIER>                  1
<CURRENCY>                    U.S. Dollars                
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-27-1996           
<PERIOD-START>                  MAY-11-1996<F1>    
<PERIOD-END>                    DEC-27-1996    
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                            1    
<CASH>                             6,914,899   
<SECURITIES>                               0             
<RECEIVABLES>                      4,475,929    
<ALLOWANCES>                         531,000   
<INVENTORY>                        1,262,665   
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                  12,232,936   
<PP&E>                             9,558,376   
<DEPRECIATION>                     1,983,875   
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    19,954,853   
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>              5,122,563   
<BONDS>                                    0   
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      0   
<PREFERRED>                                0  
<COMMON>                          12,133,585   
<OTHER-SE>                           984,331   
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>      19,954,853   
<SALES>                           12,887,050   
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                  12,887,050   
<CGS>                              9,180,325   
<TOTAL-COSTS>                     11,275,066   
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           0   
<LOSS-PROVISION>                           0   
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                   221,266   
<INCOME-PRETAX>                    1,652,331   
<INCOME-TAX>                         668,000   
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                  984,331   
<DISCONTINUED>                             0   
<EXTRAORDINARY>                            0   
<CHANGES>                                  0   
<NET-INCOME>                         984,331   
<EPS-PRIMARY>                            .23   
<EPS-DILUTED>                            .23   
<FN>
<F1>Information for the period January 1, 1996 to May 10, 1996 relating to
    the Predecessor Partnership is included in the Report on Form 10-KSB but is
    not included in the Financial Data Schedule.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet at September 30, 1996 and the related
Condensed Statement of Consolidated Income for the nine months ended September
30, 1996 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                          64,709
<SECURITIES>                                   164,457
<RECEIVABLES>                                   43,750
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     85,503
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               385,887
<PP&E>                                       1,960,253
<DEPRECIATION>                                 941,446
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,498,211
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          106,160
<BONDS>                                        185,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       146,672
<OTHER-SE>                                     617,255
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,498,211
<SALES>                                        564,696
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               587,983
<CGS>                                          445,043<F1>
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  472,847<F2>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                30,831<F3>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,974
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 76,331
<INCOME-TAX>                                    37,709
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             27,856
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    27,856
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.19
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Includes Production costs and Depreciation, depletion and amortization from
Condensed Statement of Consolidated Income.
<F2>Includes Production costs and Depreciation, depletion and amortization and
Administrative and general expense from Condensed Statement of Consolidated
Income.
<F3>Includes Exploration expense and Other expense from Condensed Statement of
Consolidated Income.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
#### Paul D. Milne, as Administrator, etc., of Charles D. Milne, Deceased, Respondent, v. Margaret C. Gidden, Appellant.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.

All concurred.