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








Certification
of CEO 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 GAMCO Investors, Inc. (the
“Company”) for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Mario J.
Gabelli, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to the best of his 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.








/s/ Mario J.
Gabelli


Name:
Mario J. Gabelli


Title:   Chief
Executive Officer


Date:   May
12, 2008





This
certification accompanies the Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
INDEMNITY AGREEMENT




TO: 




In consideration of your acting, deemed
to be acting or having acted as a director/officer of the Corporation or at the Corporations request as a director and/or officer of a body corporate
of which the Corporation is or was a shareholder or creditor, Lorus Therapeutics Inc. (LORUS)(the Corporation) hereby
undertakes and agrees to indemnify you and your heirs and legal representatives against all costs, charges and expenses, including any amount paid to
settle an action or satisfy a judgment, reasonably incurred by you in respect of any civil, criminal or administrative action or proceeding to which
you are made a party by reason of being or having been a director and/or officer of the Corporation or such body corporate (except in respect of an
action by or on behalf of the Corporation or such body corporate to procure a judgment in its favour), if


|A) |  | You acted honestly and in good faith with a view to the best
interest of the Corporation or such body corporate, as the case may be; and
|-- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|B) |  | In the case of a criminal or administrative action or proceeding
that is enforced by a monetary penalty, you had reasonable grounds for believing that your conduct was lawful.
|-- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



In respect of an action by or on behalf
of the Corporation or such body corporate to procure a judgment in its favour to which you are made a party by reason of being or having been a
director and /or officer of the Corporation or such body corporate, the Corporation hereby undertakes and agrees (subject to obtaining approval of the
court having jurisdiction) to indemnify you and your heirs and legal representatives against all costs, charges and expenses reasonably incurred by you
in connection with any such action if you fulfill the conditions set forth in paragraphs (a) and (b) above.




Notwithstanding anything set forth
herein, the Corporation shall indemnify you and your heirs and legal representatives in respect of all costs, charges and expenses reasonably incurred
by you in connection with the defense of any civil, criminal or administrative or proceeding to which you are made a party by reason of being or having
been a director and/or officer of the Corporation or such body corporate if you have been substantially successful on the merits in your defense of the
action or proceeding and you fulfil the conditions set forth in paragraphs (a) and (b) above.




DATED at Toronto this ________ day of
______, 2006




Lorus Therapeutics
Inc.


|By: | President and
CEO
|--- | -----------------

| |  | 
| |  | -

---
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 43 (Monday, March 6, 1995)]
[Sunshine Act Meetings]
[Page 12283]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-5514]



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

NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION


Notice of Meeting

TIME AND DATE: 1:00 p.m., Friday, March 10, 1995.

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

STATUS: Open.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 

    1. Final Interpretive Ruling and Policy Statement (IRPS) 95-1, 
Supervisory Review Committee.
    2. Establishment of the Position of Ombudsman.

FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: Becky Baker, Secretary of the Board, 
Telephone (703) 518-6304.
Becky Baker,
Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 95-5514 Filed 3-2-95; 12:47 pm]
BILLING CODE 7535-01-M
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

November 13, 2018

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-3831

Cummins Inc:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20. 

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request concerns a product strategically important or related to 

‘‘Made in China 2025’’ or other Chinese industrial programs.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn
**Exhibit 32.1**
 
 **CERTIFICATION**
 
 Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the undersigned officer of Industrial Enterprises of America, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the "Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB/A for the quarter ended March 31, 2004 (the "Form 10-QSB/A") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Form 10-QSB/A 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/A.
 
 
 
 Dated:  January 21, 2005
 
 /s/ Crawford Shaw
 Crawford Shaw, Chief Executive Officer, Chairman of the Board and President
 
 
 
 The foregoing Certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-QSB/A or as a separate disclosure document.
November 1, 2012

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

LYDIA ALCALA-GARCIA AND JANET SOLIS, Appellants

NO. 14-12-00175-CV V.

CITY OF LA MARQUE, TEXAS, Appellee

________________________________

This cause, an appeal from the judgment in favor of appellee, City of La Marque, 

Texas, signed January 20, 2012, was heard on the transcript of the record. We have 

inspected the record and find no error in the judgment. We order the judgment of the 

court below AFFIRMED.

We order appellants, Lydia Alcala-Garcia and Janet Solis, jointly and severally, to 

pay all costs incurred in this appeal. 

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          29,010
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           2,963
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     84,872
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           3,498
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             3,596
<LOANS>                                        451,999
<ALLOWANCE>                                      4,003
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 599,455
<DEPOSITS>                                     371,803
<SHORT-TERM>                                    84,352
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              7,538
<LONG-TERM>                                     72,022
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            70
<OTHER-SE>                                      63,670
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 599,455
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 19,294
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                3,414
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                22,708
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               5,758
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,156
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           12,552
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      715
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   1
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  9,110
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,736
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       4,891
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,891
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.71
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.69
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.71
<LOANS-NON>                                        846
<LOANS-PAST>                                       843
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 3,544
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      316
<RECOVERIES>                                        60
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                4,003
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             4,003
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

March 15, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-3661

SPM Flow Control, Inc. DBA Weir SPM:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20.

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request failed to show that the imposition of additional duties on 

the particular product would cause severe economic harm to you or other U.S. interests.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
**Exhibit
      32.1**


**CERTIFICATION**





Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the undersigned officer of Industrial Enterprises
      of
      America, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to
      such officer’s knowledge, that the Company’s Amendment No. 2 to the quarterly
      report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 (this "Amendment
      No.
      2”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
      applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
      contained in this Amendment No. 2 fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the
      financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of, and for,
      the
      period presented in this Amendment No. 2.





Date: **September
      14, 2006**


By: /s/
      John D. Mazzuto


**John
      D. Mazzuto** ,
      Chief
      Executive Officer







The
      foregoing Certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
      1350 and is not being filed as part of this Amendment No. 2 or as a separate
      disclosure document.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ANTHONY BOGARIN,

Petitioner-Appellant,

 v.

S. HATTON, Warden; XAVIER

BECERRA,

Respondents-Appellees.

No. 21-55693

D.C. No. 

3:16-cv-02793-BTM-MSB

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of California

Barry Ted Moskowitz, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 13, 2023** 

Pasadena, California

Before: CALLAHAN, R. NELSON, and H.A. THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

Anthony Bogarin appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to reopen

the time to file an appeal of the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus

petition challenging his conviction for attempted first degree burglary. We have

FILED

JAN 23 2023

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for abuse of discretion an order

denying a motion to reopen, In re Stein, 197 F.3d 421, 424 (9th Cir. 1999), and we

affirm.

1. The district court denied Bogarin’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

in June 2020. However, Bogarin did not file a timely petition for review. Rather, in

April 2021, Bogarin filed a motion for an extension of time to file an appeal,

claiming that he did not receive notice of the denial until March 2021. Because

there are no exceptions to reopening beyond 180 days from the entry of judgment,

the district court properly concluded that Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure

4(a)(6) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) precluded relief.1See In re Stein,

197 F.3d at 425–26.

2. Bogarin raises one uncertified issue on appeal, arguing that he sent a

letter in September 2019 in response to the magistrate judge’s report and

recommendation, which he asks us to construe as a timely appeal. Even assuming

that Bogarin sent such a letter, a premature appeal of the magistrate judge’s report

and recommendation is not cured by the district court’s subsequent entry of final

judgment. See Serine v. Peterson, 989 F.2d 371, 372–73 (9th Cir. 1993).

Accordingly, we decline to consider this uncertified issue, because Bogarin failed

1

 Bogarin acknowledges that we are bound by In re Stein. 

2
to make the required “substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”

See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); see also Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 483–84

(2000).

AFFIRMED.

3
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN NO. 03-05-00363- CR NO. 03-05-00364- CR Tom m y W ay ne Da vis , A ppe lla nt

v. The State of Texas, App ellee

F ROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF TRAVIS COUNTY , 147TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NOS. D -1-DC -03-20 5225 & D -1-DC -04-30 1944 HO NORAB LE WILF ORD F LOW ERS, JUDGE PRESI DING ME MO R

A ND UMO P I N I O N Mr. J ames R. Smith, appellant’s appointed counse l on appea l, moves to withd raw, citing his rec ent employ

ment by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. The motion is grante d. The appea ls are a

bated a nd the di strict court is order ed to immediately appoint substitut e counse l. A copy of the orde r of a

ppointment shall be delivere d to this C ourt no later tha n August 24, 2005.

__________________________________________ W. Kenneth L aw, Chief Justice Be fore Chief J ustice L aw, Justi ces Patter son and Puryear Filed: August 19, 2005 Do No t Pu

bli sh
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

September 26, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number USTR-2018-0025-11525

Darex, LLC:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20.

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request did not contain a sufficient product identification or was 

determined to be non-administrable.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
```
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 51 (Thursday, March 16, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 14307]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6536]

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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Advisory Panel for Biochemistry & Molecular Structure and 
Function; Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting:

    Name and Committee Code: Advisory Panel for Biochemistry & 
Molecular Structure and Function (#1134).
    Date and Time: Thursday and Friday April 6-7, 1995, 8:30 a.m. to 
5:00 p.m.
    Place: Room 370, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson 
Boulevard, Arlington, VA
    Type of Meeting: Closed.
    Contact Person: Dr. Robert L. Uffen, Program Director and Brenda 
Flam, Program Manager for Metabolic Biochemistry, Division of 
Molecular and Cellular Biosciences, Room 655, National Science 
Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230. Telephone 
(703) 306-1443.
    Purpose of meeting: To provide advice and recommendations 
concerning research proposals submitted to the Metabolic Program of 
the Division of Molecular and Cellular Biosciences at NSF for 
financial support.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate research proposals submitted to 
the Metabolic Biochemistry Program as part of the selection process 
for awards.
    Reason for closing: The proposals being reviewed include 
information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including 
technical information; financial data, such as salaries and personal 
information concerning individuals associated with the proposals. 
These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c) (4) and (6) of the 
Government in the Sunshine Act.

    Dated: March 13, 1995.
M. Rebecca Winkler,
Committee Management Officer.
[Fr Doc. 95-6536 Filed 3-15-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
```
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 53 (Monday, March 20, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 14780]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6739]



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


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Microelectronics and Computer Technology 
Corporation

    Notice is hereby given that, on November 17, 1994, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 14 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Microelectronics and 
Computer Technology Corporation (``MCC'') has filed written 
notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal 
Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The 
notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's 
provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual 
damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, the changes are as 
follows: Abelstik Laboratories; Amoco Production Company; EDEN 
International Corporation; Itasca Systems, Inc.; and Occidental 
Chemical Corporation have not renewed their Associate memberships with 
MCC.
    No other changes have been made in either membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership remains open and MCC 
intends to file additional written notification disclosing all changes 
in membership.
    On December 21, 1984, MCC filed its original notification pursuant 
to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a 
notice in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on 
January 17, 1985 (50 FR 2633).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on July 15, 
1994. A Federal Register notice pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act has 
not yet been published.
Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 95-6739 Filed 3-17-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-M