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

CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Precision Castparts Corp. (the Company) for the fiscal period ended December 28, 2008 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Mark Donegan, Chief Executive 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 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.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: February 6, 2009



|                                                 
|-------------------------------------------------
|                                                 
|/s/ Mark Donegan                                 
|Mark Donegan Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 175 (Tuesday, September 9, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52337-52338]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-20847]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


State Energy Advisory Board

AGENCY: Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable 
Energy.

ACTION: Notice of open teleconference.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces a teleconference of the State Energy 
Advisory Board (STEAB). The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463; 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of these teleconferences 
be announced in the Federal Register.

DATES: September 18, 2008 at 1 p.m. EDT.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Burch, STEAB Designated Federal 
Officer, Acting Assistant Manager, Office of Commercialization and & 
Project Management, Golden Field Office, U.S. Department of Energy, 
1617 Cole Boulevard, Golden, CO 80401, Telephone 303/275-4801.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Purpose of the Board: To make recommendations to the Assistant 
Secretary for the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 
regarding goals and objectives, programmatic and administrative 
policies, and to otherwise carry out the Board's responsibilities as 
designated in the State Energy Efficiency Programs Improvement Act of 
1990 (Pub. L. No. 101-440).
    Tentative Agenda: Update members on routine business matters.
    Public Participation: The teleconference is open to the public. 
Written statements may be filed with

[[Page 52338]]

the Board either before or after the meeting. Members of the public who 
wish to make oral statements pertaining to agenda items should contact 
Gary Burch at the address or telephone number listed above. Requests to 
make oral comments must be received five days prior to the conference 
call; reasonable provision will be made to include requested topic(s) 
on the agenda. The Chair of the Board is empowered to conduct the call 
in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. This 
notice is being published less than 15 days before the date of the 
meeting due to programmatic issues that had to be resolved prior to 
publication.

    Notes: The notes of the teleconference will be available for 
public review and copying within 60 days on the STEAB Web site, 
http://www.steab.org.


    Issued at Washington, DC, on September 4, 2008.
Rachel Samuel,
Deputy Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. E8-20847 Filed 9-8-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
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 the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service 

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Treasury. 

# ACTION:

Notice of Meeting. 

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Taxpayer Assistance Center Committee of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be conducted (via teleconference). The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel (TAP) is soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service. 

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Tuesday, October 28, 2008. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dave Coffman at 1-888-912-1227 or 206-220-6096. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Assistance Center Committee of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be held Tuesday, October 28, 2008, from 9 a.m. Pacific Time to 10:30 a.m. Pacific Time via a telephone conference call. If you would like to have the TAP consider a written statement, please call 1-888-912-1227 or 206-220-6096, or write to Dave Coffman, TAP Office, 915 2nd Avenue, MS W-406, Seattle, WA 98174. Due to limited conference lines, notification of intent to participate in the telephone conference call meeting must be made with Dave Coffman. Mr. Coffman can be reached at 1-888-912-1227 or 206-220-6096, or you can contact us at                     *http://www.improveirs.org*.                 

                    The agenda will include the following:                     *Various IRS issues*.                 

Dated: August 29, 2008. 

Roy L. Block, 

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

[FR Doc. E8-20940 Filed 9-9-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM THE
BALANCE  SHEET OF  PENN-PACIFIC  CORPORATION  AS OF  DECEMBER  31,  1997 AND THE
RELATED  STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND CASH FLOWS FOR THE THREE MONTHS THEN ENDED
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                         0
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          15
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       95
<OTHER-SE>                                     (110)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   0
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               1
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0


</TABLE>
216 La. 71

#### SAVIN v. SAVIN.

No. 39352.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 7, 1949.

C. A. Blanchard, Donaldsonville, for plaintiff & appellant.

Knowles M. Tucker, New Iberia, for defendant & appellee.

HAWTHORNE, Justice.

Plaintiff-appellant, Dennis Savin, prior to the fixing or hearing of this case on its merits in this court, filed a motion to remand on the ground of newly discovered evidence which he alleges is material to the issues of the suit.

Under the law and the well established jurisprudence of this state, the motion at this time is premature. Code of Practice, Article 906; Louisiana Ice Manufacturing Co. v. City of New Orleans et al., 1891, 43 La.Ann. 217, 9 So. 21; L. A. Frey & Sons, Inc., v. Town of Slidell et al., 1927, 173 La. 397, 137 So. 193; Mayer v. Barrow et al., 1935, 182 La. 983, 162 So. 748; Alexander v. Jackson, 1940, 195 La. 446, 197 So. 137.

Article 906 of the Code of Practice provides that we may remand a cause to the lower court if we are of the opinion that it is not possible to pronounce definitively on the cause *in the state in which it is,*either because the parties have failed to adduce the necessary testimony, or because the inferior court refused to receive it, or otherwise.

Prior to the submission of this case on its merits, we cannot determine whether it is possible to pronounce definitively on the cause in the state in which it is. In the *222early case of Louisiana Ice Manufacturing Co. v. City of New Orleans et al., supra [43 La.Ann. 217, 9 So. 22], this court in considering a motion to remand under the authority of Article 906 of the Code of Practice said: “We consider it a condition precedent to the exercise of such authority that we should first determine that it is ‘not possible to pronounce definitively on the cause in the state in which it is,’— meaning, of course, by ‘definitively a judgment according to conscience and the requirements of justice. It is plain that we cannot determine this question without first examining into the merits of the cause Sj< * *»*

This principle of law has been recognized in each of the other cases cited above.

For the reasons assigned, it is ordered that the application to remand be, at the present time, denied, and that the subject matter be referred to the merits of the cause, to be considered and determined when the case is heard and submitted on the merits.
#### LEVY v. STEPHENS.

No. 7330.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Second Circuit.

June 30, 1949.

James W. Jones, Jr., Natchitoches, for appellant.

Russell E. Gahagan, Natchitoches, for appellee.

TALIAFERRO, Judge.

Plaintiff sued out a rule on E. J. Stephens to show cause, if any he had, why the cost *243incurred in the suit by her against him on the docket of the Tenth District Court in and for Natchitoches Parish, and decided on appeal to this court the 28th day of June, 1948, as per opinion and decree reported in 36 So.2d 44, should not be fixed at the sum of $214.79, and he be ordered to pay the same. The proceeding is predicated entirely upon the premise that the judgment of this court decreed that Stephens should pay all of the costs of the original suit.

The original suit began as a possessory action but was converted into a petitory action and Stephens called in warranty James W. Jones, Jr., St. Denis Securities Company, Inc. and the Rio Hondo Land Company, Inc.

The defendant herein filed several exceptions to the rule, including that of no right of action, all of which were overruled. The case was tried on its merits after the filing of answer by Stephens and there was judgment in keeping with the prayer of the petition for the rule. Stephens appealed.

On the face of the record the judgment appealed from is patently incorrect. The decree of this court above referred to and cited did not cast Stephens for any part of the cost of the suit, and, this being true, he cannot be held responsible for the payment of any portion thereof. Said judgment cast the warrantors for all of the court costs and to them should plaintiff look for reimbursement thereof.

For the reasons herein assigned, the judgment from which appealed is reversed, the exception of no right of action is sustained, and this proceeding is dismissed at appellee’s cost.
EXHIBIT 99

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002



In connection with the annual report of the
Pittsburgh & West Virginia Railroad (the Trust) on
Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2008
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the "Report"), We, Herbert E.
Jones, Jr., Chairman of the Board of Trustees,
Herbert E. Jones, III, President of the Trust,
and Robert R. McCoy, Vice President, Secretary
and Treasurer, certify, to the best of our
knowledge, 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 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 Trust.


/s/ Herbert E. Jones, Jr.
Herbert E. Jones, Jr.
Chairman of the Board and Trustee

Date:  April 7, 2009



/s/ Herbert E. Jones, III
Herbert E. Jones, III
President


Date:  April 7, 2009


/s/ Robert R. McCoy
Robert R. McCoy
Vice President, Secretary and Treasurer

Date:  April 7, 2009
#### SILVER FLEET OF MEMPHIS, Inc., et al. v. HESTER TRUCK LINES, Inc.

No. 1835.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

April 7, 1938.

*452Porteous, Johnson & Humphrey, of New Orleans, for appellants.

Ponder & Ponder, of Amite, for appel-lee.

OTT, Judge.

This suit has as its object the annulment of the judgment rendered in favor of the defendant, Hester Truck Lines, Inc., against the plaintiff, Silver Fleet of Memphis, Inc., and its insurance carrier, Central Surety & Insurance Corporation, for damages on account of the collision between a Silver Fleet truck and a truck of defendant, Hester Truck Lines, Inc., in the early morning of December 29, 1936.

The judgment is sought to be annulled on the ground that a witness for the present defendant, plaintiff in the other suit, made a statement after the trial of the case in which he repudiated his testimony. This statement was unsigned and unsworn to by the witness, and, on the trial of- this suit to annul, the witness reaffirmed his previous sworn testimony, explaining that when he made the contradictory statement he was under the influence of liquor.

As was stated in the opinion in the companion case of Grady Rogers versus the plaintiffs in this suit, 180 So. 445, this day decided, there was ample evidence in the record to justify an affirmance of the judgment against plaintiffs after disregarding the -evidence of this witness entirely. Our affirmance this day of the judgment in favor of the present defendant against the plaintiffs carries with it as a necessary result the affirmance of the judgment in this case wherein the former judgment is sought to be annulled.

For the reasons assigned, and for the reasons given in the case of Grady Rogers versus the plaintiffs herein, 180 So. 445 this day decided; the judgment appealed from is affirmed,,at the cost of the appellants.
**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 Annual Report of SRKP 10, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
      10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Anthony C.
      Pintsopoulos, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to
      ss. 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) 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/
                      Anthony C. PintsopoulosAnthony
                            C. Pintsopoulos
                          Principal
                            Financial Officer
                          March
                            14, 2007
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER ON M OTION TO D ISMISS

Appellate case name: Jordan D. Houghtaling V. Nichol A. Houghtaling

Appellate case number: 01

- 13

- 00 547

- CV

Trial court case number: 2012

- 38612

Trial court: 310t h District Court of Harris County

Date motion filed: December 3, 2013 (Amended, March 24, 2014)

Party filing motion s : Appellee

It is ordered that the appellee’s motion to dismiss is DENIED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Michael Massengale________________

_______ Acting for the Court

Panel consists of: Justices Jennings, Bland, and Massengale

Date: June 26, 2014
exv10w15



 








Exhibit 10.15 Arrangement Regarding Retirement Benefits for Robert A. Armitage



Since Mr. Armitage will not be eligible to receive a retirement benefit from The Lilly Retirement
Plan at age 60, Lilly has agreed to offer him a special retirement benefit, provided that he works
at Lilly until age 60. The benefit will be calculated using the Retirement Plan benefit formula
that yields the highest payment based on his actual years of service and age at the time he leaves
Lilly, but at a minimum will provide an annual benefit of $75,000. Should he continue to work at Lilly until he is eligible to receive a retirement benefit
under the Retirement Plan, he will receive a benefit from such plan in lieu of the benefit
described above at the time of his retirement.
EXHIBIT 31.1
                                  CERTIFICATION

I, John V. Winfield, certify that:

1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Portsmouth
Square, Inc.;

2.  Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to
make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such
statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by
this quarterly report;

3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects
the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

4.  The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

    a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;

    b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

    c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most
recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely
to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial
reporting; and

5.  The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,
to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing equivalent functions):

    a) all significant deficiencies and material weakness in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

    b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.

Date: February 13, 2004                      /s/ John V. Winfield
                                              ---------------------------
                                              John V. Winfield, President
                                              and Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 10.18




Exhibit
10.18







THIRD
AMENDMENT TO




M/I
HOMES, INC.




DIRECTOR
DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN







WHEREAS,
M/I Homes, Inc. (“Company”) adopted the M/I Homes, Inc. Director Deferred
Compensation Plan (“Plan”) to provide its Directors with an opportunity to defer
all or a portion of their Eligible Compensation and to invest in the Company’s
Common Shares;




WHEREAS,
the Company also retained in Section 10 of the Plan the right to amend the Plan
at any time;




NOW,
THEREFORE, effective January 1, 2005:





	 	
      1.
	
      Plan
      Section 4.B is amended by deleting the first sentence thereof and by
      substituting the following therefor:








	 	
      
	
      With
      respect to each Plan Year, a Participant may elect to have a percentage of
      his Eligible Compensation which is to be paid to him by the Company, for
      the Plan Year in question, allocated to his Deferred Compensation Account
      and paid on a deferred basis pursuant to the terms of the Plan.
      







IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Amendment to be executed by a duly
authorized officer.




M/I
HOMES, INC.



By:__________________________________







_____________________________________

                 
Name (Please Print)







Title:_________________________________