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

Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, J. Russell Porter,
Chief Executive Officer of Gastar Exploration, Ltd. (the Company), hereby certify that the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005 (the Report), filed by the Company with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 fully complies with the requirements of that section.

I further certify that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.

Date: March 31, 2006



/s/ J. RUSSELL PORTERJ. Russell PorterChief Executive Officer
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Honorable Marcia S. Krieger

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02682-MSK-BNB

CHERYL HANEY,

Plaintiff,

v.

AMCO INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendant.

ORDER REMANDING CASE

THIS MATTER comes before the Court sua sponte.

The Plaintiff commenced this action in the Denver District Court. The Defendant has

sought removal based upon diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.§ 1332. The Court has

reviewed the Complaint, the Notice of Removal, and, if referred to, the Colorado Civil Cover

Sheet. The Plaintiff, who was injured in an auto accident, seeks to recover against her own auto

insurance policy for sums that she was not able to recover from her settlement with the driver

who was at fault. The amount in controversy is the difference between her loss and amount she

recovered from the at-fault driver, which the Plaintiff claims is now owed to her under the

uninsured/underinsured provisions of her own policy . The Complaint quantifies this amount as

$25,498.80 in economic damages but does not quantify any other request. The Notice of

Removal sets forth only the limits of coverage ($300,000) in Plaintiff's policy. Although such

policy limits could set a ceiling of recovery on a breach of contract claim, it does quantify the

amount in controversy. The Civil Cover sheet is insufficient to establish the amount in

Case 1:11-cv-02682-MSK Document 3 Filed 10/18/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
controversy.

Consistent with the reasoning in Baker v. Sears Holding Corp., 557 F. Supp. 2d 1208 (D.

Colo. 2007) and Klein v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Companies, D. Colo. Case No. 08-cv02257-MSK, 2008 WL 4948775 (Nov. 18, 2008), the Court finds that the Defendant(s) have not

shown specific facts, which if true, would demonstrate that the amount in controversy is at least

$75,000. 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) this action is

REMANDED to the District Court from which it was removed.

DATED this 18th day of October, 2011.

BY THE COURT:

Marcia S. Krieger

United States District Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02682-MSK Document 3 Filed 10/18/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Senior District Judge Richard P. Matsch

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02677-RPM

FRED KAFER,

Plaintiff,

v.

ALLSTATE FIRE AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendant. 

 

ORDER SETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE

 

Pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 16, it is

ORDERED that a scheduling conference will be held on September 19, 2012, at 2:30 p.m.

in the Conference Room, Second Floor, the Byron White United States Courthouse, 1823 Stout

Street, Denver, Colorado. Counsel are directed to comply with the Instructions for Preparation of

Scheduling Order which may be found at http://www.cod.uscourts.gov/judges/judges.aspx

(Senior Judge Richard P. Matsch Procedures) and use the format provided with those instructions

(Rev. 11/11). The proposed order (original only) on paper, shall be submitted directly to chambers

by 4:00 p.m. on September 13, 2012. The conference is conducted with lead counsel present in

person. No parties or representatives of parties will be permitted to attend. 

Dated: August 9th, 2012

BY THE COURT:

s/Richard P. Matsch

________________________________

Richard P. Matsch, Senior District Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02677-RPM Document 15 Filed 08/09/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
213 La. 290

#### MOSER v. MOSER.

No. 38829.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 16, 1948.

Rehearing Denied March 22, 1948.

Andrew H. Thalheim, of Gretna, for appellant.

Waverly A. Henning, of New Orleans, for appellee.

BOND, Justice.

This case is before us for consideration of defendant’s motion to dismiss that part of the appeal taken by plaintiff from the judgment of the district court decreeing a divorce between him and the defendant.

The plaintiff brought this action for divorce on the ground of two years separation. In his petition he prayed for a judgment decreeing a divorce between him and the defendant and for the permanent custody of their minor child. The defendant reconvened, praying for the permanent custody of the child, for alimony for herself and the child, and for a partition of the community property. There was judgment in the lower court in favor of the plaintiff decreeing a divorce between him and the defendant, but granting the defendant custody of the child and alimony for her own and the child’s support, and enjoining the plaintiff from alienating the community property. The plaintiff appealed. The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the appeal insofar as it relates to the decree of divorce in favor of the plaintiff.

The plaintiff has no right to appeal from that portion of the judgment which gives him the relief prayed for in his petition i. e., a judgment of divorce between him and the defendant. State ex rel. John T. Moore Planting Co., Ltd., v. Howell, 139 La. 336, 71 So. 529; White v. Hill, 168 La. 92, 121 So. 585. He should not be allowed to persist in his appeal from the divorce decree and thereby delay the defendant iii exercising her right to have the community property partitioned.

For the reasons assigned, the appeal, insofar as it relates to the judgment of divorce, is dismissed at plaintiff’s cost.

O’NEILL, C. J., absent.
| Skip to Content*Release Date: September 17, 2007*Release dates |  Coded tables |  Historical dataCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB)**F.126 Issuers of Asset-Backed Securities ABS** |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.2

LaSalle Bank, N.A.

________________________________________________________________________________
                                                                   LASALLE BANKS

135 South LaSalle Street
Chicago, Illinois 60603
(312) 904-8101
FAX: (312)904-4364

David E. Heise
Assistant vice President

                                                                  March 30, 2000



Mr. Richard P. Brandstatter
Vice President - Finance
Heartland Technology, Inc.
547 W. Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, IL 60661

Re:  Covenant Waiver for Solder Station One, Inc. for December 31, 1999
Violation

Dear Rick:

Please be advised that LaSalle Bank National Association ("LBNA") has received
your covenant waiver request letter dated March 22, 2000.  LBNA hereby grants
Solder Station One, Inc.'s waiver request as it pertains to sections
11.2(f)(ii), 11.2(f)(iii), and 11.2(f)(iv) of the Loan Agreement.  All other
conditions remain changed and in full force and effect.

This waiver applies to the covenant violations that occurred solely for the
period ended 12/31/99 and its effective through January 1, 2001.

Sincerely,

LASALLE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION



By: /s/ David E. Heise
    ------------------
        David E. Heise
**Exhibit 99.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, Peter H. Jackson,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted underSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Reportof Intraware, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended May 31,2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such QuarterlyReport on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financialcondition and results of operations of Intraware, Inc.

 

Dated: July 15, 2003

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

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided toIntraware, Inc. and will be retained by Intraware, Inc. and furnishedto the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

I, Wendy A. Nieto, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted under Section 906 ofthe Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report ofIntraware, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended May 31,2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in suchQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects thefinancial condition and results of operations of Intraware, Inc.

 

Dated: July 15, 2003

 
|   | /s/ WENDY A. NIETO                                                                                                 |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                                                               |
|   | Wendy A. Nieto                                                                                                     |
|   | *Chief  Financial Officer and Senior Vice  President of Finance of Intraware, Inc.  (Principal Financial Officer)* |
|   |                                                                                                               |

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided toIntraware, Inc. and will be retained by Intraware, Inc. and furnishedto the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
Exhibit 32.1

TAYLOR CAPITAL GROUP, INC.

Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906

of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Taylor Capital Group, Inc. (the Company) hereby certify
that:

(i) the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of the Company for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2007 (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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



|                      |  |                        
|--------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Dated: August 8, 2007 |  | /s/ BRUCE W. TAYLOR    
|                      |  | Bruce W. Taylor        
|                      |  | Chief Executive Officer
|                      | 
|Dated: August 8, 2007 |  | /s/ ROBIN VANCASTLE    
|                      |  | Robin VanCastle        
|                      |  | Chief Financial Officer
Case 1:11-cv-02686-BNB Document 3 Filed 10/24/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 3
Case 1:11-cv-02686-BNB Document 3 Filed 10/24/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 3
Case 1:11-cv-02686-BNB Document 3 Filed 10/24/11 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 3
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1585 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1585

 To designate the Department of Veterans Affairs Outpatient Clinic in 
   Tulsa, Oklahoma, as the ``Ernest Childers Department of Veterans 
                      Affairs Outpatient Clinic''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 11, 2007

Mr. Inhofe (for himself and Mr. Coburn) introduced the following bill; 
which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the Department of Veterans Affairs Outpatient Clinic in 
   Tulsa, Oklahoma, as the ``Ernest Childers Department of Veterans 
                      Affairs Outpatient Clinic''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF ERNEST CHILDERS DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS 
              AFFAIRS OUTPATIENT CLINIC.

    (a) Designation.--The Department of Veterans Affairs Outpatient 
Clinic in Tulsa, Oklahoma, shall be known and designated as the 
``Ernest Childers Department of Veterans Affairs Outpatient Clinic''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in any law, regulation, map, 
document, record, or other paper of the United States to the outpatient 
clinic referred to in subsection (a) shall be considered to be a 
reference to the ``Ernest Childers Department of Veterans Affairs 
Outpatient Clinic''.
                                 <all>
```
# U3-/r ELECTRONIC RECORD COA # 01-13-00660-CR 

## OFFENSE: 19.02 (Murder) Treyvon Raymond Williams v. The 

### STYLE: stateof Texas COUNTY: Fort Bend COA DISPOSITION: AFFIRM TRIAL COURT: 400th District Court DATE: 12/16/2014 Publish: NO TC CASE #: 12-DCR-60402



### IN THE COURT OF CRIMINALAPPEALS Treyvon Raymond Williams v. The 

### STYLE: State of Texas 

# APPBLLAMT^S Petition FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS: 

# 'j&ru&g> 

# DATE: QljjnijS-Oiy JUDGE: CCA#: 

# US-IS litAU 4*AfiMr-. CCADisposition: DATE: JUDGE: SIGNED: PUBLISH:
REHEARING IN CCA IS: JUDGE: PC:_ DNP:

MOTION FOR
ELECTRONIC RECORD
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1325 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1325

  To amend the Act of July 3, 1890, to provide for the granting to a 
  State of a parcel of land for use as an agricultural college and to 
          proscribe the use of earnings and proceeds thereof.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 8, 2007

 Mr. Crapo (for himself and Mr. Craig) introduced the following bill; 
     which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, 
                     Education, Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Act of July 3, 1890, to provide for the granting to a 
  State of a parcel of land for use as an agricultural college and to 
          proscribe the use of earnings and proceeds thereof.

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

SECTION 1. AGRICULTURAL COLLEGE LAND GRANT.

    (a) In General.--Section 10 of the Act of July 3, 1890 (26 Stat. 
215, chapter 656) is amended to read as follows:

``SEC. 10. AGRICULTURAL COLLEGE LAND GRANT.

    ``(a) In General.--A quantity of land equaling 90,000 acres, to be 
selected and located in accordance with section 4, is granted to said 
State to use for, and in support of, an agricultural college in said 
State, as provided in the Acts of Congress making donations for land 
for those purposes.
    ``(b) Exception.--Notwithstanding sections 3 through 5 of the Act 
of July 2, 1862 (commonly known as the `First Morrill Act') (7 U.S.C. 
303 et seq.), the State of Idaho may--
            ``(1) invest and manage earnings and proceeds derived from 
        land granted to the State of Idaho pursuant to subsection (a), 
        in accordance with the standards applicable to a trustee under 
        Idaho law;
            ``(2) deduct from earnings and proceeds generated from 
        granted land any expenses that a trustee is authorized to 
        deduct pursuant to Idaho law; and
            ``(3) use earnings and proceeds generated by the granted 
        land for any uses and purposes described in that Act (7 U.S.C. 
        301 et seq.) without regard to the limitations set out in 
        section 5 of that Act (7 U.S.C. 305) that prohibit the State 
        from exceeding 10 per centum on the purchase of land and 
        prohibit the State from purchasing, erecting, preserving, or 
        repairing of any building or buildings.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
take effect on October 27, 1998.
                                 <all>
```
| Skip to Content*Release Date: June 7, 2007*Release dates |  Coded tables |  Historical dataCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB)**F.221 Farm Mortgages1** |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Judge Christine M. Arguello

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02740-CMA-MEH

LORI MONK,

Plaintiff,

v.

BRYON BELLERUD, II,

Defendant.

_____________________________________________________________________

AMENDED ORDER FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT

_____________________________________________________________________

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment on Clerk’s

Default (Doc. # 11), filed January 27, 2012. The Court, having fully considered the

merits of Plaintiff’s Motion, and for good cause shown, FINDS:

1. The Court has personal jurisdiction over all the parties.

2. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action.

3. Clerk’s Default was entered on December 5, 2011.

It is therefore

ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment on Clerk’s Default is GRANTED. 

Default Judgment shall enter in favor of Plaintiff Lori Monk and against Defendant Bryon

Bellerud II as follows:

1. Plaintiff Lori Monk shall recover from Defendant Bryon Bellerud II

$1,000.00 in statutory damages. 

Case 1:11-cv-02740-CMA-MEH Document 17 Filed 01/31/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

2. Plaintiff Lori Monk shall recover from Defendant Bryon Bellerud II

$2,995.00 in attorney’s fees.

3. Plaintiff Lori Monk shall recover from Defendant Bryon Bellerud II $380.00

in costs.

DATED January 31, 2012

BY THE COURT:

_______________________________

CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO

United States District Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02740-CMA-MEH Document 17 Filed 01/31/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 12.1

CERTIFICATION

I,
Anders Igel, certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of TeliaSonera AB;

2.     Based
on my knowledge, this 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 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 company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.     The
company's other certifying officer 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 company and have:



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



|April 7, 2005 |  | By: | /s/ANDERS IGELAnders Igel
President and Chief Executive Officer
|------------- |  | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------

---



QuickLinks
Exhibit 99.1
------------


                    Certification Pursuant to 18 USC ss.1350,
      as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


In connection  with the Quarterly  Report of Safe  Alternatives  Corporation  of
America,  Inc. (Company) on Form 10-QSB (Report) for the quarter ended March 31,
2003, as filed with the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof.
I, Richard J. Fricke,  Chief  Executive  and  Financial  Officer of the Company,
certify to the best of my knowledge,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to ss. 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.


/s/ Richard J. Fricke
---------------------
Richard J. Fricke
Chief Executive and
Chief Financial Officer


Dated: May 9, 2003
       -----------
#### KUSSNER v. MULTHEI LODGE, Inc.

Supreme Court of Florida.

January Term 1954.

Certiorari denied without opinion.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Judge William J. Martínez 

Criminal Case No. 11-cr-00376-WJM

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

1. EXECUTIVE RECYCLING, INC.,

2. BRANDON RICHTER, and

3. TOR OLSON,

Defendants.

 

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO RELEASE BLIND RECORDS TO 

COUNSEL FOR BRANDON RICHTER

 

 

During trial, counsel for Defendant Brandon Richter submitted to the Court Blind

Records #1 and #2. (ECF No. 266.) The Court ordered that these Records be kept in

the custody of the Clerk and that these Records should be confidential unless and until

an appeal was filed. (Id.) Defendant Brandon Richter has appealed his conviction and

this case is currently pending before the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals. (ECF No.

403.) 

On October 31, 2013, the Tenth Circuit ordered Brandon Richter to provide four

copies of the ex parte documents that were submitted during trial. (ECF No. 508.) To

permit Mr. Richter to comply with this request, the Court hereby ORDERS that Blind

Records #1 and #2 shall be RELEASED to Mr. Richter and/or his counsel. Counsel

may make whatever reproductions necessary to comply with the Tenth Circuit’s order. 

Case 1:11-cr-00376-WJM Document 510 Filed 11/06/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

The Court further ORDERS that Mr. Richter shall RETURN Blind Records #1

and #2 to the Clerk of this Court no later than November 20, 2013. 

Dated this 6 day of November, 2013. th

BY THE COURT:

 

William J. Martínez 

United States District Judge

Case 1:11-cr-00376-WJM Document 510 Filed 11/06/13 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
#### Bessie Mae DUNN et al. v. GULF STATES UTILITIES CO.

No. 2938.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

Nov. 21, 1947.

Brumfield & Hebert, of Baton Rouge, and W. T. Bennett, of Clinton, for appellant.

Taylor, Porter, Brooks & Fuller, of Baton Rouge, for appellee.

OTT, Judge.

For the reasons assigned in the opinion' in the consolidated cases of Welsh v. Gulf States Utilities Company and Dunn et al. v. Gulf States Utilities Company, La.App., 32 So.2d 723 this day handed down, the judgment appealed from in the above entitled case is hereby affirmed.