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

                            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 amended annual report of North Coast Partners,  Inc.
(the  "Company") on Form 10-KSB/A-1 for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, Wong Peck  Ling,  President  and Chief  Financial  Officer,  of the  Company,
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

     (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 result of  operations of the
Company.



Dated:  June 30, 2004                      /s/ Wong Peck Ling
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Wong Peck Ling,
                                           President and Chief Financial Officer
                                           (Principal Executive, Financial and
                                           Accounting Officer)
AMENDED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT



THIS AMENDED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT is made this 10th day of March 2005 (the Agreement), between Chemokine Therapeutics Corp. a Delaware Corporation and its wholly owned subsidiary Chemokine Therapeutics (B.C.) Corp. a B.C. Corporation (collectively the Company), and David Karp (the Employee or the Executive).



RECITALS



A.

The Executive entered into an Employment Agreement with the Company on May 14, 2004 (the Employment Agreement).



B.

The Board of Directors have approved a salary increase for the Executive to a rate of CDN$170,000 per year, effective April 1st, 2005.



C.

The Board of Directors have approved an increase of the termination provisions of the Executives Employment Agreement.



AGREEMENT



NOW, THEREFORE,in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, and other good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency and receipt of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:



1.

Provision 2.0 Compensation.    The Company agrees to pay Executive a Base Salary of One Hundred and Seventy Thousand Dollars (CDN$170,000) per year until the termination of this Agreement.

2.

Provision 6.3(b) Termination is replaced with:    The Company may terminate Executives engagement under this Agreement without cause and without advance notice; provided, however, that Company will pay the Executive the amount equal to six (6) months of the Executives Total Compensation (where Total Compensation is equal to the Executives Base Salary and the most recent annual Bonus, if any)  In addition, the Company will pay an amount equal to two (2) weeks of Total Compensation for each year of service with the Company, prorated to the extent that a year of service is incomplete, provided that the total amount of notice or notice hereunder does not exceed nine (9) months.  In addition, all stock options grants to Executive, if any, granted pursuant to any stock option agreement will become immediately vested and exercisable.



3.

All other provisions within the Employment Agreement will remain in force.



IN THE WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties have duly signed and delivered this Agreement as of the day and year first above written.



COMPANY



CHEMOKINE THERAPEUTICS CORP.



/s/ C. Richard Piazza

_______________________________

On behalf of the Board of Directors

Name: Richard Piazza, Director, Chair of Executive Compensation Committee





EXECUTIVE (Employee)



/s/ David Karp

_______________________________

David Karp

Director of Finance, Chief Financial Officer and Corporate Secretary

1
# NASA, Japan Sign Agreement for Artemis Pressurized Rover

Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) astronaut Koichi Wakata, left, Japan’s Minister of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology Masahito Moriyama, JAXA President Hiroshi Yamakawa, NASA Administrator Bill Nelson, and NASA astronaut Kayla Barron, right, talk by a model of the Pressurized lunar rover, after the signing of an historic agreement between the United States and Japan to advance sustainable human exploration of the Moon, Tuesday, April 9, 2024, at the NASA Headquarters Mary W. Jackson Building in Washington. 

                    -  Facebook PinterestX
-  LinkedIn Emailhttps://www.nasa.gov/image-detail/53645784960-2e87b72383-k/Copy URL to clipboard>DownloadShareImage CreditNASA/Bill IngallsSize2048x1309pxNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
NASA explores the unknown in air and space, innovates for the benefit of humanity, and inspires the world through discovery.
- About NASA's Mission
Join Us- Home
- News & Events
- Multimedia
- NASA+
- Missions
- Humans in Space
- Earth & Climate
- The Solar System
- The Universe
- Science
- Aeronautics
- Technology
- Learning Resources
- About NASA
- NASA en Español
Follow NASA-   
-   
-   
-   
- More NASA Social Accounts
- NASA Newsletters
- Sitemap
- For Media
- Privacy Policy
- FOIA
- No FEAR Act
- Office of the IGBudget & Annual Reports
Agency Financial Reports
Contact NASA
Accessibility
-  									Page Last Updated:								  								Apr 10, 2024								 
-  									Page Editor:								  									Dacia Massengill								 
-  								Responsible NASA Official:							  								Abigail Bowman
#### Barbara HOOVER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Dolores LINDSEY; et al., Defendants, Dolores LINDSEY; Friends of WWOZ, Inc., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 03-30208.

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Aug. 26, 2003.

Barbara Hoover, New Orleans, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Frederic Theodore Le Clercq, Deutsch, Kerrigan & Stiles, New Orleans, LA, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

*372PER CURIAM.*

Barbara Hoover has moved for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis*(IFP) and for preparation of hearing transcripts at government expense, relative to her appeal of a judgment for the defendants in this employment-discrimination and civil-rights action. In her action, Hoover challenged the termination of her employment by WWOZ, a New Orleans not-for-profit radio station, as an underwriter who sold airtime and as an on-air host. Also made a defendant was appellee Dolores Lindsey, who was WWOZ’s underwriting manager.

The district court dismissed the following claims alleged by Hoover: (1) sex discrimination claims against WWOZ and Lindsey; (2) a race discrimination claim against Lindsey; (3) an age discrimination claim against Lindsey; (4) Fourteenth Amendment equal protection claims against WWOZ and Lindsey; (5) 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims against both, for mail fraud and/or tampering; and (6) claims against both under the Equal pay Act, 29 U.S.C. § 206(d). After a hearing, the court dismissed Hoover’s remaining race and age discrimination claims against WWOZ, on grounds that the court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. *See Greenlees v. Eidenmuller Enterprises, Inc.,*32 F.3d 197, 198— 99 (5th Cir.1994).

To be entitled to proceed IFP in this court, Hoover must show that she is a pauper and that she will present a non-frivolous issue on appeal. *See Carson v. Polley,*689 F.2d 562, 586 (5th Cir.1982). Although it appears that Hoover is financially eligible to proceed IFP, she has not identified a nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Nor has she set forth factual allegations and legal arguments to demonstrate that she will raise nonfrivolous issues on appeal. Accordingly, Hoover’s IFP motion is DENIED.

Hoover is not entitled to transcripts at government expense because she has not been granted leave to proceed IFP and she has not shown why she needs the transcript. *See*28 U.S.C. § 753(f); *Harvey v. Andrist,*754 F.2d 569, 571 (5th Cir.1985). Accordingly, her motion for transcripts at government expense is DENIED.

Because we have concluded on this review that the appeal is frivolous, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the appeal is DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

MOTIONS DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
No. 77.

#### Francis Kelly, plaintiff in error, *vs.*The State of Georgia, defendant in error.

[1.] The fact that the Judge reprimanded a Jury taken from the same list, for their misconduct in acquitting the same defendant in another case, is no ground of erorr, in a subsequent trial, there being no exception to the ' pannel on that account.

[2.] In selecting a Jury from the two panels, the defendant is entitled to seven, and the State five strikes : and they should alternate, the defendant-beginning and ending the strikes.

[3.] It is the privilege of Counsel and the duty of Courts, to propound such' questions to reluctant witnesses, as will strip them of the subterfuges to which they resort to evade telling the truth.

Misdemeanor, in Bibb Superior Court. Tried before Judge Powers, June Term, 1855..

This indictment was for keeping an open tippling house om the Sabbath day.

One of the witnesses stated, that he could not say there-was spiritous liquor in the decanters, &c. in the shop, as he had never tasted any in that house. The Judge asked him if he could not say there were spirituous liquors in the Lanier Plouse bar. This question was objected to as irrelevant, and made a ground for a new trial.

Another ground for a new trial was, that the Judge had. lectured a portion of the Jury for a verdict of acquittal, rendered on another indictment, against the same defendant. No objection was made to these Jurors.

Another ground was, that only one witness proved the•offence, and he was successfully impeached, and not sustained-The Court refused a new trial, and defendant excepted.

Lamar & Lochrane, for plaintiff in error.

Sol. Geni. DeGraeeenreid, for defendant.

*426*By the Court.*

Lumpkin, J.

delivering the opinion.

We see no error in this record. Whether the house where-the liquor is charged to have been sold, was a tippling house, and whether the defendant kept it open on the Sabbath, are-questions of fact, which were submitted to the Jury and' passed upon by them. And we think there was sufficient ■ evidence upon both points to sustain the verdict.

[1.] What Judge Powers may have said to the Jury in another case, we do not think is properly the subject of review in this. No exception was taken to- the panel on that account.

[2.] As to the mode of striking the Jury, the usual and; better practice is, to let the defendant and the State alternate, the defendant beginning and ending. This will give the defendant seven strikes, and the State five, the number allowed: by law to each.

[3.] The witness, Adderhold, was evidently disposed to stick in the back, to say the least of it. The Court saw this. And' to extract the truth, inquired of him, if he had ever been in the bar of the Lanier House, and whether he did not know that there was liquor there in the bottles, although he did not drink of it ? Thus pressed, he defended h'is position, by explaining what he meant to say. It is the privilege of Counsel, and the duty of Courts, to strip reluctant witnesses of these miserable subterfuges to conceal the truth.
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 Agriculture

###### Forest Service

# AGENCY:

Forest Service, USDA.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

The Prince of Wales Resource Advisory Committee will meet in Craig, Alaska, November 5, 2010. The purpose of this meeting is to discuss potential projects under the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2008. 

# DATES:

The meeting will be held November 5, 2010 from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.

# ADDRESSES:

                        The meeting will be held at the Craig Ranger District 504 9th Street, Craig, Alaska. Send written comments to Prince of Wales Resource Advisory Committee, c/o District Ranger, USDA Forest Service, P.O. Box 500, Craig, AK 99921, or electronically to Rebecca Sakraida, RAC Coordinator at                         *rsakraida@fs.fed.us.*

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Rebecca Sakraida, RAC Coordinator Craig Ranger District, Tongass National Forest, (907) 826-1601.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The meeting is open to the public.                           ( print page 65448)                        Committee discussion is limited to Forest Service staff and Committee members. However, public input opportunity will be provided and individuals will have the opportunity to address the Committee at that time.                

Dated: October 15, 2010.

Jason C. Anderson,

District Ranger.

[FR Doc. 2010-26892 Filed 10-22-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-P
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. WILLIAM CHASMER.

April 28, 1987.

Petition for certification denied.
# Astronaut Loral O’Hara shows off spacewalking tools

iss070e002159_alt (Sept. 30, 2023) --- NASA astronaut and Expedition 70 Flight Engineer Loral O'Hara shows off grease guns that will be used during an upcoming spacewalk at the International Space Station.

Read More

                    -  Facebook PinterestX
-  LinkedIn Emailhttps://www.nasa.gov/image-detail/gmt278_19_20__1055_loral-preparing-for-the-upcoming-eva/Copy URL to clipboard>DownloadShareTags- International Space Station
TakenOctober 5, 2023Image CreditNASASize5568x3712pxThe National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NASA explores the unknown in air and space, innovates for the benefit of humanity, and inspires the world through discovery.
- About NASA's Mission
Join Us- Home
- News & Events
- Multimedia
- NASA+
- Missions
- Humans in Space
- Earth & Climate
- The Solar System
- The Universe
- Science
- Aeronautics
- Technology
- Learning Resources
- About NASA
- NASA en Español
Follow NASA-   
-   
-   
-   
- 
- More NASA Social Accounts
- NASA Newsletters
- Sitemap
- For Media
- Privacy Policy
- FOIA
- No FEAR Act
- Office of the IGBudget & Annual Reports
Agency Financial Reports
Contact NASA
Accessibility
-  									Page Last Updated:								  								Oct 12, 2023								 
-  									Page Editor:								  									Mark A. Garcia								 
-  								Responsible NASA Official:							  								Abigail Bowman
EXHIBIT
32.1








Section 1350 Certification
of Chief Executive Officer









In connection with the quarterly report of Applied Nanotech Holdings, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
Thomas F. Bijou, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:




1.     The Report fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
and




2.     The information contained in this Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial conditions and results of
operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the
report.








Date:      
      October 31, 2008
            /s/ Thomas F.
      Bijou
              Thomas
      F. Bijou
              Chief
      Executive Officer
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS

Appeal of - )

)

Caddell Construction Co. (DE), LLC ) ASBCA No. 62424

)

Under Contract No. N69450-14-C-1756 )

APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT: James K. Bidgood, Jr., Esq.

Jonathan R. Mayo, Esq.

 Smith, Currie & Hancock LLP

 Atlanta, GA

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: Craig D. Jensen, Esq.

 Navy Chief Trial Attorney

Ellen M. Evans, Esq.

 Trial Attorney

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The dispute has been settled. The appeal is dismissed with prejudice.

Dated: August 3, 2021

LAURA J. EYESTER

Administrative Judge

Armed Services Board

of Contract Appeals

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed 

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA No. 62424, Appeal of Caddell 

Construction Co. (DE), LLC, rendered in conformance with the Board’s Charter.

Dated: August 3, 2021 

PAULLA K. GATES-LEWIS

Recorder, Armed Services

Board of Contract Appeals
#### The State *v.*Bouche.—In error.

*Tuesday, June*4.

INDICTMENT for selling spirituous liquor to an intoxicated person. Plea, not guilty. Cause submitted to the Court by .agreement, and judgment for the defendant. *Held,*that the state could not assign for error, that the evidence did not support the judgment. *The State*v. Davis, 4 Blackf. 345.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.02 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 The undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer of Martek Biosciences Corporation (the
Company), hereby certifies that, to his knowledge, on the date hereof:  a)
    the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended April 30,
2005 filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report)
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and
Exchange Act of 1934; andb)
    information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company. Date: June 9, 2005 By /s/ Peter L. Buzy Peter L. Buzy
Chief Financial Officer A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form
within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided
to Martek Biosciences Corporation and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Mary Ann ROUNSAVALL, Defendant.

No. 4:94CR3034.

United States District Court, D. Nebraska.

Dec. 14, 1998.

Bruce W. Gillan, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Lincoln, NE, for Plaintiff.

Mark W. Bubak, Green, Bubak Law Firm, Omaha, NE, for Defendant.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

KOPF, District Judge.

This unusual case is before me on remand from the Court of Appeals. *United States v. Rounsavall,*128 F.3d 665, 668-69 (8th Cir.1997). After an extensive evidentiary hearing, briefing and oral argument, I announced on December 4, 1998, that I intended to grant Mary Ann Rounsavall’s motion to compel the government to file a motion for departure pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e). I informed the parties that my written order and accompanying memorandum would not be released for ten days.

On December 11, 1998, a joint motion was filed (Filing 240). In that joint motion, the United States moved for a downward departure pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e). The government advises that it made the motion “based upon the defendant’s cooperation with law enforcement, after December 4, 1998, in the investigation of others who have committed crimes.” (Id. at ¶ 1.) In that same motion, Mary Ann Rounsavall moved to withdraw her motion to compel.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that:

(1) The joint motion (Filing 240) is granted, the court will depart downward pursuant 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e), and the defendant’s motion to compel (Filing 147) is withdrawn;

(2) The court’s previous oral announcement that it intended to grant the defendant’s motion to compel (Filing 147) is withdrawn;

(3)The resentencing of Mary Ann Roun-savall scheduled 12:00 p.m. on Wednesday, January 6, 1999, shall be held as scheduled and, since this is a criminal case, the defendant shall be present.
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.51

                             THIRTY-THIRD AMENDMENT

                                       TO

                    CONVERTIBLE DEBENTURE PURCHASE AGREEMENT

THIS THIRTY-THIRD AMENDMENT TO CONVERTIBLE DEBENTURE PURCHASE AGREEMENT (the
"Amendment") is entered into as of August 1, 2002, by and between DISC, Inc., a
California corporation (the "Company"), and MK GVD Fund (the "Purchaser").

R E C I T A L S:

A. WHEREAS on March 29, 1996 the Company and Purchaser entered into a
Convertible Debenture Purchase Agreement pursuant to which the Company agreed to
sell, and Purchaser agreed to purchase, an aggregate of $1,400,000 in principal
amount of Convertible Debentures, each convertible into shares of the Company's
Preferred Stock, which Agreement was amended as of December 31, 1996, April 11,
1997, December 31, 1997, March 27, 1998, June 30, 1998, September 25, 1998,
December 31, 1998, March 30, 1999, June 30, 1999, September 30, 1999, December
31, 1999, March 31, 2000, June 30,2000, September 30, 2000, December 29, 2000,
March 30, 2001, June 29, 2001, September 28, 2001, December 31, 2001, March 6,
2002, March 15, 2002, March 19, 2002, March 26, 2002, March 27, 2002, April 4,
2002, April 12, 2002, April 24, 2002, April 26, 2002, May 3, 2002, June 10,
2002, June 27, 2002 and June 28, 2002 to increase the aggregate amount of
Convertible Debenture to be purchased thereunder to $18,830,000.

B. The Company and Purchaser now seek to amend the Agreement to increase the
total amount of Convertible Debentures which Purchaser agrees to purchase
thereunder. NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, receipt of
which is hereby acknowledged, and in consideration of the mutual covenants set
forth herein, the parties hereto agree as follows:

1. DEFINITIONS. Unless otherwise defined herein, capitalized terms used in the
Amendment shall have the same meanings ascribed to them in the Convertible
Debenture Purchase Agreement.

2. AMENDMENT TO CONVERTIBLE DEBENTURE PURCHASE AGREEMENT. Section 1.1(a) of the
Convertible Debenture Purchase Agreement is hereby amended to provide that
Purchaser agrees to purchase, and the Company agrees to issue and sell, an
aggregate of $19,030,000 in principal amount of Convertible Debentures, each in
the form and having the terms and conditions set forth in the amended Exhibit B
attached hereto.

3. ENTIRE AGREEMENT; AMENDMENT. The Convertible Debenture Purchase Agreement, as
amended by this Amendment, constitutes the full and complete agreement and
understanding between the parties hereto regarding the subject matter of the
Convertible Debenture Purchase Agreement and shall supersede all prior
communications, representations, understandings or agreements, if any, whether
oral or written, concerning the subject matter contained in the Convertible
Debenture Purchase Agreement, as so amended, and that no provision of the
Convertible Debenture Purchase Agreement, as so amended, may be modified,
amended, waived or discharged, in whole or in part, except in accordance with
its terms.