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



EXHIBIT 32.01 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE 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 Executive 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/ Henry Linsert, Jr. Henry Linsert, Jr.
Chief Executive 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.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

**SPORT-HALEY,INC.**

**CERTIFICATION**

**Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,**

**As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906**

**of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002**

*In connection with the Quarterly Report of Sport-Haley, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2007, asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),we, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, do each certify, to our respective knowledge, 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) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)           The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and result of operations of theCompany.
| Dated: May 14, 2007                            |
|------------------------------------------------|
|                                           |
|                                           |
| /s/ DONALD W. JEWELL                           |   |
| Donald W. Jewell                               |
| Chief Executive Officer                        |
| *(Principal Executive Officer)*                |
| * *                                       |
| * *                                       |
| /s/ PATRICK W. HURLEY                          |   |
| Patrick W. Hurley                              |
| Chief Financial Officer                        |
| *(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)* |
|                                                |  |  |

 

----
# Supersonic Goes Hyper

Taking the leap well beyond supersonic flight, a hypersonic X-43 aircraft reached a record-breaking speed of Mach 9.6, or nearly 7,000 mph, during a flight over the Pacific Ocean in November of 2004. The X-43 seen here is the small black aircraft attached to the nose of a modified Pegasus booster rocket, which is hung from a pylon attached to NASA's B-52B mother ship. The X-43 project demonstrated that a supersonic combustion ramjet (scramjet) powered engine could work at hypersonic speeds and high altitude. Future airplanes and reusable launch vehicles might employ this technology to make quick jumps across the ocean or reach into orbit.

Read More

                    -  Facebook PinterestX
-  LinkedIn Emailhttps://www.nasa.gov/image-detail/supersonic-goes-hyper/Copy URL to clipboard>DownloadShareTags- Aeronautics
- Quesst
TakenMarch 22, 2013Image CreditNASASize1041x781pxNational 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:								  								Jun 12, 2023								 
-  									Page Editor:								  									Lillian Gipson								 
-  								Responsible NASA Official:							  								Abigail Bowman
No. 87-1539.

#### Branson *v.*California.

Appeal from App. Dept., Super. Ct. Cal., Los Angeles County, dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1816 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1816

To designate the building located at 15 Henry Street in Binghamton, New 
   York, as the ``Kevin J. Tarsia Federal Building and United States 
                             Courthouse''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            November 4, 2003

  Mr. Schumer introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To designate the building located at 15 Henry Street in Binghamton, New 
   York, as the ``Kevin J. Tarsia Federal Building and United States 
                             Courthouse''.

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

SECTION 1. KEVIN J. TARSIA FEDERAL BUILDING AND UNITED STATES 
              COURTHOUSE.

    (a) Designation.--The building located at 15 Henry Street in 
Binghamton, New York, shall be known and designated as the ``Kevin J. 
Tarsia Federal Building and United States Courthouse''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the building referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the Kevin J. 
Tarsia Federal Building and United States Courthouse.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 210 (Monday, November 1, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 67079]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27507]


========================================================================
Notices
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules 
or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings 
and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings, 
delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency 
statements of organization and functions are examples of documents 
appearing in this section.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 210 / Monday, November 1, 2010 / 
Notices

[[Page 67079]]



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE


Operating Guidelines, Forms, and Waivers; Correction

AGENCY: Food and Nutrition Service.

ACTION: Notice; Correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Agriculture published a document in the 
Federal Register on October 12, 2010, concerning a request for comments 
on the information collection ``Operating Guidelines, Forms, and 
Waivers'' OMB control number 0584-0083. The document contained 
incorrect burden hours. The total burden hours should be 7,537 not 
2,849 as published.

Ruth Brown,
Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 2010-27507 Filed 10-29-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-30-P
# United Sta tes Court of Appe als For the Seventh Ci rcui

t Chicago, Illinois 60604 February 27, 2001 Bef ore Hon. John L. Cof

fey , Circui t Judge Hon. Dian

e P. Wood, Circui

t Judge Hon. Ann

Cl ai re Wi ll ia ms , Circui

t Judge No. 00-1978 Dan a R. W al ker, Plaintiff- Appellant , v. Dan Gli ckm an, i n hi s off ic ia l c apaci ty a s S ec r et ar y, Uni

ted S tate s D ep artm

en t of Agricul ture, Defendant-Appellee
. Appeal from the Uni ted St ates District Court for the Central

Dis trict of Il l i noi s, P eori a D i vi si on No. 99C1062 Joe B. McDad

e, Judge
.
Order Correcting Opinion The sli p opini on in thi s case is sued to day, i s corr ected as follows: P. 8, elev enth li ne of second ful

l paragraph: “1991" is ch

anged to “1990".

S O ORD ERED .
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**SPORT-HALEY, INC.**

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Donald W. Jewell, InterimChief Executive Officer of Sport-Haley, Inc., certify that:

 

1.               I have reviewedthis quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Sport-Haley, Inc.;

 

2.               Based on my knowledge, this report does not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3.               Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, andother financial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

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

 

(a)          Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;

 

(b)         Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

 

(c)          Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the caseof an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and

 

5.               The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and Ihave disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofthe registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

 

(a)          All significant deficiencies and material weaknessesin the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting whichare 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 involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.

 

Date:  May 20, 2005

 

 
| /s/ DONALD  W. JEWELL            |   |
|----------------------------------|--------|
| Donald W.  Jewell                |
| Interim  Chief Executive Officer |
| *(Principal  Executive Officer)* |

 

----
#### Shaler L. EAGLE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Thomas McBRIDE, Warden, Mount Olive Correctional Complex, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 03-7008.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 28, 2003.

Decided Sept. 10, 2003.

Shaler L. Eagle, Appellant Pro Se. Darrell V. McGraw, Jr., Dawn Ellen Warfield, Office of the Attorney General of West Virginia, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Shaler L. Eagle, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the report and recommendation of a magistrate judge and denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). When, as here, a district court dismisses a § 2254 petition solely on procedural grounds, a certificate of appealability will not issue unless the petitioner can demonstrate both “(1) ‘that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right’ and (2) ‘that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling.’ ” *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 684 (4th Cir.) (quoting *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000)), *cert. denied,*534 U.S. 941, 122 S.Ct. 318, 151 L.Ed.2d 237 (2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Eagle has not made the requisite showing. *See Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 1039, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL**

**FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT BY**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with this Annual Report of Caspian Services, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, John Baile, 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: 

 

|   | (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. |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| Date: January 13, 2009 | By     | /s/ John Baile                      |
|------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------|
|                   |   | John Baile, Chief Financial Officer |
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.25

                              AMENDMENT AGREEMENT


     This AMENDMENT AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is entered into effective as of
                                    ---------
September 14, 1999, between Pointshare Corporation, a Delaware corporation
formerly known as Healthknowledge Corporation (the "Company"), and Dennis
                                                    -------
Schmuland, M.D. ("Schmuland").
                  ---------

                                    Recitals

A.  The Company and Schmuland entered into an Employment Agreement dated as of
July 18, 1997 (the "Employment Agreement").
                    --------------------

B.  The Company and Schmuland entered into a Stock Restriction Agreement dated
as of July 17, 1997 (the "Restriction Agreement").
                          ---------------------

C.  The Company and Schmuland desire to amend certain provisions of the
Employment Agreement and the Restriction Agreement.

                                   Agreement

    In consideration of the mutual covenants set forth in this Agreement, the
Company and Schmuland agree as follows:

    1.    Employment Position. Section 2(a) of the Employment Agreement is
amended in its entirety as follows:

    "(a)  Position. The Company agrees to employ the Employee as its Vice
          --------
President and Chief Medical Officer for the term of his Employment under this
Agreement ("Employment")."

     2.   Departure from Board of Directors. The Company and Schmuland each
agree that Schmuland no longer being a member of the Board of Directors of the
Company shall not constitute (i) a "Good Reason" under section 1(f) of the
Employment Agreement or (ii) Involuntary or Constructive Termination under
Section 1(a) of the Restriction Agreement.

     3.   Repurchase Option. The Company and Schmuland each agree that the
Company's Repurchase Option shall terminate and be of no further force and
effect with respect to all shares of the Option Stock (as defined in the
Restriction Agreement). The Company will cause the Escrow Agent (as defined in
the Restriction Agreement) to release all shares of the Option Stock still held
in escrow as soon as practicable after execution of this Agreement.

    The parties have executed and delivered this Agreement effective as of the
day and year first set forth above.

Pointshare Corporation                     Dennis Schmuland, M.D.


By:  /s/ Timothy J. Kilgallon          /s/ Dennis Schmuland, M.D.
     ------------------------          --------------------------
         Timothy J. Kilgallon
         President and CEO
9

United States, 973 F.2d 1548, 1550–51 (Fed. Cir. 1992) (quoting Restatement (Second) of

Contracts § 241 cmt. A (1981)). Making this determination “depends on the nature and effect of 

the violation in light of how the particular contract was viewed, bargained for, entered into, and 

performed by the parties.” Id. at 1551. 

Although DynCorp’s pleading is far from convincing, its failure to cite other “cases 

where a prior material breach of contract was found to be a defense to claims under the FCA”

(Reply Mot. at 10), does not mean that the Court should strike this defense at this early stage. 

Thus, the Court denies the government’s motion to strike the prior breach of contract defense, but 

it grants the motion to strike the inequitable conduct or unclean hands defense. 

CONCLUSION

The government’s motion to strike is granted in part and denied in part. The motion is 

granted as to the fifth and sixth defenses, and granted in part as to the seventh and ninth defenses 

and it is denied as to laches if asserted as to prejudgment interest (seventh defense) and the 

breach of contract defense (ninth defense). 

/s/ Ellen Segal Huvelle    

Date: October 4, 2017 

ELLEN SEGAL HUVELLE 

United States District Judge
EXHIBIT 32

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

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 ManTech International Corporation (the Company) Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), we, George J. Pedersen, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
and Kevin M. Phillips, 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:



|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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: August 6, 2007



|       |  |                                                               
|------ |  | --------------------------------------------------------------
|By:    |  | /s/ GEORGE J. PEDERSEN                                        
|Name:  |  | George J. Pedersen                                            
|Title: |  | Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer
|       | 
|By:    |  | /s/ KEVIN M. PHILLIPS                                         
|Name:  |  | Kevin M. Phillips                                             
|Title: |  | Chief Financial Officer                                       



33
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. WALTER KARAS.

January 28, 1987.

Petition for certification denied.