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





Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2008 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



This 31st day of March, 2009.







| |  |                                             
| |  | --------------------------------------------
| |  |                                             
| |  | /s/ MICHAEL G. SANCHEZ                      
| |  | Michael G. Sanchez                          
| |  | President and Chief Executive Officer       
| |  | (Principal Executive Officer)               
| |  |                                             
| |  |                                             
| |  |                                             
| |  |                                             
| |  | /s/ PAUL R. GARRIGUES                       
| |  | Paul R. Garrigues                           
| |  | Chief Financial Officer                     
| |  | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.1

July 6, 2000


Dr. Nassim Usman
RPI
2950 Wilderness Place
Boulder, CO 80301

Dear Nassim:

     This letter is intended to confirm the modified terms of employment offered
to you by Ribozyme Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ("RPI"), and acknowledge your
acceptance of employment on the terms detailed below.

Position:                 Vice President of Research and Development and
                          Corporate Officer

Effective date:           August 1, 2000

Base Salary:              $230,000/year

Cash Bonus:               Up to 20% of base salary; based on achievement of
                          mutually agreed goals

Reporting to:             CEO and President

Equity Participation:     Additional grant of options on 20,000 shares of RPI
                          common stock from the shares reserved under a stock
                          option pool; exercise price at market closing price on
                          August 1, 2000; (half will vest over 5 years; half
                          vest on achievement of mutually agreed performance
                          goals)

Offer Expiration:         This offer will expire on July 15, 2000, if not
                          accepted.

     All other terms and benefits will continue per RPI's existing benefits
programs.

     Congratulations on your significant accomplishments and promotion, and we
are very excited about the prospect of many important contributions to RPI in
the years to come.

                                                Sincerely,

                                                /s/ Dr. Ralph E. Christoffersen

                                                Ralph E. Christoffersen, PhD
                                                CEO and President
REC/a

Agreed and accepted:
Date: July 6, 2000

Signature: /s/ Dr. Nassim Usman
Name: Nassim Usman, Ph.D.

                                      18
National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center

Houston, Texas 77058

Biographical Data

WILLIAM A. PAILES (MAJOR, USAF)

PAYLOAD SPECIALIST

PERSONAL DATA: Born June 26, 1952, in Hackensack, New Jersey, but considers

Kinnelon, New Jersey, to be his hometown. Married. He is a former deacon and

treasurer of his church in El Segundo, California.

EDUCATION: Graduated from Kinnelon High School, Kinnelon, New Jersey, 1970.

Received a bachelor of science degree in computer science, USAF Academy,

Colorado Springs, Colorado, 1974. Attended pilot training at Williams Air Force Base,

Arizona, from 1974-1975; trained as a HC-130 rescue pilot in the Aerospace Rescue

and Recovery Service. In 1978, attended Squadron Officer School. Received a master

of science degree in computer science, Texas A&M University, 1981.

EXPERIENCE: Dec 1975 to Jul 1980 McClellan Air Force Base, California, and

Royal Air Force Base, Woodbridge, England. HC-130 pilot in Air Force Rescue.

Jan 1982 to Dec 1982 Headquarters Military Airlift Command, Scott Air Force Base, Illinois. Manager, mini-computer

operating systems software development.

Jan 1983 to Present USAF Manned Spaceflight Engineering Program, Los Angeles Air Force Station, California.

Manned Spaceflight Engineer.

SPACE FLIGHT EXPERIENCE: Pailes flew on STS-51J Atlantis (October 3-7, 1985) which launched from

Kennedy Space Center, Florida, and returned to land at Edwards Air Force Base, California. STS-51J was the second

Space Shuttle Department of Defense mission. It was also the maiden voyage of the Atlantis, the final Orbiter in the

Shuttle fleet. At the conclusion of the mission, Pailes had traveled over 1.6 million miles in 98 Earth orbits and logged

more than 97 hours in space.

OCTOBER 1985

This is the only version available from NASA. Updates must be sought direct from the above named individual.
#### J. H. Spratt *v.*Adams, Exr., and W. F. Chandler.

Weight of Evidence — Verdict of Jury.

If the verdict of a jury is palpably against the evidence the judgment will be reversed.

APPEAL PROM TAYLOR CIRCUIT COURT.

December 8, 1865.

Opinion op the Court by

Judge Williams:

This case has been here before and on the return to the Ciicnit Court another trial resulted in a judgment for appellees.

There are two bills of exceptions, one signed by the judge who presided, and another by bystanders, but we think, on a fair construction, there is no substantial difference.

It is most apparent from the evidence that when the sheriff sold the land under execution he proclaimed publicly that the purchaser would have to pay the unpaid purchase price; and, therefore, he sold it subject thereto, with the understanding that the purchaser must pay it, which he supposes to be about $80; but whatever the amount, it must be paid. There seems to have been $125.46 of the principal unpaid at that time, but it may be fairly presumed from the evidence that Chandler then held the notes given by Spratt to Adams, executor, as the purchase price, and he being the purchaser under the execution sale knew the amount of the unpaid purchase price; but whether so or not, the proclamation of the sheriff was of such character as to put the bidders on inquiry, and not to limit the purchaser’s liability to the exact amount named by the sheriff.

If Chandler did not then own the notes, he afterward purchased them as he was bound to do to comply with the tenor of his execution purchase, and in either event, according to the evidence in this case, he has no right of recovery.

As the instructions in the case do not conform to this view, and as the verdict of the jury is palpably against the weight of evidence, the judgment must be reversed, with directions for a new trial and further proceedings in conformity to this opinion.

Wherefore, the judgment is reversed.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2067 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2067

To withdraw the Los Padres National Forest in California from location, 
      entry, and patent under mining laws, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 11, 2004

 Mrs. Boxer (for herself and Mrs. Feinstein) introduced the following 
bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                           Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To withdraw the Los Padres National Forest in California from location, 
      entry, and patent under mining laws, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. WITHDRAWAL OF LOS PADRES NATIONAL FOREST, CALIFORNIA, FROM 
              MINING LAWS.

    Subject to valid existing rights, the Los Padres National Forest in 
California is hereby withdrawn from--
            (1) all forms of entry, appropriation, and disposal under 
        the public land laws;
            (2) location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; and
            (3) operation of the mineral leasing, mineral materials, 
        and geothermal leasing laws.
                                 <all>
```
The Attorney General of Texas 

December 5, 1978 

JOHN L. HILL 

Attorney General 

Honorable Thomas H. Haynie 

Chairman 

Opinion No. H- 1269 

Texas Private Employment Agency 

Regulatory Board 

Sam Houston Building 

Austin, Texas 

Re: Whether the deliberation 

and vote on findings of fact, 

conclusions of law and final 

orders by the Private Employment Agency Regulatory Soard 

are required to be conducted in a 

public session. 

Dear Mr. Haynie: 

You have asked whether the Open Meetings Act applies to proceedings 

under the Administrative Procedure Act. 

You advise that the Private Employment Agency Regulatory Board has 

adopted Rule 399.OLOO.O04(h) which provides in part: 

A quorum of the Board necessary to transact any 

business, including the holding of any hearing in a 

contested case, is six (6). Any order or decision issued 

by the Board under these hearing rules shall be 

approved by a majority in attendance. Such orders or 

decisions shall be stated either in the record or shall 

be voted on in executive session immediately following 

the close of the hearing by vote of the members in 

attendance. 

(Emphasis added). You argue that the decision-making process under the 

Administrative Procedure Act, V.T.C.S. article 6252-13a, is exempted from 

the requirements of the Open Meetings Act, V.T.C.S. article 6252-17, and you 

urge us to reach the same conclusion. 

We fiid no support for the proposition that the Administrative 

Procedure Act was in any way designed to permit state agencies to avoid the 

requirements of the Open Meetings Act. The Open Meetings Act is designed 

for the purpose “of assuring that the public has the opportunity to be 

informed concerning the transactions of public business” and should be 

p. 5022 
Honorable Thomas H. Haynie - Page 2 (R-1269) 

liberally construed to effect that purpose. Toyah Ind. Sch. Dit. v. Pecos-Barstow 

2nd. Sch. Dit., 466 S.W.Sd 377 (Tex. Civ; App. - San Antonio 1971, no writ). We 

believe the Open Meetings Act requires deliberations to be held in public unless 

specifically exempted in section 2 of that Act. Corpus Christi C.T.A. v. Corpus 

Christi Ind. Sch. Uist., 535 S.W.2d 429 (Tex. Civ. App. - Corpus Christi 1976, no 

writ). AR votes are required to be held in open session. V.T.C.S. art. 6252-17, g 

SUM~MARY 

The Administrative Procedure Act does not provide any 

exception to the requirement that governmental bodies meet 

in open session. 

APPROVED: 

C. ROBERT HEATH. Chairman 

Opinion Committee 

p. 5023
#### Luke Clyde TEIXEIRA, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DIRECTOR TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION, In his official and individual capacity; Telford Unit Warden, in his official and individual capacity; UGI, Telford Unit, In his official and individual capacity; Rayburn, Mail Personnel, In his individual and official capacity; Curie, Mail Personnel, In his individual and official capacity; Range, Lieutenant, In her individual and official capacity; John Does, (A-C), In their individual and official capacity, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 03-40276

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Aug. 28, 2003.

Luke Clyde Teixeira, pro se, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Kenedy, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Luke Teixeira, Texas state prisoner 1067308, appeals the district court’s dismissal without prejudice of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint based on his failure to exhaust his prison administrative remedies. Teixeira contends that he exhausted his administrative remedies and would have produced copies of his grievances if the district court had ordered prison officials to provide the documents.

Teixeira’s pleadings reflect that he may have exhausted some but possibly not all of his claims through the administrative remedies process. The district court did not address the issue whether Teixeira had actually exhausted his administrative remedies, but dismissed the complaint because *388Teixeira had not attached written proof of exhaustion. The dismissal on that basis was erroneous because Teixeira was entitled to rely upon his pleadings in asserting exhaustion. *See Underwood v. Wilson,*151 F.3d 292, 296 (5th Cir.1998).

The judgment of the district court dismissing the complaint for failure to exhaust administrative remedies is VACATED and the case is REMANDED to the district court for further consideration of the exhaustion issue.

VACATED AND REMANDED.

*

 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.
FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

June 4, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

MIKEAL GLENN STINE,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

MR. BLAKE DAVIS, Warden ADX,

Florence; MR. CHRISTOPHER

SYNSVOLL, Supervising Attorney; MR.

MARK COLLINS, Unit Manager ADX,

Florence; MS. TINA SUDLOW, Case

Manager ADX, Florence; D. FOSTER,

Counselor; FEDERAL BUREAU OF

PRISONS,

Defendants - Appellees.

No. 10-1190

(D.C. No. 1:10-CV-00751-ZLW)

ORDER

The captioned appeal is dismissed for lack of prosecution pursuant to 10th Cir. 

R. 42.1.

A copy of this order shall stand as and for the mandate of this court.

Entered for the Court,

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

Appellate Case: 10-1190 Document: 01018435248 Date Filed: 06/04/2010 Page: 1
**Exhibit
      32.2**




**CERTIFICATON
      OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER**





**Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to**


**§
      906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**





In
      connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the
      Quarterly Report of Hemagen Diagnostics, Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the period
      ending December 31, 2006, the (“Report”), I, Laura Bell, Corporate Controller of
      the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 906 1350, 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/
      Laura A. Bell


Laura
      A.
      Bell


Corporate
      Controller


(Principal
      Financial Officer)








February
      20, 2007
























A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      Hemagen Diagnostics, Inc. and will be retained by Hemagen Diagnostics, Inc.
      and
      furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
      request.
#### Taylor *v.*Blount.

*Thursday, January*4, 1844.

In trover commenced in the Circuit Court, when the demand does not exceed 50 dollars, the plaintiff, though he recover, must pay the costs.

ERROR to the *Huntington*Circuit Court.

*H.*Cooper, for the plaintiff.

*C. W. Ewing*and *R.*Brachenridge, for the defendant.

Blackford, J.

— This was an action of trover commenced in the Circuit Court. Damages claimed, 50 dollars. Verdict for the plaintiff for 17 dollars. Judgment for the amount of the verdict, but that the plaintiff pay the costs.

The plaintiff contends that the judgment against him for costs is erroneous.

Justices of the peace have jurisdiction in actions of trover to the amount of 50 dollars. If such suit be commenced in the Circuit Court, and the damages demanded do not exceed 50 dollars, the plaintiff, though he recover, shall pay the costs. R. S. 1838, p. 364, sect. 18.

• This suit being commenced in the Circuit Court, and the damages claimed being only 50 dollars, the judgment against the plaintiff for costs is correct.

*Per Curiam.*

— The judgment is affirmed with costs.
```

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 209 (Friday, October 29, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 66721]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27361]

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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Notice of Extension of Comment Period

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice: Notice of Extension of Comment Period.

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

SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service published a Notice of Intent in the 
Federal Register of October 5, 2010, requesting comments concerning a 
Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the 
Greens Creek Mine Tailings Expansion. The comment period is to be 
extended.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chad VanOrmer, 907-789-6202 or Sarah 
Samuelson, 907-789-6274.

Correction

    In the Federal Register of October 5, 2010, in FR Doc. 2010-24907, 
on page 61415, in the first column, correct the DATES caption to read:

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be 
received by November 19, 2010.

    Dated: October 22, 2010.
Forrest Cole,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 2010-27361 Filed 10-28-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P
```
# In the Missouri Court of Appeals

Eastern District

MARCH 17, 2015

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE

84.16(b) OR RULE 30.25(b).

1. ED100442 STATE OF MISSOURI, RES V JOHN H. COLEMAN, APP

2. ED100757 KERRY M. HOGAN, APP V STATE OF MO, RES

3. ED100871 STATE OF MISSOURI, RES V TIMOTHY JONES, APP

4. ED100883 STATE OF MISSOURI, RES V PIOTR CHORAZY, APP

5. ED101061 MICHAEL L. DARE, APP V STATE OF MISSOURI, RES

6. ED101150 STATE OF MISSOURI, RES V NICHOLAS GOETZ, AP P

7. ED101431 STATE OF MISSOURI, RES V ANDREW MOORE, APP

8. ED101533 NANCY DARROW, APP V STATE OF MISSOURI, RES

9. ED101607 COVERALL RESTORATION, RES V KATHLEEN TURNER,

APP

CORRECTION(S):

1

. ED101743 IN THE INTEREST OF: V.C.N.C.
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. TIMOTHY COLEMAN.

May 30, 1978.

Petition for certification denied.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-6521
WILLIAM ERNEST HOWARD, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RONALD ANGELONE, Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Chief District Judge. (CA-95-807-R) Submitted: July 25, 1996 Decided: August 12, 1996 Before LUTTIG and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William Ernest Howard, Appellant Pro Se. Mark Ralph Davis, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Howard v. Angelone , No. CA-95-807-R (W.D. Va. Mar. 26, 1996). 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.

AFFIRMED
#### Reed *v.*Sering and Another.

*Tuesday, June*4.

The Supreme Court has no jurisdiction in any case commenced before a justice of the peace, where the amount in controversy in the Supreme Court, exclusive of interest and costs, is less than twenty dollars.

ERROR to the *Marshall*Circuit Court.

Sullivan, J.

— Trial of the right of property. The claimant represented himself to be the owner of a bay mare, a cooking stove, a bureau, a table, &c., which had been seized on an execution in favour of the defendants against one *Crum.*On the trial in the Circuit Court, the cooking stove was found to belong to *Crum*the execution defendant, and was valued at 18 dollars : the residue of the property, valued at 74 dol-. lars, was decided to belong to the claimant.

Various errors are assigned, but we have not examined them as we are of opinion that this Court has not jurisdiction of the case. The claimant has obtained all he sued for except the cooking stove, the value of which is 18 dollars. The defendants do not complain of the judgmént of the Circuit Court. The stove, therefore, is the only article of the property claimed in controversy. This Court has not jurisdiction in any case commenced before a justice of the peace, where the amount in controversy, exclusive of interest and costs, is under the sum -of 20 dollars. And it is the amount that is ápcontroversy between the parties in this Court, that settles its jurisdiction. *Tripp*v. *Elliott,*5 Blackf. 168. As it is manifest that the amount in controversy is not sufficient *136to confer jurisdiction upon this Court, the writ of error must be dismissed.

*J. W.*Chapman, for the plaintiff.

*J. G.*Marshall, for the defendants.

*Per Curiam.*

— The writ of error is dismissed.