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

         In connection with the Transition Period Report of East Delta Resources
Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the nine months transition period ended
December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates
indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his
knowledge:

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

      2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the
Company.

                                                     /s/ Victor I.H. Sun
Date:      June 19, 2006.                            ---------------------------
           -----------------                         Victor I.H. Sun President,
                                                     Chief Executive Officer,
                                                     Chief Operating Officer,
                                                     And Chief Financial Officer
NO. 07-07-0219-CR

	NO. 07-07-0220-CR

	NO. 07-07-0221-CR

	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

	FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	AT AMARILLO

	PANEL B

	JUNE 21, 2007

	______________________________

	ROBERT CASH RICHARDSON,

				Appellant

	v.

	THE STATE OF TEXAS, 

				Appellee

	_________________________________

	FROM THE 108th DISTRICT COURT OF POTTER COUNTY;

	NOS. 54,546-E, 54,547-E, 54,712-E; HON. ABE LOPEZ, PRESIDING

	_______________________________

	ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS

	__________________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.

	Appellant Robert Cash Richardson, by and through his attorney, has filed motions to dismiss his appeals because he no longer desires to prosecute them.  Without passing on the merits of the case, we grant the motions to dismiss pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.1(a)(2) and dismiss the appeals.  Having dismissed the appeals at appellant’s request, no motions for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandates will issue forthwith.

							Brian Quinn

						          Chief Justice

Do not publish.
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT M ANUEL SALVADOR C ISNER O SPONC E, a .k.a . M anue l Sa lva dor C isne ros, Pe titione r, v. ER IC H. HOLDER , Jr., Attorne y Ge ne ra l, R

e sponde nt . No. 11-71927 Age n c y No. A200-877-402 M EM O R ANDUM *

On Pe tition for Re vie w of a n Orde r of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls Subm itte d Oc tobe r 14, 2014 * * B e fore : LEAVY, GOULD, a n d B ER Z ON, C irc uit Judge s . M anue l Sa lva dor C isne ros-Ponc e , a native and c itiz e n of M e xic o, pe titions for re vie w of the B o a

rd of Im m igration Appe a ls’ orde r dism issing his a ppe a l from an im m igration judge ’ s de c ision de ny ing his a pplic ation for a sy lum , withholding of re m ova l, a

nd re lie f unde r the C onve ntion Agai nst Torture(“ C AT” ). W e have 

# FIL ED OCT 20 2014 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S
. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).jurisdic tion unde r 8 U.S.C . § 1252. W e re vie w for substa ntia l e vide n c e fa c tua l findings, Ze haty ev . Gonzale s , 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th C ir. 2006), a n d we de ny the pe tition for re vie w . C isne ros-Ponc e doe s not c la im to ha ve suffe re d pa st pe rse c ution. Substa ntia l e vide nc e supports the a ge nc y ’ s finding tha

t C i sne ros-Ponc e did not e sta blish a we ll-founde d fe ar of future pe rse c ution. Se eN agoulk o v . IN S , 333 F.3d 1012, 1018 (9th C ir. 2003) (possibility of pe rse c ution wa s “ too spe c ulat ive ” ). Thus, C i sne ros-Ponc e ’ s a sy lum c la im fa ils. B e c a use C i sne ros-Ponc e fa ile d to m e e t the lowe r burde n of proof for a sy lum , it follows tha

t he ha s not m e t the highe r sta nda rd for withholding of re m ova l. Se e Ze haty e , 453 F.3d a t 1190. Fina lly , substa

ntia l e v ide nc e supports the a ge nc y ’ s de nia l of C AT re lie f be c a use C isne ros-Ponc e fa i le d to e sta blish tha t it is more like ly

tha n not he will be torture d by

or with thea c quie sc e nc e of the gove rnm e nt of M e xic o . Se eSilay a v . Muk ase y , 524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th C ir. 2008). PE T IT IO N FO R RE V IE WDE NIE D.

1 1 - 7 1 9 2 7 2
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 214 (Friday, November 5, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 68366]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-28079]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human 
Development; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Child Health and Human 
Development, Special Emphasis Panel, Williams Syndrome.
    Date: November 30, 2010.
    Time: 12 p.m. to 2 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6100 Executive Blvd., 
Rockville, MD (Teleconference).
    Contact Person: Norman Chang, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, 
Division of Scientific Review, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National 
Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, 6100 Executive 
Blvd., Room 5B01, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-1485, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#bad9d2dbd4ddd4fad7dbd3d694d4d3d294ddd5cc"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="8cefe4ede2ebe2cce1ede5e0a2e2e5e4a2ebe3fa">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, 
Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 
93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, 
Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National 
Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: November 1, 2010.
Jennifer S. Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2010-28079 Filed 11-4-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 213 (Thursday, November 4, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 68001]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27846]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Revision to Notice of Lodging of Settlement Agreement Under the 
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act 
and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Published on October 28, 
2010

    The notice previously published on October 28, 2010, is hereby 
revised to correct two site location errors. The correct site locations 
are:

    71. the Former Leed's Assembly Plant--Northern Parcel Site in 
Missouri; and
    72. the Former Leed's Assembly Plant--Southern Parcel Site in 
Missouri.

    Instructions for sending comments on the proposed Consent Decree 
and Settlement Agreement and for obtaining copies of the proposed 
Decree and Agreement are provided in the October 28, 2010 Notice 
(Federal Register/Vol. 75, No. 208/Thursday, October 28, 2010/Notices/
page 66390).

Maureen Katz,
Assistant Section Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment 
and Natural Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 2010-27846 Filed 11-3-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-15-P
EXHIBIT 31.0

              CERTIFICATION OF THE PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
                           PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Daniel J. Dorman, certify that:

1.    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Sandston
      Corporation;

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

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

4.    I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
      procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and
      internal controls over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act
      Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for Sandston Corporation and have:

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

      b)    designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused
            such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under
            our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
            reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial
            statements for external purposes in accordance with generally
            accepted accounting principles.

5.    I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control
      over financial reporting, to Sandston Corporation's auditors and the audit
      committee of the Sandston Corporation's Board of Directors:

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

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

Date: August 12, 2005


/s/ Daniel J. Dorman
--------------------

Daniel J. Dorman
Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer


                                    Page 11
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Danette Vargas, Appellant.

[787 NYS2d 902]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (D’Emic, J), rendered July 30, 2002, convicting her of attempted assault in the first degree, upon her plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see Anders v California,*386 US 738 [1967]; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631 [1976]; *cf. People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606 [1979]). Florio, J.P., Adams, Goldstein, Rivera and Spolzino, JJ., concur.
#### Wesley Hancock et al. *v.*M. H. Brand et al.

Pleadings — Preparation.

A judgment rendered in a cause submitted before preparation for trial will, on that account, be reversed and remanded to the lower court for further preparation.

APPEAL EROM CAMPBELL CIRCUIT COURT.

March 6, 1867.

Opinion oe the Court by

Judge Peters:

The service of process on Morris as stated in the affidavits filed is admitted by appellants, and by section 87, Civil Code, will be deemed an actual service of process on him.

But, by an amended petition, Permilia Simmons, Lorenzo D. Hancock, Thomas Hancock, P. Woodruff, and Mary E. Wood-ruff are made defendants, and, according to the allegations of said amendment, they are proper parties to the action, as the heirs of a portion of the devisees of Henry Smith, /deceased, from whom the title to the land is attempted to be derived. There was no actual service of process on them; and although it is shown by an affidavit of one of the attorneys of the appellee, Brand, that they were nonresidents, no warning order or traverse is taken against them, no attorney appointed to defend for them, and no bond executed as required by section 440, Civil Code.

The amended petition alleges that Henry Smith disposed of the land by will and .appellee proceeded to trial without producing a copy of said will which was made an exhibit in his petition, and without offering any evidence of the alleged partition of the land between Mullins and Daniel, or showing by any proof, whatever, that the devisees of Smith had parted 'with the title to the land, or had been paid for the same. But on account of the defects in .the preparation of the cause herein suggested, it was *224not in a condition to be heard when it was submitted. Payne *v.*Witherspoon, 14 B. Mon. 270.

Wherefore, the judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 21.1

                         Subsidiaries of Universe2U Inc.

1418276 Ontario Inc. incorporated in Ontario.
Universe2U Canada Inc., incorporated in Ontario.
CableTec Communications Inc., incorporated in Ontario.
Universe2U Right-of-ways Agency Inc., incorporated in Delaware.
Coastal Network Services Inc., incorporated in Delaware.
Coastal Networks Inc., incorporated in Nevada.
MultiLink Network Services Inc., incorporated in Delaware.
MultiLink Networks Inc., incorporated in Nevada.
T-E Realty & Right-of-Way Agency, L.L.C., incorporated in Michigan (49%
ownership).


The follow subsidiaries were merged into Universe2U Canada Inc. Jan. 1, 2002:

Fiber Optics Corporation of Canada Inc., incorporated in Ontario.
Canadian Cable Consultants Inc., incorporated in Ontario.
Photonics Engineering & Design, Inc., incorporated in Ontario.
##### 



Exhibit 15.1 Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm The Board of Directors
Sify Limited
Tidel Park, 2nd Floor
No. 4, Canal Bank Road
Taramani
Chennai 600 113
India We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Registration Statement
Nos. 333-101322 and 333-107938) on Form S-8 and the registration statements (Registration Nos.
333-101915 and 333- 121047) on Form F-3 of Sify Limited (formerly known as Satyam Infoway
Limited), of our report dated April 19, 2005, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of
Sify Limited as of March 31, 2005 and 2004 and the related consolidated statement of operations,
stockholders equity and comprehensive income, and cash flows for each of the years in the three
year period ended March 31, 2005, which report appears in the
Form 20-F of Sify Limited dated June 30, 2005. KPMG
India June 30, 2005
#### Luke H. Ferguson *v.*E. B. & W. S. Wallace, et al.

Evidence.

Where a defendant is allowed to testify as to certain transactions between himself and the plaintiff, in support of his own defense, the plaintiff has the right also to testify concerning the same matter.

APPEAL FROM LOGAN CIRCUIT COURT.

Edwards, for Appellant.

June 17, 1867.

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Bobertson :

The evidence of the declarations of Hart, concerning the ownership of the corn while it remained in his possession, was competent on well established principles, and the objection to the admission of this evidence was, therefore, properly overruled.

We think, also, the objection to the ruling of the court in allowing the plaintiff, E. B. Wallace, to testify in relation to the matters, as to which the appellant had been examined by his own counsel, was rightly overruled. The appellant was asked on his examination by the appellees to state if he did not buy corn from plaintiffs before Christmas, 1865. It was not responsive to this inquiry for the defendant to prove in his own behalf that he got the corn in controversy from the agent of Hart, under the arrangement alleged in his answer, and as he thus availed himself of the opportunity to testify in support of his own defense the plaintiffs had a right also to testify concerning the same matter according to section 673 of the Civil Code.

It seems to us the evidence which was legitimately before the court sustained the judgment, and the court properly overruled the motion for a new trial.

Wherefore, the judgment is affirmed.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   Exhibit 10(T)


                     AMENDMENT NO. [ ] TO RESTATED AGREEMENT


                  AMENDMENT, made as of the 21st day of July 1998 by and between
[ ] the "Executive") and VF CORPORATION, a Pennsylvania corporation (the
"Corporation").

                                   BACKGROUND

                  The Executive and the Corporation are parties to an Agreement
dated [             ] (the "Agreement") relating to the Corporation providing
the Executive with certain severance benefits in the event his employment
terminates subsequent to a "change in control" (as defined in the Agreement) of
the Corporation under the circumstances described therein. The Corporation's
principal executive offices have relocated from Wyomissing, Pennsylvania to
Greensboro, North Carolina, effective on or about July 1, 1998.

                  The parties desire to amend the Agreement to reflect the
relocation of the Corporation's principal executive offices.

                  NOW, THEREFORE, the parties, intending to be legally bound
hereby, agree as follows:

                  1. Paragraphs 3(iii)(D) and (E) of the Agreement are amended
by substituting "Greensboro, North Carolina" for "Reading, Pennsylvania"
therein.

                  2. The foregoing amendments to the Agreement are effective as
of the date of the relocation of the Corporation's principal executive offices
from Wyomissing, Pennsylvania to Greensboro, North Carolina.

                  3. All of the provisions of the Agreement are incorporated
herein and are hereby modified to conform with this Amendment No. [ ], but in
all other respects the provisions of the Agreement are to be and shall remain in
full force and effect.

                  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment
No. [ ] as of the date first above written.


                                               EXECUTIVE

Witness:___________________________            ___________________________(SEAL)



                                               VF CORPORATION

Attest:___________________________             By:______________________________
       Candace S. Cummings                        Mackey J. McDonald
       Secretary                                  President and Chief Executive
                                                  Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM COMPANY'S
INTERIM PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1997 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000892833
<NAME> SUNPORT MEDICAL CORP.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-09-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         219,987
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,250,894
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,794,565
<PP&E>                                         213,814
<DEPRECIATION>                                 109,733
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,079,857
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          145,872
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     6,409,291
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,079,857
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               795,411
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,647,417
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             (852,006)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              33,010
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,550,501
<INCOME-TAX>                                    73,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,477,501
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### Wallace and Wife *v.*Jones.—In error.

*Thursday, December*26.

IN assumpsit against husband and wife on a promissory note made by the wife *dum*sola, and non assumpsit pleaded, the plaintiff must prove the marriage. *Cowley*v. *Robertson et ux.*3 Camp. 438.