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

EXHIBIT 32.1

**PURSUANT TO 18U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ENACTED PURSUANT TO CERTIFICATION SECTION 906 OF THE U.S. SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
Cambior Inc. (the "Company") is filing its annualreport on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005 with the U.S.Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"). I, LouisP. Gignac, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as enacted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge: 

(1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of  the U.S. 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/ Louis P. Gignac                                      *Louis P. GignacPresident and Chief Executive      OfficerMarch 31, 2006
Exhibit 32.2





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 Quarterly Report of Remy International, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period
ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Rajesh K. Shah, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, 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) 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 position and results of operations of the Company.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





|    |  |                             
|--- |  | ----------------------------
|/s/ |  | Rajesh K. Shah              
|   
|    |  | Rajesh K. Shah              
|    |  | Executive Vice President and
|    |  | Chief Financial Officer     











August 6, 2004



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Remy International, Inc. and will be retained by Remy International, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Kurtis Ray EASTER, Appellant.

No. 04-2609.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted March 7, 2005.

Decided March 11, 2005.

Jane W. Duke, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Little Rock, AR, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Kurtis Ray Easter, Tucker, AR, pro se.

Christopher A. Tarver, Omar F. Greene, II, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Little Rock, AR, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before WOLLMAN, MURPHY, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Kurtis Ray Easter appeals the sentence that the district court1 imposed after he *271pleaded guilty to mailing a threatening communication, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 876(c). Easter argues that the court plainly erred by making factual findings that increased his punishment under U.S.S.G. §§ 3A1.2(a)(l)(A) (official victim) and 4B1.1 (career offender).

Assuming arguendo that we should review for plain error under *United States v. Booker,*— U.S.-, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), we conclude that any error in making the section 3A1.2(a)(l)(A) finding did not affect Easter’s substantial rights. Even without that enhancement, the same total offense level and criminal history category would have resulted from Easter’s classification as a career offender, which was based on the district court’s finding that Easter had two prior felony convictions for crimes of violence, *see id.*at 756 (reaffirming that fact of prior conviction need not be established by guilty plea or jury verdict).

The judgment is affirmed.

1

. The Honorable William R. Wilson, Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
Exhibit 32.2



Written Statement of Chief Financial Officer

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



The undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer of Central European Distribution Corporation (the Company), hereby certifies that, to his
knowledge on the date hereof:



| | (a) | the Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended June 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 Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



/s/ Chris BiedermannChris Biedermann Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer August 8, 2005
Exhibit 32.1 Section 906 Certification of Chief Executive Officer

CERTIFICATION

In
connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009 (the Form 10-Q) of Eastern Virginia Bankshares, Inc. (the Company), I, Joe A. Shearin, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



| |  |  | the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | - |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and the results of operations of the
Company as of and for the periods presented in the Form 10-Q.
| | - |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                        |  |                    |  |  |  |       |  |                 
|----------------------- |  | ------------------ |  |  |  | ----- |  | ----------------
|By:                     |  | /s/ Joe A. Shearin |  |  |  | Date: |  | November 5, 2009
|Joe A. Shearin          |  |                    |  | 
|Chief Executive Officer |  |                    |  | 



38
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________ No. 1D 18

- 2480

_____________________________ T YRONE M ARQUIS T AYLOR , Petitioner ,

v.
S TATE O F F LORIDA , Respondent

.

_____________________________

Petition Alleging Ineffectiv e Assistance of Appellate Counsel

— Original Jurisdiction

.

February 25, 2019

P ER C URIAM

. The petition alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel is denied on the merits.
W OLF , O STERHAUS , and J AY , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ N ot final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Tyrone Marquis Taylor, pro se , Petitioner

. Ashley B. Moody, Attorney General, and Kaitlin Weiss, Assistant Attorney General , Tallahassee , for Respondent

.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                             410
<SECURITIES>                                   334,412
<RECEIVABLES>                                  129,577
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,516
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 476,518
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               66
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    250,000
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                     244,253
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   476,518
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 7,929
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   149
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,780
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,780
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
#### Lenir RICHARDSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Andrew Lee RICHARDSON; Gerald R. Curran; Clark E. Brodersen; Janine M. Saxes; Susan Thomas; Roslyn Children Center, Defendants—Appellees, and Ellen Zehl, Defendant.

No. 04-2489.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: March 10, 2005.

Decided: March 14, 2005.

Lenir Richardson, Appellant pro se.

Stephen Anthony Horvath, Trichilo, Bancroft, McGavin, Horvath & Judkins, Fairfax, Virginia; Eric James Berghold, Gary Wayne Brown, McCandlish *&*Lillard, P.C., Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellees.

Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Lenir Richardson appeals a district court order dismissing her complaint against her former husband, attorneys involved in her divorce and child custody action, and other persons who may have come into contact with her daughter. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s memorandum opinion and order and dismiss the appeal as frivolous. 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*
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Kelli Mars","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/kelli-l-marsnasa-gov\/","title":"20 Years Ago: Remembering Robert Gilruth","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"BjCzli4XBp\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/history\/20-years-ago-remembering-robert-gilruth\/\">20 Years Ago: Remembering Robert Gilruth<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/history\/20-years-ago-remembering-robert-gilruth\/embed\/#?secret=BjCzli4XBp\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“20 Years Ago: Remembering Robert Gilruth” — NASA\" data-secret=\"BjCzli4XBp\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/gilruth_in_1946_0.jpg?w=472","thumbnail_width":472,"thumbnail_height":600}
ex_244422.htm


Exhibit 10.2


 


EXECUTION COPY


 


 


FIRST AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


 


This FIRST AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”), is entered into as of April 28, 2021, by and among NorthWest Indiana Bancorp (the “Company”), the wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company, Peoples Bank (“Peoples Bank,” and collectively with the Company, the “Bank” unless otherwise noted), and David A. Bochnowski (the “Executive”).


 


WHEREAS, the Company, Peoples Bank, and the Executive entered into an Amended and Restated Employment Agreement, dated as of February 26, 2016, but effective as of April 28, 2016 (the “Employment Agreement”);


 


WHEREAS, the Executive has served as the Executive Chairman of the Bank pursuant to the Employment Agreement;


 


WHEREAS, the Executive and the Bank are currently in discussions to extend the term of the Employment Agreement; and


 


WHEREAS, until such discussions have concluded, the parties now desire to make certain modifications to the Employment Agreement as set forth in this Amendment;


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and mutual covenants herein and for other good and valuable consideration, the parties hereby agree that the Employment Agreement shall be, and it hereby is, amended as follows:


 


	 	
			1.

				
			Employment and Term. Clauses (b) Term of Section 1 of the Employment Agreement is hereby amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows:

			



 


“(b)         Term. The initial term of the Executive’s employment under this Agreement shall commence as of the Effective Date and end on June 28, 2021, subject to earlier termination as provided in Paragraph 7 below. The term of this Agreement shall be hereinafter referred to as the “Term.” ”


 


	 	
			2.

				
			Defined Terms. All capitalized terms not otherwise defined in this Amendment shall have the meanings given to them in the Employment Agreement.

			



 


	 	
			3.

				
			Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts, each such counterpart being deemed to be an original instrument, and all such counterparts shall together constitute the same instrument.

			



 


	 	
			4.

				
			Miscellaneous. Except as specifically amended by the terms of this Amendment, all other terms and conditions of the Employment Agreement are and shall remain in full force and effect for all purposes.

			



 


[Signature Page Follows]



 




 




 


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of the date first above written.


 


 


	 	
			NORTHWEST INDIANA BANCORP


			 


			 


			/s/ Donald P. Fesko


			Name: Donald P. Fesko


			Title: Chair, Compensation and Benefits Committee


			 


			 


			PEOPLES BANK


			 


			 


			/s/ Donald P. Fesko


			By: Donald P. Fesko


			Title: Chair, Compensation and Benefits Committee


			 


			 


			/s/ David A. Bochnowski


			By: David A. Bochnowski

			



 


 


2
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. TERRENCE R. SCALES.

June 13, 1989.

Petition for certification denied. (See 231 *N.J.Super.*336)
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"As the Sun Rises, NASA’s Global Hawk is Being Prepared for Flight","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"U1X4JhdHmZ\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/as-sun-rises-nasas-global-hawk-being-prepared-flight-2\/\">As the Sun Rises, NASA’s Global Hawk is Being Prepared for Flight<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/as-sun-rises-nasas-global-hawk-being-prepared-flight-2\/embed\/#?secret=U1X4JhdHmZ\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“As the Sun Rises, NASA’s Global Hawk is Being Prepared for Flight” — NASA\" data-secret=\"U1X4JhdHmZ\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/global_hawk_sunrise_testing.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":450}
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-14-00142-CV

Michael A. Smith

v.

Cindy Pena

§

§

§

§

From the 271st District Court

of Wise County (CV08-09-684)

June 25, 2015

Opinion by Justice Dauphinot

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of 

the trial court is affirmed.

It is further ordered that Appellant Michael A. Smith shall pay all of the 

costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By _/s/ Lee Ann Dauphinot______________

 Justice Lee Ann Dauphinot
II 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2864 

To extend for eighteen months the period for which chapter 12 of title 

11, United States Code, is reenacted. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 29, 2004 

Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself, Mr. LEAHY, Mr. BOND, Mr. NELSON of Nebraska, and Mr. FEINGOLD) introduced the following bill; which was read 

twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To extend for eighteen months the period for which chapter 

12 of title 11, United States Code, is reenacted. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Family Farmer Bank5 ruptcy Relief Act of 2004’’. 
2 

•S 2864 IS 

1 SEC. 2. EIGHTEEN-MONTH EXTENSION OF PERIOD FOR 

2 WHICH CHAPTER 12 OF TITLE 11, UNITED 

3 STATES CODE, IS REENACTED. 

4 (a) AMENDMENTS.—Section 149 of title I of division 

5 C of Public Law 105–277 (11 U.S.C. 1201 note) is 

6 amended— 

7 (1) by striking ‘‘January 1, 2004’’ each place 

8 that term appears and inserting ‘‘July 1, 2005’’; 

9 and 

10 (2) in subsection (a)— 

11 (A) by striking ‘‘June 30, 2003’’ and in12 serting ‘‘December 31, 2003’’; and 

13 (B) by striking ‘‘July 1, 2003’’ and insert14 ing ‘‘January 1, 2004’’. 

15 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

16 subsection (a) are deemed to have taken effect on January 

17 1, 2004. 

Æ
#### LINDA LANE v. OHIO CASUALTY GROUP, ET AL.

May 30, 1989.

Petition for certification denied.
#### AMERICAN HYDRO POWER PARTNERS, L.P. v. CITY OF CLIFTON AND ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NEW JERSEY.

May 30, 1989.

Petitions for certification denied.
#### CITY FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION v. BENJAMIN JACOBS.

September 5, 1984.

Petition for certification denied.
Exhibit 10.1
 
    plus plus provided,
however




---



##### 



Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc.
    
    
    
    Penwest Pharmaceuticals Co.By:
    
    /s/ Nancy Wysenski
    
    
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Frank MuscoloTitle:
    
    Chief Operating Officer
    
    
    
    
    
    Title:
    
    Controller & CAODate:
    
    March 27, 2009
    
    
    
    
    
    Date:
    
    March 31, 2009