alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.1

      CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report of Patriot Scientific Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended November 30, 2005, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission and to which this Certification is an
exhibit (the "Report"), the undersigned officer of Patriot Scientific
Corporation does 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:

      (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.

Date: January 23, 2006


                                        /s/ David H. Pohl
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        David H. Pohl
                                        Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          28,996
<SECURITIES>                                     3,592
<RECEIVABLES>                                  845,435
<ALLOWANCES>                                    28,995
<INVENTORY>                                    429,914
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,359,217
<PP&E>                                       1,434,769
<DEPRECIATION>                                 524,469
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,354,300
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,322,059
<BONDS>                                      1,746,937
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           776
<OTHER-SE>                                   (571,500)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,354,300
<SALES>                                      1,364,316
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,364,316
<CGS>                                        1,031,103
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,031,103
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               470,056
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 3,447
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              51,484
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (188,327)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    17,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (205,327)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (205,327)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.66)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3915 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3915

To provide for an additional temporary extension of programs under the 
   Small Business Act and the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 
             through May 21, 2004, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 9, 2004

 Mr. Manzullo introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Small Business

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide for an additional temporary extension of programs under the 
   Small Business Act and the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 
             through May 21, 2004, 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. ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATION OF PROGRAMS 
              UNDER THE SMALL BUSINESS ACT AND THE SMALL BUSINESS 
              INVESTMENT ACT OF 1958.

    The authorization for any program, authority, or provision, 
including any pilot program, that was extended through March 15, 2004, 
by section 1(a) of Public Law 108-172 is further extended through May 
21, 2004, under the same terms and conditions.

SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF CERTAIN FEE AUTHORIZATIONS.

    Section 503(f) of the Small business Investment Act of 1958 (15 
U.S.C. 697(f)) is amended by striking ``October 1, 2003'' and inserting 
``September 30, 2004''.
                                 <all>
```
3 t Zz ” 7

c)

REVISIONS
we | aoe | ew CHANGE Tose
: !
23.050
Ph 2.650 ———+}
2590
2.130
2.025
3825 r— 025 X 025 CHAMFER
2X 6.750 420
3.000
3.004
2X@3.250
, 33
at { 1
q Se o0 |
p b ct S c 020
Section A-A
_ 1 ng
ur?
“ Ling
y ver c
ei
* han
WATER SEOPOATION RROVALS nee NIST cee Fon nRON EAH
om ‘BH sata IMatonal etulute of Stendarde and Technology owner oo m8
Lines Beer ines RI PI, SS ee
BAR wee HUMIDITY CAN
CD DATA TRINGTATN DRAWN DATA | gfe" ee manne
Lene bane =r Sewarnoerer
Gta on wok ans rose) —
tea. a 3 ) SOF 074-0493
Wares} a lie Ceroek (nam Coroce — e i FF ie 4
OT ae pete aaah naval" aon o7s-czs0 [| BM 8 TOL PER ANSI YIKSHRI9S2

T = T > T 7 =


4 L 3 i z ni 7
REVISIONS
we | zone [ eoy UNE [Leste
£ I
D
2K.707 + 2X.707
10 |
1 2x.455 L
B05 |
194 —— = 153 2X.405
4x @
160 aco etl. 4x.393 : 2X.393
055 : mM =
3X #960 IR 4X 4-60UNC_28
- 2X.338 “y 1 7.510
he 7125 Ya 6 i 255 7-408 Io
\ 255 7.125 L2x707 @ 2746 | f > { wy { |
380} r | 2x.338 | 2.750 2x38 | [2%.280
. L 4... T B16
1280 2x.338 | 92980 o3250| | roanven 2x,280 f \
q 1 2X 707 y \ t + 1
\ 8 ff 14] 4
125 N yy L
t
tL—| : cot R128
sto . os PSE
i. 5X.090 2K 374 2X.371
Se 3X.755
755
1510 - 3x1510—4 '
2X.707 2X.707
2x.405 Section A-A
2X.810
aR ome os Ner aa RR
Wiican eal 1 peereaeteeenterte | abate |p
“Aare HUMIDITY BOTTOM
oxo oat [RRGEN DRAWN BATA Z
(ree oto be Toe
Fe orock 0309/03 @ =4 FC 014—0494 2.
mores) (a earn cal hel re at
aa cial foescros araazce PE [| Gr & ToL, FER ANS VSN EZ
T 4 me



2 i i

REVISIONS
No. |ZONE| _ECN CHANGE DATE

- 050 r 2X 100

Section A-A
4X R063
A | | A
Lo 5 im 450 -300
KE 4 1 |
1
4 _
050 100
A
°° 050 =
800
850
900
MATERIAL SPECI uw OTH Fit
acs IFICATION = APPROVALS. ‘Seon e secre Nistr CENTER FOR NEUTRON RESEARCH
COPPER isswces We; |Natlonal instetute of Stenderds and Technology oe
ae TCR aT ame eens | PeacTens §— {Techrlogy Adhitraion U.S. Geparinent of Commerte
PLATE) HK 201
CAD DATA ANNOTATION DRAWING DATA | oo nore WATER RESWVOIR

D0 NOT SCALE DRAWING [rat

aE oa Sao WE ETAT
work 2oosiows nasa} Som a
eee = FB 014-0496
TE raed THE ae aE mae OE fey sa
fim Larock 01/15/03)" im Lorock 2:4 PE ter 1
7 eters ara . rr x
“7003/0415 14066] i rods 113439] “aon 975-6030 P| _CDIM. & TOL. PER ANSI Y1.SM-1982

i 1 vo
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

TERRANCE P. LINK

No. 20 CR 495

Judge Robert M. Dow Jr.

JOINT STATUS REPORT

On August 13, 2020, an information was filed charging defendant with one 

count of filing a false tax return, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7206(1). (R. 1, 

Information.) On September 16, 2020, defendant pled guilty pursuant to a 

cooperation plea agreement in which he agreed to the postponement of his sentencing 

until after the conclusion of his cooperation. (R. 12, Plea Agreement ¶ 11; R. 13, 

9/16/20 Minute Order.) 

The parties anticipate that defendant’s cooperation will not conclude within 

the next several months and request a status hearing on or after January 3, 2022. 

Date: September 21, 2021

Respectfully submitted,

JOHN R. LAUSCH, JR.

United States Attorney

By: /s Christopher J. Stetler /s Catharine O’Daniel

CHRISTOPHER J. STETLER CATHARINE O’DANIEL

JAMES P. DURKIN Law Offices of Catharine D. O’Daniel

Assistant United States Attorneys 130 East Randolph Street

United States Attorney’s Office Suite 2800

219 South Dearborn Street, 5th Floor Chicago, Illinois 60601

Chicago, Illinois 60604 (312) 580-2072

(312) 353-7602

Case: 1:20-cr-00495 Document #: 17 Filed: 09/21/21 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:49
##### 



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 Quarterly Report of American Standard Companies
Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2004 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Frederic M. Poses, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company
hereby 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 condition and results of operations of the
Company as of and for the periods covered in the Report.  /s/ Frederic M. Poses 
Frederic M. Poses 
Chief Executive Officer October 29, 2004
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-7334
LAWRENCE DUKES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus W. K. JONES; ALVIN NEWMAN, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Chief District Judge. (CA-95-232-5-F) Submitted: January 18, 1996 Decided: February 1, 1996 Before HAMILTON and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lawrence Dukes, Appellant Pro Se. 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. Dukes v. Jones , No. CA-95-232-5-F (E.D.N.C. Aug. 9, 1995).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
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 99-60180

USDC No. 1:99-CV-59-RG

 

JEFFREY D. GALLAND,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

Respondent-Appellee.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

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

September 13, 1999

Before POLITZ, STEWART, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jeffrey Galland, Mississippi prisoner # R3160, has filed a

motion for a certificate of appealability (COA) to appeal the

district court’s dismissal of Galland’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition

without prejudice for failure to exhaust state remedies. 

Galland’s petition contained both habeas claims (his challenges

to his various sentencings, his rule violation report, the

condition of his sentence that he had to marry or have his house

arrest revoked, and the revocation of his house arrest) and a 

42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim (his assertions that he was not allowed to
No. 99-60180

-2-

attend Sunday services). We construe his request for COA as both

a request for COA for his habeas claims and an appeal of the

dismissal of his civil rights claims. 

To obtain a COA to appeal the dismissal of his habeas claims

for failure to exhaust, Galland must make a credible showing of

that he exhausted state remedies. See Murphy v. Johnson, 110

F.3d at 10, 11 (5th Cir. 1997). Galland has not made such a

showing, and his request for COA is denied.

With respect to Galland’s civil rights claim, the district

court should have separated out the § 1983 claim and addressed

it. See Patton v. Jefferson Correctional Center, 136 F.3d 458,

463-64 (5th Cir. 1998) (when a § 2254 petition contains both

habeas and § 1983 claims, the district court should separate the

claims); see also United States v. Santora, 711 F.2d 41, 42 n.1

(5th Cir. 1983) (the essence of a claim dictates the type of

claim it is as opposed to the title affixed to the pleading). 

Accordingly, Galland’s request for COA to appeal the

dismissal of his habeas claims is DENIED. The district court’s

dismissal of Galland’s civil rights claim is VACATED, and the

case is REMANDED for further proceedings. Galland’s motion to

expedite his appeal is DENIED.
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NOS. WR-82,096-01, WR-82,096-02 & WR-82,096-03

EX PARTE KENTRAIL RAY MCCUIN, Applicant

ON APPLICATIONS FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NOS. F-12-51308-L, F-12-51309-L & F-12-51310-L 

IN THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 5

FROM DALLAS COUNTY

Per curiam. YEARY, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which KEASLER and HERVEY,

JJ., joined. JOHNSON, J., filed a dissenting statement. ALCALA, J., filed a dissenting opinion.

O R D E R

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court these applications for writs of habeas corpus. Ex

parte Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of evading

arrest, possession of a firearm by a felon, and unlawful possession with intent to deliver cocaine in

a drug free school zone. He was sentenced to two, five, and twenty years’ imprisonment,

respectively. The Fifth Court of Appeals affirmed his convictions. McCuin v. State, Nos. 05-12-

01148-CR, 05-12-01149-CR & 05-12-01150-CR (Tex. App. Dallas—Jul. 26, 2013) (not designated

for publication).
2

Applicant contended, among other things, that his trial counsel rendered ineffective

assistance because he did not object to an improper cumulation order. After a remand, the trial court

found that trial counsel objected and was not ineffective. The court’s findings concerning the merits

of Applicant’s claims are supported by the record. The trial court recommended that this Court

remand the cases for new punishment hearings. However, we find no legal basis in Applicant’s

allegations to conclude he is entitled to habeas corpus relief. Ex Parte Townsend, 137 S.W.3d 79

(Tex. Crim. App. 2004). Based on the trial court’s findings and this Court’s independent review of

the entire record, we deny relief on all of Applicant’s habeas allegations.

Filed: June 22, 2016

Publish
108TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4115

AN ACT

To amend the Act of November 2, 1966 (80 Stat.

tion.the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Reservaincluded in all contracts affecting the land within1112), to allow binding arbitration clauses to be

108TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4115

AN ACT

To amend the Act of November 2, 1966 (80 Stat. 1112),

to allow binding arbitration clauses to be included in

all contracts affecting the land within the Salt River

Pima-Maricopa Indian Reservation.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 4115 EH

1 SECTION 1. BINDING ARBITRATION FOR SALT RIVER PIMA2 MARICOPA INDIAN RESERVATION CON3 TRACTS.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 2(c) of the Act of Novem5 ber 2, 1966 (25 U.S.C. 416a(c)), is amended—

6 (1) in the first sentence—

7 (A) by striking ‘‘Any lease’’ and all that

8 follows through ‘‘affecting land’’ and inserting

9 ‘‘Any contract, including a lease, affecting

10 land’’; and

11 (B) by striking ‘‘such lease or contract’’

12 and inserting ‘‘such contract’’; and

13 (2) in the second sentence, by striking ‘‘Such

14 leases or contracts entered into pursuant to such

15 Acts’’ and inserting ‘‘Such contracts’’.

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

17 this section shall take effect as if included in the Indian

18 Tribal Economic Development and Contract Encourage19 ment Act of 2000 (Public Law 106–179).

Passed the House of Representatives July 19, 2004.

Attest:

Clerk.
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 Quarterly Report of Trane Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the
quarter ending March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Frederic M. Poses, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby 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 condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for the periods covered in the Report.



|                        
|------------------------
|/S/    FREDERIC M. POSES
|Frederic M. Poses       
|Chief Executive Officer 

May 9, 2008
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Mark DREW, a/k/a Stretch, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 04-6745.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 19, 2004.

Decided Dec. 21, 2004.

*883Mark Drew, Appellant pro se. Arthur Bradley Parham, Office of the United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before LUTTIG, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

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

PER CURIAM.

Mark Drew seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting the Government’s motion for summary judgment and dismissing Drew’s 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. *See Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Drew has not made the requisite showing. 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 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 Annual Report of BLACKWATER MIDSTREAM CORP. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Donald St.Pierre, 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:  June 28, 2010By:
/S/ DONALD ST.PIERREDonald St.PierreChief Financial Officer
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Innovative Solutions and Support, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2005 asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),each of the undersigned officers 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 therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.                                       The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result ofoperations of the Company.

 

 
| By:                 | /s/  GEOFFREY S. M. HEDRICK |   |
|---------------------|-----------------------------|--------|
|                | GEOFFREY S. M. HEDRICK      |
|                | CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD AND   |
|                | CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER     |
|                |                        |
|                |                        |
| July 29,  2005 |                        |
|                |                        |
|                |                        |
| /s/                 | JAMES  J. REILLY            |   |
|                | CHIEF  FINANCIAL OFFICER    |
|                |                        |
|                |                        |
| July 29,  2005 |
|                     |                             |        |  |  |  |

 

----