alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.24


BASE SALARIES OF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE COMPANY


As of October 1,
2005, the following are the base salaries (on an annual basis) of the executive
officers of Network Engines, Inc.:




	
  Name and Title

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  Base Salary

  	
   

  
	
  John H. Curtis

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  230,000 

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  President, Chief Executive Officer and Director

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  John
  Amaral

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  200,000 

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Chief Technology Officer

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Douglas G. Bryant

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  210,000 

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Vice President of Finance and
  Administration, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer

  and Secretary

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Richard
  P. Graber

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  200,000 

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Vice President of Engineering and Operations

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  J. Donald Oldham

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  170,000 

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Vice President of OEM Appliance
  Sales

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Michael
  D. Riley

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  210,000 

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Vice
  President of Marketing and Strategy
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**





**CERTIFICATION
      OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER**


**PURSUANT
      TO 18 USC § 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE**


**SARBANES-OXLEY
      ACT OF 2002**






In
      connection with the annual report of Genesis Pharmaceuticals Enterprises, Inc.
      (“the Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2005 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (“the Report”),
      I, Cao Wubo, Chief Executive Officer and President, 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:





|(a) | The
              annual report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended September 30, 2007
              of the
              Company 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 Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in all material respects,
              the financial condition and results of operations of the
              Company.
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Dated:
      January 15, 2008





/s/
      Cao
      Wubo


Cao
      Wubo


Chief
      Executive Officer and President
```

              PROVIDENT FINANCIAL GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

EXHIBIT 99.1

                  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

In connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of
the Quarterly  Report of Provident  Financial Group,  Inc.  ("Provident") on
Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2003 (the "Report"),  I, Robert L.
Hoverson,  Chief  Executive  Officer of Provident,  certify,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C.   Section   1350,   as  adopted   pursuant  to  Section  906  of  the
Sarbanes-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 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
    Provident.

/s/ Robert L. Hoverson
----------------------
Robert L. Hoverson
Chief Executive Officer

May 15, 2003

[A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has
been  provided to Provident  Financial  Group,  Inc. and will be retained by
Provident Financial Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.]
```
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Charles J. Fisher, Appellant.

(Appeal No. 1.)

[826 NYS2d 923]

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Russell P Buscaglia, A.J.), rendered May 11, 2005. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the first degree (four counts), robbery in the second degree (two counts) and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: In appeal No. 1, defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of, inter alia, four counts of robbery in the first degree (Penal Law § 160.15 [3], [4]). In appeal No. 2, defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of robbery in the first degree (§ 160.15 [4]) and attempted robbery in the first degree (§§ 110.00, 160.15 [4]). With respect to appeal No. 2, we reject defendant’s contention that attempted robbery in the first degree under Penal Law §§ 110.00 and 160.15 (4) is a nonexistent crime *(see People v Durden,*219 AD2d 605, 605-606 [1995], *lv denied*87 NY2d 900 [1995]; *see also People v Miller,*87 NY2d *1277211, 216-217 [1995]). Also with respect to appeal No. 2, Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant’s request for youthful offender status *(see People v Dorman,*5 AD3d 1094 [2004], *lv denied*2 NY3d 798 [2004]), and the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. In view of our determination affirming the judgment in appeal No. 2, we reject defendant’s further contention that the plea in appeal No. 1 must be vacated *(see People v Taylor,*4 AD3d 875, 876 [2004], *lv denied*3 NY3d 648 [2004]; *People v Butler,*2 AD3d 1459 [2003], *lv denied*3 NY3d 637 [2004]; *cf. People v Fuggazzatto,*62 NY2d 862, 863 [1984]). Present—Martoche, J.P., Smith, Centra and Green, JJ.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 2-09-254-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF E.J.C., A CHILD

----------

FROM THE 231 DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

ST

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

----------

On October 6, 2009, we notified appellant that the trial court clerk

responsible for preparing the record in this appeal had informed this court that

arrangements had not been made to pay for the clerk’s record as required by

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 35.3(a)(2). See Tex. R. App. P. 35.3(a)(2).

We stated that we would dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless

appellant, within fifteen days, made arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record

and provided this court with proof of payment.

1... See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
Appellant sent a letter to this court on October 19, 2009, stating she is

indigent and forwarding a copy of an Affidavit of Inability to Pay she filed in the

trial court on July 22, 2008. We notified appellant on October 20, 2009, that

the affidavit does not satisfy the requirements of an affidavit of indigence for

appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 20.1. We stated that appellant should file an

affidavit complying with Tex. R. App. P. 20.1 with the trial court by November

2, 2009. Appellant failed to do so and has therefore failed to make

arrangements for payment of the clerk’s record.

Because appellant has not made payment arrangements for the clerk’s

record, it is the opinion of the court that the appeal should be dismissed for

want of prosecution. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App.

P. 37.3(b), 42.3(b).

Appellant shall pay all costs of the appeal, for which let execution issue.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: GARDNER, WALKER, and MCCOY, JJ.

DELIVERED: November 19, 2009

2
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1977 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1977

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Department of 
   Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health National 
  Institutes of Dental and Craniofacial Research for fiscal year 2024.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 29, 2023

Mr. Biggs (for himself, Mr. Rosendale, Mr. Gaetz, Mr. Good of Virginia, 
   Mr. Roy, and Mr. Crane) introduced the following bill; which was 
            referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Department of 
   Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health National 
  Institutes of Dental and Craniofacial Research for fiscal year 2024.

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

SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 
              AND HUMAN SERVICES, NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH 
              NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF DENTAL AND CRANIOFACIAL RESEARCH 
              FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, amounts authorized 
to be appropriated or otherwise available for Department of Health and 
Human Services, National Institutes of Health National Institute of 
Dental and Craniofacial Research for fiscal year 2024 may not exceed 
$461,781,000.
                                 <all>
```
#### J. B. Martin v. Commonwealth.

Criminal Law — Indictment.

After verdict and judgment of conviction in a criminal case the indictment should he construed literally to sustain the finding of the jury.

Bill of Exceptions.

It is necessary not only that the judge sign the bill of exceptions, but that it shall be filed with the pleadings as a part of the record. Unless' it is so filed it does not become a part of the record.

APPEAL PROM ADAIR CIRCUIT COURT.

September 25, 1875.

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay :

We cannot say that the indictment in this case does not state facts constituting a public offense. After trial, verdict and judgment, the indictment is to be construed liberally to sustain the finding of the jury. In this case it is averred by the commonwealth, that the defendant represented to Winfrey, Bradshaw and others, certain things as existing facts, and that by and through, such representations he obtained in money one hundred dollars. It is further averred that he intended by such representations to. perpetuate a fraud upon said parties, and charged that the statements made were untrue, and so known to be by defendant at the time they were made. We may also infer from the indictment that the Bank of Columbia had been robbed, and that the parties defrauded were interested, either as stockholders in said bank, or as citizens desirous of suppressing crime in having the robbers brought to justice.

*497
      *Winfrey & Winfrey for appellant. T. E. Moss, for appellee.*

The action of the court below in overruling the motion in arrest of judgment in this case is not a ground for reversal. We cannot inquire into the remaining questions raised in the argument; there is no bill of exceptions in the record.

There is a paper copied which seems upon its face to have been intended for a bill of exceptions; but there is no order of court directing it to be filed. It is necessary not only that the judge shall sign the bill of exceptions, but that it shall be filed with the pleadings as part of the record. Sec. 367, Civil Code of Practice. Unless it be so filed, it does not become part of the record, and the clerk, in making out a transcript for this court, has no legal authority to copy it. As the paper in question was improperly copied into the record before us, we cannot take notice of its contents.

The judgment appealed from must be *affirmed.*
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 Annual Report of Superior Galleries, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Silvano DiGenova, Chief Executive 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 to the best of 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.


                                    /s/ Silvano DiGenova
                                    -----------------------------------------
                                    Silvano DiGenova, Chief Executive Officer
                                    August 10, 2005



         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

         This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and
are not to be incorporated by reference into the Report or any other filing of
the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any
general incorporation language in such filing.
Exhibit 32.2




Certification
of Principal Financial Officer


Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350


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




Pursuant
to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned
officer of NeuMedia, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), does hereby
certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that:




The
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2010 of the Company
(the “Form 10-Q”) 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 the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




Date:
August 23, 2010




/s/
      Russell BurkeRussell
      BurkeChief
      Financial Officer and Secretary(Principal
      Financial
Officer)
EXHIBIT 32.1

 

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

 

In            connection with the Quarterly Report of CreditRiskMonitor.com, Inc. (“CRM”)            on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2007, as filed with the            Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,            Jerome S. Flum, Chief Executive 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, to the best of 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. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

By:  /s/ Jerome S. Flum

Jerome S. Flum

Chief Executive Officer

 

November 12, 2007

 

20

----
#### Jakes *v.*The State.

Criminal *Law.—Temperance.—Act of 1859.—Sale for Medical*Purposes.—• On the trial of an indictment for selling intoxicating liquor without a license under the act of 1859, the proof was, that the defendant, a druggist, sold a pint of liquor on the statement of the purchaser that it was for medical purposes, and it was so used.

*Held,*that the defendant should have been acquitted.

APPEAL from the Tippecanoe Criminal Circuit Court.

Worden, J.

The appellant was indicted for, and tried and convicted of, selling intoxicating liquor without a license, in violation of the act of 1859. The case comes before us *474on the evidence, from which it appears that the appellant was a druggist, and that as such he sold to one William W. Smith a pint of whiskey, for the sum of fifty cents. The whiskey was bought, as the witness testified, to be used for medical purposes, and was thus used. When called for, the appellant enquired for what purpose it was wanted, and was informed by Smith that it was wanted for medical purposes. Under these circumstances, the conviction cannot be maintained. *Donnell*v. *The State,*2 Ind. 658; *Thomasson*v. *The State,*15 Ind. 449. A motion which the appellant made for a new trial should have prevailed.

*G. O. B’ehm, A. 0. Beltm,*and *y. R. Carnahan,*for appellant.

*y. C. Denny,*Attorney General, for the State.

The judgment below is reversed, and the cause remanded.
EXHIBIT 32

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 First Litchfield Financial
Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30,
2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), we, Joseph J. Greco, President and Chief Executive Officer of
the Company, and Carroll A. Pereira, Principal 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 results of operations
          of the Company.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
<S>                                         <C>
/s/ Joseph J. Greco                         /s/ Carroll A. Pereira
-------------------                         ----------------------
Joseph J. Greco                             Carroll A. Pereira
President and Chief Executive Officer       Principal Financial and Accounting Officer
November 14, 2007                           November 14, 2007
</TABLE>

The foregoing certificate is furnished solely for purposes of complying with
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and for no other purpose
whatsoever. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth herein or in any
of the Company's previous filings under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended,
or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, that might incorporate the
Company's future filings, including this Report on Form 10-Q, in whole or in
part, this Certificate shall not be incorporated by reference into any such
filings.
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**





**CERTIFICATION
      OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER**


**PURSUANT
      TO 18 USC § 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE**


**SARBANES-OXLEY
      ACT OF 2002**







In
      connection with the annual report of Genesis Pharmaceuticals Enterprises, Inc.
      (“the Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2005 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (“the Report”),
      I, Elsa Sung, Chief Financial Officer, 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:





|(a) | The
              annual report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended September 30, 2007
              of the
              Company 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 Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in all material respects,
              the financial condition and results of operations of the
              Company.
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Dated:
      January 15, 2008




/s/
      Elsa
      Sung


Elsa
      Sung


Chief
      Financial Officer