alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<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 Quarterly Report of Wolverine Tube, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending October 2, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Dennis J. Horowitz, Chief
Executive Officer of Wolverine Tube, Inc., 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 and belief:

      (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.

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

/s/  Dennis J. Horowitz
----------------------------
Dennis J. Horowitz
Chief Executive Officer
November 14, 2005
#### Teneyck, Inc., Formerly Known as Neill Supply Co., Inc., Appellant, v Robert D. Rosenberg, Respondent.

[975 NYS2d 335]

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara R. Kapnick, J.), entered January 11, 2013, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

This action is barred by the doctrine of in pari delicto *(see Kirschner v KPMG LLP,*15 NY3d 446, 464 [2010]). The parties pleaded guilty in federal court to identical charges stemming from the underlying bribery scheme.

Contrary to plaintiffs contention, the adverse interest excep*530tion does not avail it *(see id.*at 466-467). Apart from plaintiffs guilty plea, the complaint itself demonstrates that plaintiff profited from the bribery scheme.

Plaintiff failed to show that leave to amend the complaint was warranted. Concur — Andrias, J.P, Friedman, Richter, ManzanetDaniels and Feinman, JJ. [Prior Case History: 39 Mise 3d 194.]
III 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 19 

Expressing the sense of Congress regarding the importance of life insurance 

and recognizing and supporting National Life Insurance Awareness Month. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 11, 2005 

Mr. CHAMBLISS (for himself and Mr. NELSON of Nebraska) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the 

Judiciary 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of Congress regarding the importance 

of life insurance and recognizing and supporting National 

Life Insurance Awareness Month. 

Whereas life insurance is an essential part of a sound financial plan; 

Whereas life insurance provides financial security for families 

in the event of a premature death by helping surviving 

family members to meet immediate and longer-term financial obligations and objectives; 

Whereas nearly 50,000,000 Americans say they lack the life 

insurance coverage needed to ensure a secure financial 

future for their loved ones; 

Whereas recent studies have found that when a premature 

death occurs, insufficient life insurance coverage on the 
2 

•SCON 19 IS

part of the insured results in three-fourths of surviving 

family members having to take measures such as working 

additional jobs or longer hours, borrowing money, withdrawing money from savings and investment accounts, 

and, in too many cases, moving to smaller, less expensive 

housing; 

Whereas individuals, families, and businesses can benefit 

greatly from professional insurance and financial planning advice, including the assessment of their life insurance needs; and 

Whereas the Life and Health Insurance Foundation for Education (LIFE), the National Association of Insurance 

and Financial Advisors (NAIFA), and a coalition representing hundreds of leading life insurance companies 

and organizations have designated September 2005 as 

‘‘Life Insurance Awareness Month’’, the goal of which is 

to make consumers more aware of their life insurance 

needs, seek professional advice, and take the actions necessary to achieve the financial security of their loved 

ones: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 

2 concurring), That Congress— 

3 (1) designates September 2005 as ‘‘Life Insur4 ance Awareness Month’’; 

5 (2) recognizes and supports the goals and ideals 

6 of ‘‘Life Insurance Awareness Month’’; and 

7 (3) requests that the President issue a procla8 mation calling on the Federal Government, States, 

9 localities, schools, nonprofit organizations, busi-
3 

•SCON 19 IS

1 nesses, other entities, and the people of the United 

2 States to observe ‘‘Life Insurance Awareness 

3 Month’’ with appropriate programs and activities. 

Æ
#### In the Matter of Johnny Downs, Appellant, v New York State Executive Department et al, Respondents.

Submitted August 9, 2010;

decided September 23, 2010

Motion for reargument of motion for leave to appeal denied *[see*15 NY3d 742 (2010)].
Exhibit
32.1





Certification
of Principal Executive Officer


Pursuant
to U.S.C. Section 1350


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





I, Edward J. Quilty, Chairman,
President and Chief Executive Officer of Derma Sciences, Inc., hereby certify
that the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2009 of
Derma Sciences, Inc. (the “Form 10-K”) upon my best knowledge and belief fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Form 10-K fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of Derma Sciences, Inc.





Dated:  March
      31, 2010
            /s/ Edward J. QuiltyEdward
      J. QuiltyChairman,
      President and Chief Executive Officer(Principal
      Executive Officer)
1 The Honorable William R. Wilson, Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 05-3136

___________ John E. Searcy, III, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Arkansas. Warren Newman, individually and in * his official capacity as Special Agent of * [UNPUBLISHED] Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms, * * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: August 7, 2006 Filed: August 18, 2006

___________ Before MURPHY, BYE, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. John Searcy appeals the district court’s 1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his suit under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents , 403 U.S. 388 (1971). Following de novo review, see Evers v. Alliant Techsystems, Inc. , 241 F.3d 948, 953 (8th Cir. 2001) (standard of review), we agr ee with the district court and affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          19,119
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           4,703
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 6,322
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     82,623
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                             415
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                               394
<LOANS>                                        272,531
<ALLOWANCE>                                      2,171
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 404,718
<DEPOSITS>                                     354,977
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              2,293
<LONG-TERM>                                     11,200
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        16,037
<OTHER-SE>                                      20,211
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 404,718
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 20,407
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                5,369
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                 1,124
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                26,900
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              14,326
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              15,342
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           11,558
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   1
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 11,900
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,622
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       1,759
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,759
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.35
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.28
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.08
<LOANS-NON>                                        553
<LOANS-PAST>                                     1,195
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   464
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 2,375
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      287
<RECOVERIES>                                        83
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                2,171
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             2,005
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            166


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               Dec-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                  Sep-09-1999
<PERIOD-END>                    Dec-31-1999
<CASH>                          84,493
<SECURITIES>                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                   0
<ALLOWANCES>                    0
<INVENTORY>                     14,765
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                104,011
<PP&E>                          57,963
<DEPRECIATION>                  9,379
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  590,412
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           96,014
<BONDS>                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0
<PREFERRED>                     150,000
<COMMON>                        36,201
<OTHER-SE>                      (291,803)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    590,412
<SALES>                         761
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                761
<CGS>                           442
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   442
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                364,438
<LOSS-PROVISION>                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              13,010
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 (377,129)
<INCOME-TAX>                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             (377,129)
<DISCONTINUED>                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0
<CHANGES>                       0
<NET-INCOME>                    (377,129)
<EPS-BASIC>                     (.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                   (.11)



</TABLE>
November 20, 2012



### JUDGMENT


## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

COURTLAND BUILDING C OMPANY, INC. , Appellant

NO. 14

- 12

- 00249

- CV V.

JALAL FAMILY PARTNER SHIP, LTD, SOHAIL JA LAL, INDIVIDUALLY AN D

YASMEEN JALAL, INDIV IDUALLY

, Appellees

________________________________ This cause, an appeal from an order signed March 5, 2012 denying appellant Courtland Building Company, Inc.’s motion to compel arbitration, was heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find error in the judgment. We therefore order the judgment of the court below REVERSED as it pertains to the following claims:

1. The claims asserted by appellees Jalal Family Partnership, Ltd., Sohail Jalal, and Yasmeen Jalal;

2. Courtland Building Company, Inc.’s claims for (a) breach of contract, (b) lien foreclosure, (c) declaratory judgment on the validity of its mechanic’s and materialman’s liens, (d) breach of fiduciary duty under section 162.001 of Texas Property Code, (e) violations of secti on 28.002 of the Texas Property Code, (f) quantum meruit, and (g) fraudulent inducement of the construction contract that is the subject of this suit.

In addition, we order the portion of the trial court’s order denying the motion to abate proceedings pen ding arbitration REVERSED as it pertains to the claims described
above

.We REMAND the cause to the trial court for with instructions to (a) grant

Courtland Building Company, Inc.’s motion to compel arbitration of the claims as described herein, (b) stay further litigation of those claims pending arbitration, and (c) determine whether it is appropriate to stay Courtland Building Company, Inc.’s
fraudulent

- transfer claims and its requests for declaratory judgment in connection with
instruments recorded at n umbers 2009007610 and 2012002647 of the Fort Bend County Real Property Records pending arbitration.

We further order that all costs incurred by reason of this appeal be paid by appellees, Jalal Family Partnership, Ltd., Sohail Jalal, Individually, and Yas meen Jalal, Individually.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
#### Baldwin *against*Prouty.

evWenoeffiofeDa vAreTbefore0^ p“eaiee wi,o th¡s thecepadrtydftofor Srtbethj?udteic^ tSe original mióudgmént,in the hand-writing-of proofsto'veHfy those minute*,

IN ERROR, on *certiorari*to a justice’s court.

The plaintiff in error, who was defendant in the court below, pleaded by way of set- off, a judgment recovered by him against the plaintiff below, before another justice.; and the plaintiffhaVing, at the trial in the court below, proved his demand, the defendant jn support of his set-off oiféred to prove, that the justice before whom the iudsment in his favour was obtained, was dead; J ° . « . :an. a'so offered the original minutes of that judgment in the hand-writing of the justice, with proof to Verify those minutes; but this evidence was excluded, and judgment was given in the court below for the defendant itt error for the whole amount of his claim. ■

*Per Curiam.*

The judgment was a good ground of sef-offj, and the evidence offered of the existence of that judgment was the best that the nature of the case would admit. The justice, therefore, erred in rejecting the evidence, and the judgment ought to be reversed.

Judgment reversed.
UN PUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23

- 1020

RANDALL SOUSA
,
Plaintiff

- Appellant
,

v.
CIRCUIT COURT OF FAIRFAX COUNTY; WILLBERG TEDDY CHAPILLIQUEN; THE HONORABLE DAVID BERNHARD; THE HONORABLE CHARLES S. SHARP
,
Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Alexandria

. Michael Stefan Nachmanoff , District Judge. ( 1:21

- cv

- 01304

- MSN

- JFA )

Submitted : May 18, 2023 Decided: May 23, 2023

Before NIEMEYER, RICHARDSON, and RUSHING , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Randall Sousa, Appellant Pro Se. Sheri H. Kelly, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Abingdon, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-1020 Doc: 14 Filed: 05/23/2023 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM:

Randall Sousa seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting Defendants’ motion

to dismiss Sousa’s civil claims. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the
notice of appeal was not timely filed.
In civil cases, pa rties have 30 days after the entry of the district court’s final
judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court
extends the appeal period under Fed. R. Ap p. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal period under
Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a
jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles v. Russell
, 551 U.S. 2 0 5, 2 1 4 ( 2007 ).

The district court entered its order and judgment on November 17, 2022. Sousa

filed the notice of appeal on January 5, 2023. Because Sousa failed to file a timely notice
of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss th e appeal.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.

DISMISSED USCA4 Appeal: 23-1020 Doc: 14 Filed: 05/23/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
#### The People of the State of New York, Appellant, v Dionis Collado, Respondent.

Submitted September 13, 2010;

decided September 16, 2010

Motion for assignment of counsel granted and Robert S. Dean, Esq., Center for Appellate Litigation, 74 Trinity Place, 11th Floor, New York, NY 10006 assigned as counsel to the respondent on the appeal herein.
#### Santorini Equities, Inc., Appellant, v Francisco Picarra et al., Respondents.

Submitted June 7, 2010;

decided July 1, 2010

*770Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the Court of Appeals does not have jurisdiction to entertain this motion for leave to appeal from the order of the Appellate Division where the appeal to the Appellate Division was from an order entered on an appeal from another court *(see*NY Const, art VI, § 3 [b] [7]; CPLR 5602 [a]).
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-1245

JOSEPH A. STALLARD,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at 

Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:22-cv-01236-LMB-JFA)

Submitted: July 20, 2023 Decided: July 25, 2023

Before NIEMEYER and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joseph A. Stallard, Appellant Pro Se. Dennis Carl Barghaan, Jr., Assistant United States 

Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1245 Doc: 13 Filed: 07/25/2023 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Joseph A. Stallard appeals the district court’s order granting the United States Patent 

& Trademark Office’s (USPTO) motion to dismiss Stallard’s civil action under the 

Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 500 to 559. Stallard’s action challenged 

§ 1202.10 of the USPTO’s Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure, which provides 

examining attorneys with guidance on criteria for evaluating an application to register a 

character in a creative work as a trademark. Upon review of the record, we discern no 

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Stallard v. USPTO, No. 

1:22-cv-01236-LMB-JFA (E.D. Va. Mar. 1, 2023). We dispense with oral argument 

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this 

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1245 Doc: 13 Filed: 07/25/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida 

Opinion filed October 18, 2023.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D23-0672

Lower Tribunal No. R.A.A.C. 23-00176

________________

Huseyin Dagli,

Appellant,

vs.

Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission,

Appellee.

An Appeal from the Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission.

Huseyin Dagli, in proper person.

Amanda L. Neff, Deputy General Counsel (Tallahassee), for appellee 

Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission.

Before FERNANDEZ, SCALES and LOBREE, JJ. 

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT
        32a: Rule 13a - 14(b) Certification
 
 Pursuant
        to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
        Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Earthworks Entertainment,
        Inc. (the “Company”) certifies that:
  1.  The
        Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the period ended December
        31,
        2005 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
        15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d));
        and
  2.  The
        information contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material
        respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
        Company.
 
 
 FEBRUARY
                  13, 2006
              /s/ PETER KEEFEPeter
                  KeefePresident,
                  Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET, CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AND
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS INCLUDED IN THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-QSB FOR
THE NINE MONTHS ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                                                      <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                            9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                        DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                           JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                             SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                                   7929
<SECURITIES>                                             44780
<RECEIVABLES>                                            5266
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                         59250
<PP&E>                                                   1391
<DEPRECIATION>                                           560
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                           831
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                    58652
<BONDS>                                                  0
<COMMON>                                                 17
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              1257
<OTHER-SE>                                               1743
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                             61669
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                         16436
<CGS>                                                    3369
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                            16382
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         150
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       2090
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                          (96)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      (96)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                             (96)
<EPS-BASIC>                                            (.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            (.04)


</TABLE>