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 Annual Report of Ampco-Pittsburgh Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, in the capacity and on the date 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.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|               |  |     |  |                                               
|-------------- |  | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------
|March 16, 2010 |  | By: |  | /s/ Robert A. Paul                            
|               |  |     |  | Director, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
|               |  |     |  | Robert A. Paul
#### Julie DEMAHY, Plaintiff-Appellee v. ACTAVIS, INC., Individually and as Successor in Interest of Purepac Pharmaceutical Company, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 08-31204.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Aug. 22, 2011.

Kristine K. Sims, Brian Leonard Glorioso, Richard Alvin Tonry, II, Tonry, Brinson & Glorioso, L.L.C., Slidell, LA, Louis M. Bograd (argued), Center for Constitutional Litigation, P.C., Washington, DC, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Richard A. Dean (argued), Irene Childress Keyse-Walker, Kristen Lepke Mayer, Tucker Ellis & West, L.L.P., Cleveland, OH, Elizabeth Haecker Ryan, Lemle & Kelleher, L.L.P., New Orleans, LA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Joseph Paul Thomas, Linda E. Maichl, Ulmer & Bernel, L.L.P., Cincinnati, OH, for Amicus Curiae.

*1046Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

PER CURIAM:

The Supreme Court having reversed the judgment of this Court and remanded this action for further proceedings in light of its opinion in *PLIVA, Inc. v. Mensing,*— U.S.-, 131 S.Ct. 2567, 180 L.Ed.2d 580 (2011), we vacate the district court’s order denying in part the motion to dismiss and remand for the entry of judgment in favor of the defendant-appellant, Actavis, Inc.

VACATED and REMANDED
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 eTotalSource, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof  (the  "Report").  I, Terry L.  Eilers,
President and CEO of the company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 USC 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.


                                         /s/ Terry L. Eilers
                                         --------------------------------
                                         Terry L. Eilers, President/CEO

Dated:  8/12/03
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2811 

To amend the Migratory Bird Treaty Act to provide for penalties and enforcement for intentionally taking protected avian species, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 20, 2009 

Mr. MERKLEY introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

A BILL 

To amend the Migratory Bird Treaty Act to provide for 

penalties and enforcement for intentionally taking protected avian species, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Migratory Bird Treaty 

5 Act Penalty and Enforcement Act of 2009’’. 

6 SEC. 2. AMENDMENT OF MIGRATORY BIRD TREATY ACT. 

7 Section 6 of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 

8 U.S.C. 707) is amended by redesignating subsections (c) 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2811 IS

1 and (d) as subsections (d) and (e), respectively, and by 

2 inserting after subsection (b) the following: 

3 ‘‘(c)(1) Except in the case of hunting and other activ4 ity allowed under section 3, whoever, in violation of this 

5 Act, intentionally and maliciously takes by any manner 

6 any migratory bird shall be guilty of a felony and, upon 

7 conviction, shall be fined not more than $50,000 or im8 prisoned for not more than two years, or both, for each 

9 violation. 

10 ‘‘(2) Any person who intentionally and maliciously 

11 commits any other act or omission in violation of this Act 

12 or any regulations issued under this Act shall be guilty 

13 of a felony and, upon conviction, shall be fined not more 

14 than $50,000 or imprisoned for not more than two years, 

15 or both, for each violation. 

16 ‘‘(3) The Secretary or the Secretary of the Treasury 

17 shall pay, from sums received as fines under this sub18 section and subject to the availability of appropriations, 

19 a reward to any person who furnishes information that 

20 leads to an arrest or a criminal conviction for any violation 

21 of this Act. The amount of the reward, if any, shall be 

22 designated by the Secretary or the Secretary of the Treas23 ury, as appropriate. Any officer or employee of the United 

24 States or any State or local government who furnishes in25 formation or renders service in the performance of his or 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 2811 IS

1 her official duties is ineligible for payment under this 

2 paragraph.’’. 

Æ 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with BILLS
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

MARK GALLAGHER,

Petitioner

v.

ABSTRACT OVERHEAD DOOR CORP. (WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEAL BOARD),

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 85 EAL 2022

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the

Commonwealth Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 6th day of December, 2022

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  897,309
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                       1,508,753
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              13,264,873
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      1,860
<COMMON>                                         6,515
<OTHER-SE>                                      93,949
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                13,264,873
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,158,321
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                6,036,274
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                79,664
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             675,179
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,632,796)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   441,884
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,074,680)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,074,680)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.45)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.45)
        

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
financial statements of Realmark Property Investors Limited Partnership VI-B for
the quarter ended June 30, 2000, and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                          3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                     APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                       JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                                 841,163
<SECURITIES>                                                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                0
<ALLOWANCES>                                                 0
<INVENTORY>                                                  0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                             0
<PP&E>                                               7,078,885
<DEPRECIATION>                                       2,214,101
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       6,447,182
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                        0
<BONDS>                                              5,248,748
<COMMON>                                                     0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                        0
<PREFERRED>                                                  0
<OTHER-SE>                                                   0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         6,447,182
<SALES>                                                      0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                       509,232
<CGS>                                                        0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                          447,175
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                             0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                     114,229
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                       (53,487)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                 0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                          0
<DISCONTINUED>                                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                              0
<CHANGES>                                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                                           (53,487)
<EPS-BASIC>                                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                0


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2

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


In connection with the Quarterly Report of CHS Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-Q/A for the period ended November 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John Schmitz,
Executive Vice President and 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 the Report fairly presents, in all
               material respects, the financial condition and result of
               operations of the Company.


/s/ John Schmitz
--------------------
John Schmitz
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
November 14, 2003
# Sheet1

mailto:J.doe@abc.commailto:Ddoe@xyz.commailto:b.smith@abc.commailto:Dan@luckycasino.net
Exhibit 32

                    ADVANCED FINANCIAL INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES




Section 906 Certification of Principal Executive Officer and Chief Executive
Officer

     I, Charles A. Holtgraves, Chief Executive officer (Principal Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer), certify that this quarterly report on Form
10-QSB for the quarterly period ended (June 30, 2002) fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) of 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
and that the information contained herein fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Advanced
Financial Inc. and its subsidiaries for the periods presented.


Date: November 21, 2003                     /s/  Charles A. Holtgraves
                                            -----------------------------------
                                                 Charles A. Holtgraves
                                                 Chief Executive Officer
                                                 Chief Financial Officer
#### Marjorie Barstow GREENBIE, Plaintiff, v. Hollister NOBLE et al., Defendants.

United States District Court S. D. New York.

Dec. 7, 1955.

*415Socolow, Stein & Seto.n, New York City, Monroe E. Stein, New York City, of counsel, for plaintiff.

Satterlee, Warfield & Stephens, New York City, James F. Dwyer, George C. Shively, New York City, Patricia A. O’Brien, New York City, of counsel, for defendants Doubleday & Co., Inc. and Sears Roebuck & Co.

EDELSTEIN, District Judge.

Defendants Doubleday & Company, Inc. and Sears Roebuck & Company object to certain of the interrogatories served upon them by the plaintiff in this copyright infringement action. Broadly, two main grounds for objection are offered. One, urged by both defendants, is ■that information relevant solely to the issue of damages is called for prematurely, before the establishment of liability. The other is raised only by Sears, which complains that portions of interrogatories are objectionable because they call for information concerning the internal business affairs of its subsidiaries, not parties to this action and related to it only through stock ownership.

In this district, the right of a plaintiff in a copyright infringement action to pursue inquiry before trial on the issue of damages has been upheld. Lundberg v. Welles, D.C., 93 F.Supp. 359. In any event, I find the plaintiff’s position well taken that the interrogatories are material and necessary not alone to the amount of any recovery by her, but also to the validity of the defense of laches interposed by both Doubleday and Sears.

 As to the interrogatories concerning Sears’ wholly owned subsidiaries, Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., requires, for a party corporation, that answers be given * * by any officer or agent, who shall furnish such information as is available to the party.” Answer cannot be avoided by alleging ignorance, if the corporation can obtain the information from sources under its control. 4 Moore Federal Practice 2331, 2nd ed.; Hornung v. Eastern Auto. Forwarding Co., D.C., 11 F.R.D. 300. Hence, all that remains is the factual question of whether or not Sears can obtain the information from sources under its control. If it cannot furnish the information sought, Sears should so state under oath.

Accordingly, the objections are overruled.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Area 3 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comment, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Monday, March 9, 2009.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sallie Chavez at 1-888-912-1227, or (954) 423-7979.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that a meeting of the Area 3 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be held Monday, March 9, 2009, at 12:30 p.m. Eastern Time. You can submit written                           ( print page 4307)                        comments to the panel by faxing the comments to (954) 423-7975, or by mail to Taxpayer Advocacy Panel, Room 340, 1000 South Pine Island Road, Plantation, FL 33324, or you can contact us at                     *http://www.improveirs.org.*                     This meeting is not required to be open to the public, but because we are always interested in community input we will accept public comments. Please contact Sallie Chavez at 1-888-912-1227 or (954) 423-7979 for more information.                

*The agenda will include the following:*                     Various IRS issues.                

Dated: January 13, 2009.

Shawn F. Collins,

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

 [FR Doc. E9-1336 Filed 1-22-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
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 International Packaging and Logistic Group, Inc., (the "Company") on Form 10Q for the period ending March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Steve Westlund, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of the undersigned’s 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 result of operations of the Company.








/s/ Steve Westlund


Steve Westlund


Chief Financial Officer





May 17, 2011
#### BATES v. WILCOX et al.

No. 4913.

United States District Court W. D. Missouri, W. D.

June 23, 1948.

Joseph Koralchik, of Kansas City, Mo., for plaintiff.

Paul Stinson, of Kansas City, Mo., for defendants.

DUNCAN, District Judge.

Plaintiff instituted this suit in the Circuit Court of Jackson County within and 'for the State of Missouri in which he sought damages against the defendants for breach of contract of employment and sought damages in the amount of a fixed sum and in the alternative for an accounting against one of the defendants. Upon the petition of the defendant Wilcox Electric Company the cause was removed to this court. Thereafter, the plaintiff filed a motion for a jury trial under the provisions of Rule 39(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. This motion was filed on April 30, 1948, and to this motion the defendants filed objections alleging that the action was an equitable one, for accounting, and that the plaintiff was not entitled to trial by jury. Subsequent thereto on May 10, 1948, the plaintiff filed his amended complaint in which he prays “for judgment against said defendants in the sum of One Hundred Sixteen Thousand, Five Hundred and Forty-nine Dollars and Sixty Eight Cents ($116,549.68), together with interest thereon.” In this amended complaint plaintiff complied with Rule 9 of the Rules of Practice of the District Court of the United States for the Western District of Missouri. Whether the action under the original complaint was one in equity or one in law is not now of importance. The amended complaint clearly makes the action one at law and entitles *370the plaintiff to a trial by jury, and the plaintiff has made timely request after the case was removed into this court for such a jury trial under said Rule 9. Plaintiff’s request should, therefore, be granted.

It is so ordered.

Order

Plaintiff’s motion for trial by jury coming on for consideration and the Court having examined the pleadings and the suggestions in support of and in opposition to said motion doth now here sustain said motion on the ground that the original complaint was filed in the Circuit Court, of Jackson'County, Missouri, and removed to this Court upon the petition of the defendant Wilcox Electric Company and that prior to the removal of said cause it was not necessary or required of the plaintiff that he request a trial by jury, and that upon the filing of an amended complaint after the case was removed into this court the plaintiff at the first opportunity requested a trial by jury.
* 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. 98-50827

Summary Calendar

 

SERGIO HIRAM ALVIDREZ,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

KENNETH W. WILLIAMS ET AL.,

Defendants,

DAYTON J. POPPELL, Warden; ADOLPH THOMAS JR.; 

REFUGIO SAMARRON; MAURICE NEWCOMB,

Defendants-Appellees.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. SA-96-CV-1089

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

July 19, 1999

Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Sergio Hiram Alvidrez, Texas prisoner no. 512255, appeals

the district court’s summary judgment in favor of Dayton J.

Poppell, Warden of the Connally Unit of the Texas Department of

Criminal Justice, Institutional Division (TDCJ-ID), and Connally

Unit employees, Adolph Thomas, Jr., Refugio Samarron, and Maurice
No. 98-50827

-2-

Newcomb. Having reviewed the arguments and the record on appeal,

we find that Alvidrez failed to present evidence showing that a

genuine issue of material fact exists that the defendants were

deliberately indifferent to a substantial risk of serious harm. 

See Newton v. Black, 133 F.3d 301, 308 (5th Cir. 1998); Newell v.

Oxford Management, Inc., 912 F.2d 793, 795 (5th Cir. 1990); Fed.

R. Civ. P. 56(c).

AFFIRMED.