alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32.1
   (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 the dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.
 Date: March 31, 2009
    
    /s/ Hilton H. Howell, Jr.

Hilton H. Howell, Jr.President and Chief Executive OfficerDate: March 31, 2009
    
    /s/ John G. Sample, Jr.

John G. Sample, Jr.Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
96-2357.

#### Guess v. Landefeld.

Fairfield App. Nos. 96CA37, 96CA39, 96CA40 and 96CA45. Reported at 77 Ohio St.3d 1518, 674 N.E.2d 372. On motion for reconsideration. Motion denied.
#### Union Carbide Corporation, Appellant, v Affiliated FM Insurance Company et al., Defendants, and Continental Casualty Company et al., Respondents.

Submitted April 4, 2011;

decided May 3, 2011

Motion for reargument denied *[see*16 NY3d 419 (2011)].
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>


         This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Condensed Consolidated Interim Balance Sheet and the Condensed Consolidated
Interim Statement of Operations and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000823534
<NAME>                        REPAP ENTERPRISES INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     CANADIAN DOLLARS
       
<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1.4219
<CASH>                                         26,700
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  74,800
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    74,800
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               176,300
<PP&E>                                         1,410,600
<DEPRECIATION>                                 411,400
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1,327,600
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          173,700
<BONDS>                                        921,500
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    16,000
<COMMON>                                       640,400
<OTHER-SE>                                     (640,500)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1,327,600
<SALES>                                        146,900
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               163,300
<CGS>                                          111,100
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  119,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (200)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             26,500
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                1,600
<INCOME-TAX>                                   800
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (800)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 18,100
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   17,300
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  20
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  20
        


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3244 Considered and Passed Senate (CPS)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3244

To provide that Members of Congress shall not receive a cost of living 
               adjustment in pay during fiscal year 2011.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 22, 2010

   Mr. Feingold (for himself, Mr. Burr, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Bennet, Mrs. 
  Lincoln, Mr. Grassley, Mrs. McCaskill, Mr. Begich, Mr. McCain, Mr. 
   Whitehouse, Mr. Leahy, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Nelson of Nebraska, Mr. 
 Ensign, and Mr. Durbin) introduced the following bill; which was read 
           twice, considered, read the third time, and passed

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide that Members of Congress shall not receive a cost of living 
               adjustment in pay during fiscal year 2011.

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

SECTION 1. NO COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT IN PAY OF MEMBERS OF CONGRESS.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no adjustment shall be 
made under section 601(a) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 
(2 U.S.C. 31) (relating to cost of living adjustments for Members of 
Congress) during fiscal year 2011.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32(n)

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









|(1) | The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2008 (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 the dates and for the periods presented in the Report.









|/s/ Theodore H. Bunting, Jr.Theodore H. Bunting, Jr. 
Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer of
Entergy Texas, Inc.
(acting principal financial officer)
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date:	February 27, 2009
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-80,368-01

EX PARTE BRIAN CHARLES JONES, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 36853CR/A IN THE 40TH DISTRICT COURT

FROM ELLIS COUNTY

Per curiam.

O P I N I O N

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 this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

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

or detention and was sentenced to life imprisonment. 

Applicant contends that his counsel rendered ineffective assistance because he failed to

timely file a notice of appeal. Trial counsel submitted an affidavit in which he states that Applicant

at all times wanted to pursue an appeal and that counsel’s failure to timely file notice of appeal was

in no way Applicant’s fault. Counsel states that he mistakenly believed that notice of appeal had

been filed at the same time as a motion for new trial but only later learned that the notice of appeal
could not be located.

The trial court has determined that a one-page notice of appeal was stapled to the back of an

amended motion to quash the indictment found in the court’s file, but that the notice itself was not

file-stamped and contains no certificate of service. The trial court finds that the district clerk did not

forward the notice of appeal that was stapled to the motion to the court of appeals. The trial court

also finds that Applicant wishes to appeal his conviction. 

We find that Applicant is entitled to the opportunity to file an out-of-time appeal of the

judgment of conviction in Cause No. 36853CR/A from the 40th District Court of Ellis County. 

Applicant is ordered returned to that time at which he may give a written notice of appeal so that he

may then, with the aid of counsel, obtain a meaningful appeal. Within ten days of the issuance of

this opinion, the trial court shall determine whether Applicant is indigent. If Applicant is indigent

and wishes to be represented by counsel, the trial court shall immediately appoint an attorney to

represent Applicant on direct appeal. All time limits shall be calculated as if the sentence had been

imposed on the date on which the mandate of this Court issues. We hold that, should Applicant

desire to prosecute an appeal, he must take affirmative steps to file a written notice of appeal in the

trial court within 30 days after the mandate of this Court issues.

Copies of this opinion shall be sent to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice-Correctional

Institutions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division. 

Delivered: October 30, 2013

Do not publish
## I

N T H E C O U R

T O F C R I M I N A L A P P EA L S O F T EX A S
N O S. A P - 75, 868 & A P - 75, 869

EX PA R TE A A R O N JAM ES H A LL , A ppl i c ant

ON AP P LI CAT I ONS F OR W RI TS OF HABE AS CORP US CAUS E N O. 9 1 5 3 8 8 - A AND 9 2 0 8 0 2 - A I N T HE 2 2 8 TH DI S TR I CT COURT FROM HA RRI S CO UNTY

P er cur i am . O P I N I O N Pursuant to the p ro v i s i o n s of Article 11.07 of the Te x as Code of Criminal Proce dure, the cler k of the trial c ourt transmitted to t h i s C o u rt t h es e applications for writs of ha beas c orpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of murder a nd conspirac y

to possess with intent to deliver 400 g rams or more of coca ine and sentenc ed to six ty -five
and thi rt y y e ars ’ imp ri so nme nt, re sp e c tiv e ly . T he F ir st Cou rt of Ap pe a ls a ff

ir me d his c on vic tio ns . Hall v. State, 137 S.W .3d 847 (Tex. App. – Houston 2004, pet ref ’d ). Applicant conte nds, inter alia, that his tr ia l c ouns e l r e nd e re d in e ff e c tiv e a ssi sta

nc e be c a us e counsel failed to know the law conc erninguse of a prior juvenile conviction for enha nceme nt andc a

us e d a ple a of “ tr ue ” to be e nte re d to a juve nil e c on vic tio n that wa s unava ila ble fo r e nh anc e me nt. Th e tr ia l c ourt

ha s d e te rm ine d th a t tr ia l c ouns e l’ s p e rf or manc e wa s d e fi c ient and th at this de fi c ie nt p e rf

or manc e prej ud ice d App lic ant. Th e tr ia l c ourt re c omm e nd s th a t r e lie f b e g ra nte d in the form of

new punishment proc eeding s. This recommendation is supported by the re cord. Habe as cor

pus relief is gr anted. The sentenc es in ca use numbers 915388 and 920802 from the 228th District Court of Harris C ounty are set aside, a nd Applicant is rema

nded to the custody

of the She ri ff

of Ha rr is C ounty

fo r n e w p un ish me nt p ro c e e din g s.

Deliver ed: Marc h 19, 2008 Do No t Pu

bli sh
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      Exhibit 11

                        CONTINENTAL CIRCUITS CORPORATION
                STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE
                                   (Unaudited)
                      (In thousands, except per share data)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                              Three months ended                   Six Months Ended
                                                        January 31          February 2,       January 31,         February 2,
                                                        -------------------------------       -------------------------------
                                                            1998               1997               1998               1997
                                                          -------             ------            -------             ------
<S>                                                       <C>                 <C>               <C>                 <C>
Basic:
Average Shares Outstanding                                  7,267              7,206              7,262              7,200

Net Income (loss)                                         $(2,638)            $1,817            $  (324)            $3,250
                                                          =======             ======            =======             ======

Net income (loss) per share                               $ (0.36)            $ 0.25            $ (0.04)            $ 0.45
                                                          =======             ======            =======             ======


Diluted:
Average Shares Outstanding                                  7,267              7,206              7,262              7,200

Net effect of dilutive stock options--based on
  the treasury stock method using average
  market price                                                183                226                238                228
                                                          -------             ------            -------             ------

Diluted Shares                                              7,450              7,432              7,500              7,428

Net Income (loss)                                         $(2,638)            $1,817            $  (324)            $3,250
                                                          =======             ======            =======             ======

Net income (loss) per share *                             $ (0.36)            $ 0.24            $ (0.04)            $ 0.44
                                                          =======             ======            =======             ======
</TABLE>


* The anti-dilutive impact of additional shares is not reflected on reported
  loss per share per SFAS 128.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> US DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                  1.000
<CASH>                                           1,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,896,616
<ALLOWANCES>                                   198,422
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,792,988
<PP&E>                                       2,653,261
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,782,119
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,768,862
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,455,317
<BONDS>                                        365,309
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            42
<OTHER-SE>                                     948,194
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,768,862
<SALES>                                      3,334,898
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,334,898
<CGS>                                        2,575,837
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,575,837
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               570,113
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              56,516
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                132,432
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            132,432
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   132,432
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.03


</TABLE>
Exhibit 13.2




CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In connection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F of Hadera Paper Ltd. (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, Shaul Gliksberg, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his knowledge, that:




(1)              The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and




(2               The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.




Date:  June 16, 2010                                                                                            /s/Shaul Gliksberg


Shaul Gliksberg


ChiefFinancial and Business Development Officer
J-S63038-15

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

: PENNSYLVANIA

Appellee :

:

v. :

:

DONALD FRANCIS, :

:

Appellant : No. 916 EDA 2015

Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence entered on February 11, 2015

in the Court of Common Pleas of Lehigh County,

Criminal Division, No(s): CP-39-CR-0004292-2014; 

CP-39-CR-0004317-2014

BEFORE: DONOHUE, MUNDY and MUSMANNO, JJ.

JUDGMENT ORDER BY MUSMANNO, J.: FILED NOVEMBER 12, 2015

Donald Francis (“Francis”) appeals from the judgment of sentence 

imposed following his guilty plea to possession with intent to deliver a 

controlled substance and possession of a controlled substance. See 35 P.S. 

§ 780-113(a)(16), (30). Francis’s counsel, Amy E. Sonin, Esquire (“Sonin”), 

ostensibly seeking to withdraw her representation, has filed a brief pursuant 

to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967). See Anders Brief at 7, 

11-12, 18-23.

Pursuant to Anders, when counsel believes an appeal is frivolous and 

wishes to withdraw from representation, he/she must

(1) petition the [C]ourt for leave to withdraw stating that after 

making a conscientious examination of the record, counsel has 

determined the appeal would be frivolous; (2) file a brief 

referring to any issues that might arguably support the appeal, 

but which does not resemble a no-merit letter; and (3) furnish a 
J-S63038-15

- 2 -

copy of the brief to the defendant and advise him of his right to 

retain new counsel, proceed pro se, or raise any additional points 

he deems worthy of this Court’s attention.

Commonwealth v. Edwards, 906 A.2d 1225, 1227 (Pa. Super. 2006) 

(citation omitted); see also Commonwealth v. Santiago, 978 A.2d 349, 

361 (Pa. 2009) (setting forth the requirements of the contents of an Anders

brief).

Here, Sonin’s brief fulfills the requirements of Anders and Santiago. 

Moreover, Sonin provided Francis with notice of her intention to seek 

permission to withdraw from representation, a copy of the Anders Brief filed 

on his behalf, and advised Francis of his rights in lieu of representation. 

However, Sonin has failed to file a petition to withdraw as counsel with this 

Court.1 See Edwards, 906 A.2d at 1227.

We hereby Order Sonin to either file a proper petition to withdraw 

that fulfills the requirements of Anders with this Court, or file an advocate’s 

brief within thirty (30) days of the date this Order is filed. In the event 

Sonin files an advocate’s brief, the Commonwealth will be permitted thirty 

(30) days to respond from the filing of the brief. Panel jurisdiction retained.

Judgment Entered.

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.

Prothonotary

 

1 We note that Sonin appears to have provided a petition to withdraw to 

Francis. See Letter, 6/5/15. However, no petition was filed with this Court.
J-S63038-15

- 3 -

Date: 11/12/2015
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3192 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3192

 To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for the tolling of 
  the timing of review for appeals of final decisions of the Board of 
               Veterans' Appeals, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 12, 2010

  Mr. Specter introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
             referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for the tolling of 
  the timing of review for appeals of final decisions of the Board of 
               Veterans' Appeals, 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. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Fair Access to Veterans Benefits Act 
of 2010''.

SEC. 2. TOLLING OF TIMING OF REVIEW FOR APPEALS OF FINAL DECISIONS OF 
              BOARD OF VETERANS' APPEALS.

    (a) In General.--Section 7266(a) of title 38, United States Code, 
is amended--
            (1) by striking ``In order'' and inserting ``(1) Except as 
        provided in paragraph (2), in order''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
    ``(2) The 120-day period described in paragraph (1) shall be 
extended upon a showing of good cause for such time as justice may 
require.''.
    (b) Applicability.--
            (1) In general.--Paragraph (2) of section 7266(a) of such 
        title, as added by subsection (a), shall apply to a notice of 
        appeal filed with respect to a final decision of the Board of 
        Veterans' Appeals that was issued on or after July 24, 2008.
            (2) Reinstatement.--Any petition for review filed with the 
        Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims that was dismissed by such 
        Court on or after July 24, 2008, as untimely, shall, upon the 
        filing of a petition by an adversely affected person filed not 
        later than six months after the date of the enactment of this 
        Act, be reinstated upon a showing that the petitioner had good 
        cause for filing the petition on the date it was filed.
                                 <all>
```