alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 32**

 

Certification 

 

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), each of the undersigned officers of Symmetry Holdings Inc., (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that: 

 

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2007 (the “Form 10-Q”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 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. 

 

 

| Dated: May 7, 2007 |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            | */s/ Corrado De Gasperis* |   |
|--------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------|--------|
|               |  

 

 

*Chief Executive Officer*

 

 

 

* *

 

Dated: May 7, 2007 

 

*/s/ Corrado De Gasperis*

 

 

 

 

 

*Principal Financial Officer*

 

 

 

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.

 

 

  |
Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed July 23, 2015.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-14-00852-CR

NO. 14-14-00853-CR

CLIFFORD BAKER, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 174th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1299247 and 1299248

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant appeals his convictions for possession of a controlled substance 

with intent to deliver and possession of body armor by a felon. Punishment was 

assessed at confinement for twelve years in each case and the sentences were 

ordered to run concurrently. 
2

Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal 

in each case is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the 

requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presenting a 

professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating why there are no arguable 

grounds to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811–13 (Tex. Crim. 

App. 1978). 

A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised 

of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford 

v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). As of this date, more than 

60 days have passed and no pro se response has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree the 

appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error 

in the record of either case. We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in 

an Anders brief or a pro se response when we have determined there are no 

arguable grounds for review. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. 

Crim. App. 2005).

Accordingly, in each case the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Jamison and Busby.

Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     6
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION FROM FORM
10-K FOR THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

</LEGEND>
<CIK>                        0000812301
<NAME>                       THE FRANKLIN HOLDING CORPORATION (DELAWARE)
<MULTIPLIER>                 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                          JAN-1-1997
<PERIOD-END>                            DEC-31-1997
<INVESTMENTS-AT-COST>                   4168
<INVESTMENTS-AT-VALUE>                  6833
<RECEIVABLES>                           330
<ASSETS-OTHER>                          555
<OTHER-ITEMS-ASSETS>                    0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          7718
<PAYABLE-FOR-SECURITIES>                0
<SENIOR-LONG-TERM-DEBT>                 0
<OTHER-ITEMS-LIABILITIES>               375
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES>                     375
<SENIOR-EQUITY>                         0
<PAID-IN-CAPITAL-COMMON>                8118
<SHARES-COMMON-STOCK>                   801
<SHARES-COMMON-PRIOR>                   801
<ACCUMULATED-NII-CURRENT>               (3440)
<OVERDISTRIBUTION-NII>                  0
<ACCUMULATED-NET-GAINS>                 0
<OVERDISTRIBUTION-GAINS>                0
<ACCUM-APPREC-OR-DEPREC>                2666
<NET-ASSETS>                            7343
<DIVIDEND-INCOME>                       2
<INTEREST-INCOME>                       226
<OTHER-INCOME>                          269
<EXPENSES-NET>                          2401
<NET-INVESTMENT-INCOME>                 (1904)
<REALIZED-GAINS-CURRENT>                3313
<APPREC-INCREASE-CURRENT>               (1338)
<NET-CHANGE-FROM-OPS>                   70
<EQUALIZATION>                          0
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-INCOME>               0
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-GAINS>                0
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OTHER>                   2604
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-SOLD>                 0
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-REDEEMED>             0
<SHARES-REINVESTED>                     0
<NET-CHANGE-IN-ASSETS>                  (2633)
<ACCUMULATED-NII-PRIOR>                 (2246)
<ACCUMULATED-GAINS-PRIOR>               0
<OVERDIST-NET-GAINS-PRIOR>              0
<OVERDISTRIB-NII-PRIOR>                 0
<GROSS-ADVISORY-FEES>                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      0
<GROSS-EXPENSE>                         2401
<AVERAGE-NET-ASSETS>                    8289
<PER-SHARE-NAV-BEGIN>                   12.33
<PER-SHARE-NII>                         (2.37)
<PER-SHARE-GAIN-APPREC>                 2.46
<PER-SHARE-DIVIDEND>                    0.00
<PER-SHARE-DISTRIBUTIONS>               3.25
<RETURNS-OF-CAPITAL>                    0.00
<PER-SHARE-NAV-END>                     9.17
<EXPENSE-RATIO>                         28.97
<AVG-DEBT-OUTSTANDING>                  0
<AVG-DEBT-PER-SHARE>                    0.00


</TABLE>
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-40117 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JUAN PABLO CONTRERAS, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. L-95-CR-175-1

- - - - - - - - - - August 21, 1996 Before SMITH, DUHÉ, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Juan Pablo Contreras has appealed his convictions for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute marijuana and for possession of marijuana with intent to distribute. Based upon a careful review of the evidence, we hold that a rational juror could have convicted Contreras of these crimes based upon the evidence presented at the trial. See United States v.No. 96-40117 - 2 - Rodriguez-Mireles , 896 F.2d 890, 893 (5th Cir. 1990).
AFFIRMED.
Case :11-cv-00427-JLL -MAH Document 51 Filed 04/13/12 Page 1 of 2 PagelD: 230 

MARGULIES WIND, PA 


Harborside Financial Center 


Plaza 10, 3 Second Street, Suite 1201 


Jersey City, New Jersey 07311-3988 


(201) 333-0400 (201) 333-11l0/fax 


e--mail:fec@mwhlawi:arm.com 


Attorneys for Plaintiff 


UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY 

VIRTUAL STUDIOS, INC., CIVIL ACTION NO: 

ll-00427-JLL-CCC 

Plaintiff, 

VS. 

COURISTAN, INC. 

Defendant. ORDER RESETTING 

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE 

This matter having come before the Court with the consent of counsel, Robert E. 

Margulies, Esq., appearing for the plaintiff and Robert S. Weisbein, Esq., appearing for the 

defendant and for good cause shown; 

1':1 

IT IS ON TillS .0th day ofApril, 2012 

ORDERED that the Settlement Conference presently scheduled for Friday, May 251h, 

2012 is adjourned to Tuesday, July 1 Th, 2012 at 10:30 a.m., at which time counsel are to appear 

with their clients who have full authority for settlement; and 

Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 52 Filed 04/18/12 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 232
Case :11·cv·00427·.JLL ·MAH Document 51 Filed 04/13/12 Page 2 of 2 PagelD: 231 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that exparte settlement positions, not more than five 

(5) pages, are to be sent to the Court by each party on or before July 10th, 2012. 

Michael 1Lu~ A. Hammer 

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 52 Filed 04/18/12 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 233
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 on Form 10-KSB of DOR BioPharma, Inc. (the
“Company”) for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the
undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350:





(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.








DOR
BIOPHARMA, INC.





March
      26, 2008
            by:
            /s/ Christopher J.
  SchaberChristopher
      J. Schaber, Ph.D.President
      and Chief Executive Officer(Principal
      Executive Officer)
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.18

       AMENDMENT TO STOCK OPTION PLAN FOR NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS OF UNITED


The following sets forth the entire text of the proposed amendment to the Stock
Option Plan for Non-Employee Directors of United, effective March 20, 1998 (the
"Plan"):


         The first sentence of Section 3.1 of the Plan shall be deleted and
replaced with the following:

         The total number of shares of Stock as to which Options may be granted
pursuant to the Plan shall be 3,000,000 in the aggregate.

         Except as amended as stated above, the Plan shall continue in full
force and effect.
Case 2:11-cr-00039-KSH Document 9 Filed 03/15/11 Page 1 of 3 PageID: 18
Case 2:11-cr-00039-KSH Document 9 Filed 03/15/11 Page 2 of 3 PageID: 19
Case 2:11-cr-00039-KSH Document 9 Filed 03/15/11 Page 3 of 3 PageID: 20
<PAGE>


                                  Exhibit 23.1

                                BDO Seidman, LLP
                      1900 Avenue of the Starts, 11th Floor
                              Los Angeles, CA 90067



               Consent of Independent Certified Public Accountants


Osicom Technologies, Inc.
Santa Monica, California

We hereby consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Nos. 333-28863, 333-22291 and 333-51445) on Form S-3 of Osicom Technologies,
Inc. of our report, dated March 11, 1999, except for Notes H and Q which are of
April 30, 1999, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Osicom
Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries as of January 31, 1999 and 1998, and the
related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity, and cash
flows for the years ended January 31, 1999, 1998 and 1997, which report appears
in the January 31, 1999 annual report on Form 10-K of Osicom Technologies, Inc.

Our report indicates that we did not audit the financial statements of a foreign
subsidiary which statements reflect total assets of $27,529,000 as of
January 31, 1999 and total revenues of $39,508,000 for the year then ended,
total assets of $35,533,000 as of January 31, 1998 and total revenues of
$46,440,000 for the year then ended and total revenues of $50,692,000 for
the ten months ended January 31, 1997. Those statements were audited by
other auditors whose report has been furnished to us, and our opinion, insofar
as it relates to the amounts included for such subsidiary, is based solely on
the report of the other auditors.

                                        BDO SEIDMAN, LLP

Los Angeles, California
May 3, 1999





<PAGE>
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>                                                               EXHIBIT 23(a)</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>

<TABLE CELLSPACING=0 BORDER=0 CELLPADDING=7 WIDTH=721>
<TR><TD WIDTH="51%" VALIGN="TOP"> </TD>
<TD WIDTH="49%" VALIGN="TOP">
<P ALIGN="RIGHT">EXHIBIT 23(a)</TD>
</TR>
</TABLE>


<P> </P>
<P> </P>
<P> </P>
<TABLE CELLSPACING=0 BORDER=0 CELLPADDING=7 WIDTH=734>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
<P ALIGN="CENTER">CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS</TD>
</TR>
</TABLE>


<P> </P>
<P> </P>
<P>	We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements (Form S-8, Nos. 33-17196, 33-44822, 33-44877, 33-44876, 33-22459, 33-38491, 33-54075, 33-54079, 33-54077, 333-47833, 333-28273 and Form S-3, Nos. 33-36001 and 333-60175)
pertaining to various stock option, employee savings, deferred compensation and restricted stock plans and a universal shelf registration statement of Wellman, Inc. of our report dated February 14, 2000, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements and financial statement schedules included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) of Wellman, Inc. and for the year ended December 31, 1999.</P>

<P> </P>
<P> </P>
<P> </P>
<TABLE CELLSPACING=0 BORDER=0 CELLPADDING=7 WIDTH=734>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
<P ALIGN="CENTER">Ernst & Young LLP</TD>
</TR>
</TABLE>


<P> </P>
<P> </P>
<P>Charlotte, North Carolina</P>
<P>March 27, 2000</P>
<FONT FACE="Courier,Courier New">
<P> </P></FONT></BODY>
</HTML>
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 Pioneer Exploration Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending November 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Thomas Brady, President, Chief Executive Officer of the Company and a member of the Board of Directors, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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.




















/s/ Thomas Brady




Thomas Brady


Chief Executive Officer


January 13, 2011
<PAGE>
                                                                EXHIBIT 10(xxvi)

                                AMENDMENT NO. 1
                                     TO THE
                         KULICKE & SOFFA INDUSTRIES NC.
                      EXECUTIVE DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN


      WHEREAS, Kulicke & Soffa Industries Inc. (the "Company") maintains the
Kulicke & Soffa Industries, Inc. Executive Deferred Compensation Plan (the
"Plan") as amended and restated effective October 1, 1999 for the benefit of its
eligible employees; and

      WHEREAS, the Company desires to amend the Plan, with the consent of the
participants therein, to revise the definition of "Special Circumstance":

      NOW THEREFORE, effective August 1, 2001, section 1.24 of the Plan is
hereby amended to read as follows:

            1.24 Special Circumstance means the reporting by K&S of consolidated
      net losses equal to or in excess of $100,000,000, over a measuring period
      not exceeding two fiscal years of K&S (beginning with a fiscal year in
      which a loss for the year is reported). A Special Circumstance shall be
      deemed to occur on the date on which K&S makes an announcement of
      quarterly or annual earnings showing consolidated net losses, which
      together with losses reported previously during the measuring period,
      equal or exceed such $100,000,000 amount.

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Amendment No. 1 to be
      executed by its duly authorized officers this 1st day of August 2001.

[CORPORATE SEAL]                          KULICKE & SOFFA INDUSTRIES INC.



Attest:                                   By:
       -------------------------             -----------------------------------
* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 25, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-51416

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MANUEL MELENDEZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. EP-02-CR-56-ALL-DB

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

Before DeMOSS, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

 Manuel Melendez appeals the sentence imposed following his

guilty plea conviction of being found in the United States after

deportation/removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Melendez

complains that his sentence was improperly enhanced pursuant to

8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) based on a prior conviction. He argues that

the sentencing provision is unconstitutional. Melendez thus

contends that his sentence should not exceed the two-year maximum

term of imprisonment prescribed in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). 
No. 02-51416

-2-

In Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235

(1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in

8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of

separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing

provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. 

Melendez acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by

Almendarez-Torres, but asserts that the decision has been cast

into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). 

He seeks to preserve his argument for further review. 

Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi,

530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984

(5th Cir. 2000). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres

“unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule

it.” Dabeit, 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and

citation omitted). The judgment of the district court is

AFFIRMED.

The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of

filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks

that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED. 

AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
* 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. 00-10425

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

TED CALVIN BLAND,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:99-CR-191-1-E

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

March 19, 2001

Before REAVLEY, DeMOSS and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

 Ted Calvin Bland appeals his convictions for being a felon

in possession of a firearm. Bland argues that 18 U.S.C.

§ 922(g)(1) is unconstitutional on its face because it fails to

require a “substantial effect” on interstate commerce. He also

contends that the Government should be required to prove the

knowledge element of the same statute. Bland concedes that his

arguments are foreclosed by this court’s precedent and indicates

they are presented here solely for issue preservation purposes.
No. 00-10425 

-2-

The “in or affecting commerce” element of 18 U.S.C.

§ 922(g)(1) requires only a minimal nexus between the firearm and

interstate commerce. United States v. Gresham, 118 F.3d 258, 265

(5th Cir. 1997). This element is satisfied because the firearms

possessed by Bland previously traveled in interstate commerce. 

United States v. Rawls, 85 F.3d 240, 242 (5th Cir. 1996). 

Knowledge of a legal obligation is not an element of 18 U.S.C. 

§ 922(g)(1). United States v. Dancy, 861 F.2d 77, 82 (5th Cir.

1988). Recent decisions by the Supreme Court do not alter this

court’s jurisprudence regarding 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)’s minimal

interstate-nexus or knowledge requirements. Accordingly, Bland’s

convictions are AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 32



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



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned President and Sole Executive
Officer of the Company, certifies, that to his knowledge:

         1) Ridgefield Acquisition Corp.'s Form 10-KSB/A for the annual period
         ended December 31, 2007 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 Ridgefield Acquisition Corp.'s Form
         10-KSB for the annual period ended December 31, 2007 fairly presents,
         in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
         operations of the Company.


Dated: September 9, 2008


                                            /s/ Steven N. Bronson
                                            -----------------------------------
                                            Steven N. Bronson, President
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, : Crim. No. 10-422 (FSH)

v. : O R D E R

ILYN ANTONIO LOPEZ-RIVERA. :

Defendant. :

This matter having come before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of the United

States Magistrate Judge filed in this matter, which was submitted as a result of this Court having

referred this cause to the Magistrate Judge for the purpose of conducting a plea proceeding under

Fed. R. Crim. P. 11; and the defendant having consented to the Magistrate Judge conducting the

guilty plea proceeding; and the Court having reviewed the Report and Recommendation, as well as

the transcript of the proceedings on June 21, 2010 and there being no objection to the Report and

Recommendation timely filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b); and the Court finding the Report and

Recommendation is neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law; and the Court hereby finding that

the Report and Recommendation should be approved and adopted and the defendant’s guilty plea

accepted,

IT IS ON THIS 7 day of July, 2010, th

ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge is

approved and adopted; and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendant’s guilty plea is accepted and a judgment

of guilt to Count One of the Information shall be entered. 

 /s/ Faith S. Hochberg 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:10-cr-00422-FSH Document 16 Filed 07/07/10 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 37