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 Quarterly Report of Market Data Consultants, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended May 31, 2006 (the "Report"), I, Wilson Cheung, President and Chairman 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 requirement 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 Company's
> financial position and results of operations.

/s/Wilson Cheung



Wilson Cheung, President and Chairman

July 10, 2006
V. Crim. No. ].O-cr-876

TERIEK EDWARDS ORDER FOR CONTINUANCE

This matter having come before the Court on the joint

application of Paul J. Fishman, United States Attorney for the

District of New Jersey (Rodney C. Villazor, Assistant U.S.

Attorney, appearing), and defendant Teriek Edwards (Chester

Keller, Esq., appearing), for an order granting a continuance of

the proceedings in the above-captioned matter, and the defendant

being aware that he has the right to have the matter brought to

trial within 70 days of the date of his appearance before ajudicial officer of this court pursuant to Title 18 of the United

States Code, Section 3161(c) (1), and as the defendant hasconsented to such a continuance, and for good and sufficient

cause shown,

IT IS THE FINDING OF THIS COURT that this action should

be continued for the following reasons:

(1) The charges in this case involves numerous

witnesses that defense counsel requires adequate time to reviewand prepare for;

(2) Taking into account the exercise of diligence,

therefore, the facts of this case require that defense counsel be
to negotiate a plea agreement, which would render any grand jury

proceedings and any subsequent trial of this matter unnecessary;

(4) As a result of the foregoing, pursuant to Title

18, United States Code, Section 3161(h) (7), the ends of justice

served by granting the continuance outweigh the best interest of

the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

IT IS, therefore, on this ‘day of March, 2011,

ORDERED that this action be, and hereby is, continued

until April 18, 2011; and it is further

ORDERED that the period from the date of this order

through April 18, 2011 shall be excludable in computing time

under the Speedy Trial Act of 1974

.____,

/ I — F • / -

/ ‘A

( t 7 ‘( Y’,1J

HON. WILLIAM H. WALLS

United States District Judge

-2-
Assistant US. A ney__i

Chester Keller, Esq.Counsel for defendant Teriek Edwards

-3-
Exhibit
32.1




CERTIFICATION
OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
March 31, 2008 (the “Report”) of Pegasi Energy Resources Corporation (the
“Registrant”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof, I, Michael Neufeld, as the Chief Executive Officer, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
hereby certify, to the best of my 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 consolidated financial condition and consolidated results of operations of
the Registrant.




Dated:
May 15, 2008




/s/ Michael
      NeufeldMichael
      NeufeldChief
      Executive Officer




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

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Pursuant to Section 906
of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, the undersigned  hereby  certifies that the
Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended  February 29, 2012 of DoMark
International,  Inc. (the  "Company")  fully complies with the  requirements  of
Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange Act of 1934 and that
the  information  contained  in such Report  fairly  presents,  in all  material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


Dated: April 23, 2012                   By: /s/ Michael Franklin
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Michael Franklin
                                            Chief Financial Officer

     A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906, or
other  document  authenticating,   acknowledging,   or  otherwise  adopting  the
signature  that  appears in typed form  within  the  electronic  version of this
written  statement  required  by  Section  906,  has  been  provided  to  DoMark
International,  Inc.  and will be retained  by DoMark  International,  Inc.  and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
EXHIBIT 32.2

I, James J. Mastriani, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Legal Officer of
Velocity Asset Management, Inc. certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

     1.  this Amendment No.1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB/A of the
         Company for the quarter ended December 31, 2006 (the "Report") fully
         complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
         Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

     2.  the information contained in the Amendment fairly represents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
         the Company.

Date:    June 15, 2007

         BY:  /s/ JAMES J. MASTRIANI
              --------------------------------
              James J. Mastriani
              Chief Financial Officer



The foregoing certification is being furnished solely 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) and is not being filed as part of a separate
disclosure document.

                                       8
#### Ralph Vollaro et al., Appellants, v John F. Bevilacqua, Respondent.

[823 NYS2d 204]

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ruchelsman, J.), dated September 15, 2005, which granted the defendant’s motion for leave to reargue his prior motion to vacate his default in appearing at trial, which was determined by order of the same court dated June 15, 2005, and upon reargument, granted the defendant’s motion to vacate his default.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

In an order dated December 16, 2004, the Supreme Court granted a motion by former counsel for the defendant to withdraw from the case, and adjourned the trial date to January 27, 2005, to allow the defendant to obtain new counsel *(see*CPLR 321 [b]). The defendant’s assertion that he did not receive notice of the scheduled date of trial on January 27, 2005, constituted a valid and reasonable excuse for his failure to appear on that trial date *(see Simmons v Pantoja,*306 AD2d 399, 400 [2003]; *Lohmann v Castleton Gallery,*252 AD2d 482, 483 [1998]; *Krebs v Cabrera,*250 AD2d 736, 737 [1998]). Contrary to the plaintiffs’ contention, notice of the new trial date to former counsel did not constitute notice to the defendant since former counsel was no longer representing the defendant *(cf. Candeloro v Candeloro,*133 AD2d 731, 732 [1987]). Furthermore, the defendant promptly obtained new counsel and moved to vacate his default. The default was not intentional or the result of bad faith *(see Simmons v Pantoja, supra; Krebs v Cabrera, supra; Goldstein v Mazza,*88 AD2d 987 [1982]). In addition, the defendant’s verified answer and affidavit set forth allegations sufficient to make out a prima facie showing of a meritorious defense *(see*CPLR 105 [u]; *65 N. 8 St. HDFC v Suarez,*18 AD3d 732, 733 [2005]; *Lichtman v Sears, Roebuck & Co.,*236 AD2d

*911373 [1997]; *Richard Kranis, P.C. v European Am. Bank,*208 AD2d 904, 905 [1994]).

Accordingly, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting the defendant’s motion for leave to reargue and, upon reargument, in granting the defendant’s motion to vacate his default in appearing at trial on January 27, 2005. Florio, J.E, Crane, Luciano, Spolzino and Covello, JJ., concur.
Law Offices

SCIARRA & CATRAMBONE, L.L.C.

A Limited Liability Company

1130 Clifton Avenue - Suite #3

Charles J. Sciarra* Clifton, New Jersey 07013 New York Office

Jeffrey D. Catrambone* Tel: 973-242-2442 The Woolworth Building

Matthew R. Curran Fax: 973-242-3118 233 Broadway 18th Floor

 www.sciarralaw.com 212-406-1700

Of Counsel

Cathie Perselay Seidman*

Alan Serrins ** November 16, 2012

*Admitted NJ & NY Bars

**Admitted NY Bar

Via ECF Filing

Honorable Lois H. Goodman, U.S.M.J.

Clarkson S. Fisher Federal Courthouse, Room 7050

492 E. State Street

Trenton, New Jersey 08608

Re: Bayliss v. New Jersey State Police, et al.

Docket No.: 11-cv-0890

Our File No.: 12-386 

Dear Judge Goodman:

As Your Honor is aware, the undersigned’s firm represents Richard Wambold in the abovereferenced matter. I am writing to confirm my telephone conversation with Your Honor’s Law Clerk

this morning wherein I was advised that the Court will address the issue of Wambold’s filing of a

motion for leave to file an amended pleading on Monday, November 19, 2012. Based upon the

foregoing, Wambold is not required to file his motion today as previously ordered.

Pursuant to the Court’s notice, the telephone conference has been rescheduled for Monday,

November 19, 2012 at 2:30 PM. My office will initiate the call.

I thank the Court for its attention and courtesies. 

Very truly yours,

Sciarra & Catrambone, L.L.C.

By: Matthew R. Curran /s/ 

MRC/m Matthew R. Curran

cc: Robert B. Woodruff, Esq. (Via ECF Filing)

John M. Bowens, Esq. (Via ECF Filing)

Linda G. Harvey, Esq. (Via ECF Filing)

Client

Case 3:11-cv-00890-MLC-LHG Document 52 Filed 11/16/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 304
|EXHIBIT 28(a)
|-------------







|Report of Independent Chartered Accountants to the directors and shareholders of Wellman International Limited and Subsidiaries
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Wellman International Limited and Subsidiaries (the company) at 31 December 2002, 2001, and 2000 and the related consolidated statements of income, stockholders' equity and other comprehensive income/(loss), and cash flows for the three years then ended. These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above, present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Wellman International Limited and Subsidiaries as of 31 December 2002 and 2001, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for the three years then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.



KPMG
Chartered Accountants
Dublin, Ireland





12 February 2003
# covid_table33_c26_size_class
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1171 

To suspend the current compensation packages for all officers of Fannie 

Mae and Freddie Mac. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 11, 2019 

Mr. TILLIS (for himself and Ms. WARREN) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and 

Urban Affairs 

A BILL 

To suspend the current compensation packages for all 

officers of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. 

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 ‘‘Respect the Caps Act’’. 

5 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON TRANSFER OF FUNCTIONS. 

6 (a) FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORA7 TION.—Section 303(h) of the Federal Home Loan Mort8 gage Corporation Act (12 U.S.C. 1452(h)) is amended by 

9 adding at the end the following: 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1171 IS

1 ‘‘(5) The Corporation may not transfer or delegate 

2 any duty or responsibility of the chief executive officer, 

3 as of November 25, 2015, to any other position.’’. 

4 (b) FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIA5 TION.—Section 309(d) of the Federal National Mortgage 

6 Association Charter Act (12 U.S.C. 1723a(d)) is amended 

7 by adding at the end the following: 

8 ‘‘(5) The corporation may not transfer or delegate 

9 any duty or responsibility of the chief executive officer, 

10 as of November 25, 2015, to any other position.’’. 

11 SEC. 3. REMOVAL OF DIRECTOR OF FHFA FOR CAUSE. 

12 Section 1312(b)(2) of the Federal Housing Enter13 prises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 (12 

14 U.S.C. 4512(b)(2)) is amended by inserting ‘‘, including 

15 for approving the compensation and benefits of any chief 

16 executive officer of an enterprise at a level greater than 

17 the level described in section 3 of the Equity in Govern18 ment Compensation Act of 2015 (12 U.S.C. 4518 note)’’ 

19 before the period at the end. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-41345 Conference Calendar

ELIAZAR R. LEAL, SR., Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus ROCHELLE MCKINNEY; TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE HEALTH DIRECTOR; TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE DENTAL DEPARTMENT, Personnel in Texas Department of Criminal Justice Dental Department; TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE ADMINISTRATOR, Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 5:97-CV-181

- - - - - - - - - - June 17, 1998 Before DAVIS, PARKER, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * Eliazar Leal, Sr., Texas prisoner # 766199, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his complaint as frivolous. He argues that his complaint, which alleged that the defendants refused to provide him with a permanent filling for his tooth until he had been in the prison system for a year and had passedNo. 97-41345 -2- a plaque test, sufficiently asserted an Eighth Amendment violation. Leal stated in his complaint that he twice received dental treatment and sealant for his tooth. His complaint failed to allege that the defendants acted with deliberate indifference to a substantial risk of serious harm, and therefore the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Leal’s complaint as frivolous. See Hare v. City of Corinth, Miss. , 74 F.3d 633, 648 (5th Cir. 1996)(en banc); Denton v. Hernandez , 504 U.S. 25, 31-34 (1992); see also 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(I).
AFFIRMED.
#### AMERICAN & FOREIGN INS. CO. et al. v. RICHARD GIBSON & SONS, Inc., et al.

No. 813 Civ. A.

District Court, D. Massachusetts.

Nov. 4, 1940.

Herbert C. Splane and Kneeland & Splane, all of Boston, Mass., for plaintiff.

R. J. Dunn and T. F. Riley, both of Boston, Mass., for defendant Richard Gibson & Son, Inc.

Thompson & Twomey and Hubert C. Thompson, both of Boston, Mass., for defendant Richard Gibson & Son, Inc.

John W. Blakeney, Jr., of Boston, Mass., for defendant A. B. Maddison Co., Inc.

McLELLAN, District Judge.

The following statement may be taken, transcribed, and filed with the papers in the case.

This is an action by various insurance companies, who, having insured certain property and paid the fire loss thereon, seek by way of subrogation to recover damages from the defendants, who are charged with having negligently caused the fire. The first interrogatory to which the plaintiffs object is numbered 3, and reads: “3. Please state the dates of all policies issued by the plaintiffs to the Allied Stores Corporation, the total amount of insurance covering the premises involved in this case and annex to your answers a specimen copy of the type of policy issued or advise the defendant where and when its attorney may inspect the original policies.”

The objection to this interrogatory is overruled.

The plaintiffs’ next objection is to Interrogatory No. 12 (c), reading: “12 (c). In what respect, with full details, the defendant Richard Gibson & Son, Inc. ‘failed and neglected to see that proper precautions and safeguards were used by the defendant, A. B. Maddison Company, Inc. in said repair work’ as alleged in paragraph two of the Complaint.”

For reasons which it is unnecessary here to discuss, the plaintiffs’ objection to Interrogatory 13(c) is sustained.

The next interrogatories to which the plaintiffs object are numbered 13(b) and 14, and read:

> “13(b). Who started or caused said fire, giving the names and addresses of the persons involved.”

> “14. By whom was the fire discovered? Please set forth the name, address and position of the person who discovered it.”

Counsel for the defendant, who, I am informed, was duly notified of this hearing, did not appear, and so I have been favored *502with no suggestions from him as to why the objections to Interrogatories 13(b) and 14, in view of the issues, in the light of other interrogatories to which no objections have been interposed, and in the exercise of the court’s discretion, should not be sustained. The conclusion is that the objection to Interrogatory 3 is overruled, the objection to Interrogatory 12(c) is sustained, and the objections to Interrogatories 13(b) and 14 are sustained.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-3 No. 333-93051, Form S-3/A No. 333-81263 and Form S-8 Nos. 333-84567,
333-48867, 333-31297, 333-23095, 333-06081, 33-62543, 33-80594, 33-53432,
33-45469, 33-41945, 33-25230, 33-19851, and 33-16625) pertaining to the Komag
Incorporated Deferred Compensation Plan, the Komag, Incorporated Restated 1987
Stock Option Plan, the Komag Material Technology, Inc. 1995 Stock Option Plan,
the Komag, Incorporated Employee Stock Purchase Plan, the Komag, Incorporated
Restated 1987 Stock Option Plan, the - Komag, Incorporated 1988 Employee Stock
Purchase Plan, the Dastek, Inc. 1992 Stock Option Plan, and the 1997
Supplemental Stock Option Plan of our report dated January 21, 2000 (except Note
16 as to which the date is March 17, 2000), with respect to the consolidated
financial statements and schedule of Komag, Incorporated in this Annual Report
(Form 10-K/A) for the year ended January 2, 2000.

                                                         /s/ Ernst & Young LLP



     San Jose, California

     September 27, 2000



                                       5
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Anthony Castellano, Appellant.

[822 NYS2d 474]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rena K. Uviller, J), rendered on or about April 28, 2004, unanimously affirmed. No opinion. Order filed. Concur—Tom, J.E, Saxe, Friedman, Sullivan and McGuire, JJ.
EXHIBIT
      32




Certifications
      of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
      Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
      of
      2002





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of China Shoe Holdings, Inc.
      (the "Company") for the quarter ended September 30, 2008 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Gu
      Xianzhong, as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company and Angus
      Cheung Ming, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company,each 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 the best of 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 operations of the Company.




/s/
      Gu
      Xianzhong


Name:
      Gu
      Xianzhong


Title:
      President and Chief Executive Officer


(Principal
      Executive Officer)




/s/
      Angus
      Cheung Ming


Name:
      Angus Cheung Ming


Title:
      Chief Financial Officer


(Principal
      Financial and Accounting Officer)





Date:
      November 19, 2008





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
      authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
      in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
      by Section 906, has been provided to China Shoe Holdings, Inc. and will be
      retained by China Shoe Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
      Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
**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 on Form 10-QSB/A  of
  Aslahan Enterprises Ltd. (the "Registrant") for the fiscal quarter ended
  November 30,
  2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof,
  I, Tina Sangha, President, Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial
  Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of our
  knowledge and belief:





(1) The Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all
  material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
  Registrant.





Date:August 7, 2007
      By:
      /s/ Tina SanghaTina SanghaChief Executive Officer, President  and Principal Financial Officer





A
  signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
  document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature
  that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written
  statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Registrant and will
  be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
  Commission or its staff upon request.