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

Exhibit 32.2

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

I, Imad Kamel Yassine, Chief Financial Officer, of Bioshaft
Water Technology, Inc. (the Company), hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

| | (a) | the Quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company, for the
      second quarter ended January 31, 2009, and to which this certification is
      attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the Report) fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
      1934, as amended; and
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |     |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
| | (b) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.                                                                                                                                                          





|By:    |                                                                      | 
|------ | -------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|Name:  | Imad Kamel Yassine                                                   | 
|Title: | Chief Financial Officer                                              | 
|       | (Principal Financial Officer and
      Principal Accounting Officer) | 
|Date:  | September 21, 2009                                                   | 

A signed original of this written statement required by
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 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.

This certification accompanies the Form 10-Q to which it
relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is
not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Registrant under the
Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made
before or after the date of the Form 10-Q), irrespective of any general
incorporation language contained in such filing.

---
#### Good Energy, L.P., et al., Respondents, v Chris Kosachuk, Appellant.

[853 NYS2d 75]

*332Since defendant did not convey his shares as part of a larger conveyance of Good Energy as a going concern, but, rather, sold his shares back to the majority shareholder, no issue of “continuity of place” or “continuity of name” is involved, and the “sale of business” rationale is not applicable *(see Purchasing Assoc. v Weitz,*13 NY2d 267, 271 [1963]; *Titus & Donnelly v Poto,*205 AD2d 475 [1994]). Instead, the covenants in the parties’ agreement for purchase and sale should be analyzed under the stricter reasonableness standard applicable to employment agreements *(see BDO Seidman v Hirshberg,*93 NY2d 382 [1999]).

The covenant not to solicit is unreasonable to the extent it restricts defendant from doing business with Good Energy’s energy suppliers as well as its customers, since there are a limited number of energy suppliers in the United States, and the covenant effectively excludes defendant from continued employment in the industry. The covenant not to compete is reasonable in terms of duration, five years, but unreasonable in terms of geographic area, the entire United States, since Good Energy operates in only eight states. Furthermore, the covenant not to compete is unreasonable because it purports to prohibit defendant from dealing with Good Energy’s entire client base, thus including not only those clients or customers that had been created and maintained at Good Energy’s expense, but also those clients that were not serviced by defendant during his tenure at Good Energy and those that came to Good Energy solely because of a preexisting relationship with him *(see BDO Seidman,*93 NY2d at 392).

*333In light of the above, plaintiffs’ cross motion for summary judgment must be denied. While defendant concededly had a relationship with Triple Net Properties, a former customer of Good Energy, the circumstances giving rise to that relationship are not clear. At a minimum, a factual issue exists whether defendant breached the restrictive covenants as narrowed above.

Defendant’s counterclaims and third-party complaint were properly dismissed because the record evidence does not support his allegation that he was “forced” to sell his minority interest or that his interests were undervalued and resold at a considerable profit. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Friedman and Nardelli, JJ. *[See*2007 NY Slip Op 30171(U).]
Case 3:11-cr-00176-JAP Document 27 Filed 03/28/11 Page 1 of 5 PageID: 57
Case 3:11-cr-00176-JAP Document 27 Filed 03/28/11 Page 2 of 5 PageID: 58
Case 3:11-cr-00176-JAP Document 27 Filed 03/28/11 Page 3 of 5 PageID: 59
Case 3:11-cr-00176-JAP Document 27 Filed 03/28/11 Page 4 of 5 PageID: 60
Case 3:11-cr-00176-JAP Document 27 Filed 03/28/11 Page 5 of 5 PageID: 61
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.                  

###### Commission on Civil Rights

Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission), and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), that a meeting of the Oklahoma Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene on Tuesday, August 18, 2009 at 10 a.m. and adjourn at approximately 3 p.m. at Langston University Oklahoma City Campus, Room 133, 4205 N. Lincoln Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK. The purpose of the meeting is to plan a future civil rights project and receive briefing information from local civil rights groups.

                    Members of the public are entitled to submit written comments. The comments must be received in the regional office by September 18, 2009. The address is U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 400 State Avenue, Suite 908, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. Persons wishing to e-mail their comments, or to present their comments verbally at the meeting, or who desire additional information should contact Farella E. Robinson, Regional Director, Central Regional Office, at (913) 551-1400, or for hearing impaired TDD (913) 551-1414, or by e-mail to                     *frobinson@usccr.gov.*

Hearing-impaired persons who will attend the meeting and require the services of a sign language interpreter should contact the Regional Office at least ten (10) working days before the scheduled date of the meeting.

                    Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Central Regional Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this advisory committee are advised to go to the Commission's Web site,                     *http://www.usccr.gov*, or to contact the Central Regional Office at the above e-mail or street address.                

The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the Commission and FACA.

Dated in Washington, DC, July 7, 2009.

Peter Minarik,

Acting Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.

[FR Doc. E9-16359 Filed 7-9-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

PAUL J. BISHOP,

 Plaintiff,

 

v.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF 

HOMELAND SECURITY, and JOHN 

LAVA,

 Defendants.

Civil Action No.: 11-573

ORDER

HON. WILLIAM J. MARTINI

THIS MATTER comes before the Court upon Plaintiff Paul J. Bishop’s 

Complaint, Bishop’s motion for default judgment, and Bishop’s motion for preliminary 

injunction. The crux of Bishop’s allegations is that he was wrongfully terminated by the 

United States Department of Homeland Security and John Lava, the New Jersey 

Assistant Port Director for Homeland Security. Bishop previously filed substantially the 

same lawsuit against the same defendants on March 3, 2010. That original lawsuit was 

Civil Action No. 10-1095. The defendants are the same in both suits, and both share a 

common nucleus of operative facts. The chief difference is that Bishop has made 

additional demands in his present action, including, for example, a request for $10 Billion 

in damages. On December 21, 2010, this Court found that it lacked subject matter 

jurisdiction over Civil Action No. 10-1095 and transferred the case to the United States 

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. See Bishop v. U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., No. 

Case 2:11-cv-00573-WJM-MF Document 7 Filed 06/13/11 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 38
10-CV-1095, 2010 WL 5392897 (D.N.J. Dec. 21, 2010). On January 31, 2011, while his 

motion for reconsideration of the Court’s transfer order was still pending in Action No. 

10-1095, Bishop filed the present lawsuit. 

As this Court noted in its Order denying reconsideration, this Court was divested 

of subject matter jurisdiction over Action No. 10-1095 once that case was transferred to 

the Federal Circuit. See Bishop v. U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., No. 10-CV-1095, 2011 

WL 529933 (D.N.J. Feb. 8, 2011). Bishop cannot circumvent that lack of jurisdiction by 

refiling substantially the same lawsuit. And regardless, this Court would still lack subject 

matter jurisdiction over the refiled action for the same reasons set forth in its December 

21, 2010 Opinion transferring his original case. 

For the foregoing reasons and for good cause shown;

IT IS on this 13th day of June 2011, hereby,

ORDERED that Defendant’s Complaint is DISMISSED for lack of subject 

matter jurisdiction; and it is further

ORDERED that Defendant’s remaining motions will be DENIED as moot.

 /s/ William J. Martini 

WILLIAM J. MARTINI, U.S.D.J.

Case 2:11-cv-00573-WJM-MF Document 7 Filed 06/13/11 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 39
The State of TexasAppellee/s



# Fourth Co **urt of Appeals**

**San Antonio, Texas**

May 15, 2014

N o. 04

- 13

- 00064

- CR

Donald AEKINS

, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 403rd District Court, Travis County, Texas

Trial Court No. D

- 1

- DC

- 12

- 904056

Brenda Kennedy, Judge Presiding



### ORDE R

Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

The Appellant ’ s Motion to Suspend Rule 9.3(b) is hereby GRANTED.

_________________________________ Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the sa id

court on this 15th day of May, 2014

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
Exhibit 32.1





SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION





In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of MedPro Safety Products, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2011 , as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, W. Craig Turner, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, do hereby certify, in accordance with 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), as applicable, 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 results of operations of the Company.




Dated:December 13, 2011By:/s/ W. Craig TurnerW. Craig TurnerChief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 99.1

                            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 Malacology, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on March 31, 2003, (the "Report"), I, Vivek
R. Rao, President, Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief Financial Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.
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/ Vivek R. Rao
------------------------------------
Vivek R. Rao
President, Chief Executive Officer
and Acting Chief Financial Officer
March 28, 2003
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : Hon. Katharine S. Hayden

 :

v. : Crim. No. 11-122

 :

TIMOTHY MAURICE JENKINS : O R D E R

This matter having come before the Court upon allegations that

the defendant, TIMOTHY MAURICE JENKINS, violated certain conditions of

his supervised release imposed on or about October 15, 1997, by the

United States District Court for the Western District of North

Carolina; and the defendant having appeared before this Court on April

8, 2011, to answer the allegations contained in the petition filed by

the United States Probation Office on or about March 18, 2011

(hereinafter the “Petition”); and the Court finding good cause to

adjourn the Petition until June 7, 2011; and on said date, the Court

having heard from the government (by Fabiana Pierre-Louis, Assistant

U.S. Attorney, appearing), and by the defendant (by Kevin Carlucci,

Assistant Federal Public Defender, appearing), and it appearing at

that time that the underlying charges were appropriate for dismissal;

and for good cause shown,

IT IS on this 13 day of June, 2011, th

ORDERED that the above referenced Petition is hereby dismissed;

and it is further

ORDERED that the defendant’s term of supervised release is

continued; and it is further

ORDERED that the United States Probation Office shall provide

Case 2:11-cr-00122-KSH Document 8 Filed 06/14/11 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 24
defendant with a New Jersey Transit rail and bus pass no later

than Tuesday, June 14, 2011.

/s/ Katharine S. Hayden

 

 KATHARINE S. HAYDEN

 United States District Judge

Case 2:11-cr-00122-KSH Document 8 Filed 06/14/11 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 25
* 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. 00-50762 Summary Calendar

BRUCE CLIFTON HOFFMAN

Petitioner - Appellant

v. JANIE COCKRELL, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION

Respondent - Appellee

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. W-99-CV-376

-------------------- January 30, 2002 Before KING, Chief Judge, and DAVIS and JONES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Bruce Clifton Hoffman, Texas prisoner #806077, has filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 application alleging that: (1) his mandatory release date was rescinded in violation of the Ex Post Facto Clause; (2) the State of Texas did not provide any remedies for him to pursue his instant claims, thereby negating the exhaustion requirement; and (3) application of Texas House Bill 1433, which amended T EX . G OV ’ T C ODE A NN . § 508.149(a), to Hoffman, thereby rendering him ineligible for mandatory supervision, constituted cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth AmendmentNo. 00-50762 -2- of the U.S. Constitution. Hoffman concedes that he has not exhausted his state remedies, stating instead that state court review is not possible. But state court review of Hoffman’s argument in Texas state court is possible. See , e.g. , Ex parte Hall , 995 S.W.2d 151 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). Thus, Hoffman has failed to exhaust his state court remedies as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1). See Mercadel v. Cain , 179 F.3d 271, 275 (5th Cir. 1999). The judgment of the district court dismissing Hoffman’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 application is AFFIRMED.
#### In the Matter of Ricardo N., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent, Appellant.

[822 NYS2d 80]

Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Alma Cordova, J.), entered on or about September 29, 2005, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon his admission that he had committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of assault in the third degree, and imposed a conditional discharge for a period of up to 12 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly exercised its discretion in denying appel*424lant’s request for a dismissal or an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal, and instead adjudicating him a juvenile delinquent and imposing a conditional discharge *(see e.g. Matter of Jonaivy Q.,*286 AD2d 645 [2001]). The court’s determination to discredit appellant’s account of the incident is supported by the record. In light of his failure to provide accurate details of the incident, the seriousness of the underlying conduct and his truancy issues at school, the court adopted the least restrictive dispositional alternative consistent with appellant’s needs *(see Matter of Katherine W.,*62 NY2d 947, 948 [1984]). Concur— Tom, J.E, Marlow, Sullivan, McGuire and Malone, JJ.
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 Nanosphere, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A (Amendment No. 1) for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Michael K. McGarrity, President and Chief Executive 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, 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.

/s/ Michael K. McGarrityMichael K. McGarrityPresident and Chief Executive Officer


April 2, 2015


This certification accompanies each Report pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.


A signed original of this written statement required by §906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company 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 of Zevotek, Inc., a Delaware corporation
(the “Company”), on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
Adam J. Engel, President, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and
Director 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.




Dated:  May
15, 2009




/s/ Adam J. EngelAdam
      J. Engel, President, Chief Executive Officer,
                    Chief
      Financial Officer and
Director