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**

|   | (a) | the                Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) and                15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                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:   | /s/ Barry                Zyskind                                                                                                 |
|--------|-----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |            | Barry                Zyskind  President                and Chief Executive Officer*(Principal                Executive Officer)* |

----
**EXHIBIT
23.1**
 
  
 **CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**
 
 
 We
consent to the reference of our firm under the section “Selected Financial Data”
and to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8
(Nos. 333-45422, 333-53814, 333-55130, 333-66250 and 333-82488) of our report
dated March 1 , 2005,
with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Radvision
Ltd. for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 included in this
Annual Report (Form 20-F) for the year ended December 31, 2004, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.
  ****/s/ Kost Forer Gabbay and
      KasiererKost Forer Gabbay & KasiererA Member of Ernst & Young
      GlobalTel-Aviv, IsraelApril 2,
    2005
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

______________________________

ALBERT H. ROBERTS, :

: Civ. No. 11-1793 (RMB) (AMD) 

Plaintiff, :

:

v. : ORDER

:

KAREN BALICKI, et al., :

:

Defendants. :

______________________________:

For the reasons set forth in the Court’s Opinion filed 

herewith, 

IT IS on this 26th, day of July, 2013,

ORDERED that Defendants William Gandy, Todd Horan, Miguel 

Lago, Terrance McCoy, Roger Hogan, Richard Yacovelli and Timothy 

Volov’s motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 85.) is GRANTED.

S/RENÉE MARIE BUMB________ 

RENÉE MARIE BUMB, U.S.D.J.

1

Case 1:11-cv-01793-RMB-AMD Document 112 Filed 07/29/13 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 1062
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. 

mniteb ~tate5 <!Court of ~eaI5 

for tbe jf eberaI <!Circuit 

TECSEC, INC., 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES 

CORPORATION, 

Defendant-Appellee, 

AND 

CISCO SYSTEMS, INC., SAS INSTITUTE, INC., 

SAP AMERICA, INC., SAP, AG, SUN 

MICROSYSTEMS, INC., ORACLE CORPORATION, 

SYBASE, INC., SOFTWARE AG, SOFTWARE AG, 

INC., ADOBE SYSTEMS, INC., EBAY INC., AND 

PAYPAL, INC., 

Defendants. 

2011-1303 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the 

Eastern District of Virginia in case no. 10-CV-0115, Judge 

Leonie M. Brinkema. 

TECSEC, INC., 
TECSEC v. INTL BUSINESS MACHINES 2 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v. 

INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES 

CORPORATION, 

Defendant-Appellant, 

AND 

CISCO SYSTEMS, INC., SAS INSTITUTE, INC., 

SAP AMERICA, INC., SAP, AG, SUN 

MICROSYSTEMS, INC., ORACLE CORPORATION, 

SYBASE, INC., SOFTWARE AG, SOFTWARE AG, 

INC., ADOBE SYSTEMS, INC., EBAY INC., AND 

PAYPAL, INC., 

Defendants. 

2011-1345 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the 

Eastern District of Virginia in case no. 10-CV-0115, Judge 

Leonie M. Brinkema. 

ON MOTION 

ORDER 

International Business Machines Corporation moves 

to dismiss its cross-appeal. 

Upon consideration thereof, 

IT Is ORDERED THAT: 

(1) The motion to dismiss 2011-1345 is granted. Each 

side shall bear its own costs in 2011-1345. 
3 TECSEC v. INTL BUSINESS MACHINES 

(2) The revised official caption for 2011-1303 is reflected above. 

,Jut 25 2011 

Date 

cc: Brian M. Buroker, Esq. 

John M. Desmarais, Esq. 

s21 

FOR THE COURT 

/s/ Jan Horbaly 

Jan Horbaly 

Clerk 

Issued As A Mandate (As To 2011-1345 Only): .Dn 25 2011 

-FILED 

II.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR 

THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT 

JUL 25 2011 

JAN HOR8AI.Y 

CLERK
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Penn Virginia GP Holdings, L.P. (the
Partnership) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Frank A. Pici, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of
PVG GP, LLC, the general partner of the Partnership, certify, 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 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; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|      |  |                  |  |                                           
|----- |  | ---------------- |  | ------------------------------------------
|Date: |  | November 1, 2007 |  |                                           
|      |  |                 
|      |  |                  |  | /s/ Frank A. Pici                         
|      |  |                  |  | Frank A. Pici                             
|      |  |                  |  | Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

This written statement is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission as an exhibit
to the Report. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Partnership and will be retained by the Partnership and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
|   | (1) | The      Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010 of      the Company (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 results of operations of the      Company. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:      November 3, 2010 | /s/ RYUJI      UENO                                                            |
|-----------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                        | Ryuji      Ueno, M.D., Ph.D., Ph.D.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   |
|                        | Chief      Executive Officer                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          |
|                        | (Principal      Executive Officer)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    |

----
vs.

BRUCE KERNAN,

Defendant.

THIS MATTER having come before the Court on the application of defendant Bruce

Kernan (by Stacy Ann Biancamano, Arleo, Donohue & Biancamano. L.L.C.) for modification of

the conditions of bail; and the United States (by JoIm Gay, Assistant United States Attorney)

consenting to the entry of the Order; and United States Pretrial Services (by Andrew Dziopa.

United States Pretrial Services) taking no position thereto; and for good cause shown:

iT IS on this / 7day of September, 2012;

HEREBY ORDERED that the defendant’s bail be modified as follows:

1. Mr. Kernan be permitted to travel to Toyko, Japan from October 4. 2012 to

October 19, 2012 to visit his wife’s family.

2. Pretrial services to return Mr. Kernan’s passport to allow his travel.

3. Mr. Kernan to surrender it back to pretrial upon his return.

4. All other conditions previously imposed shall remain in effect.

UNITED STATES

DISTRICT OF

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff,

DISTRICT COUT

NEW JERSEY

Crim. No.: 11-00169 (WJM)

ORDER FOR MODIFICATION

CONDITIONS OF BAIL

United States District Jud

Case 2:11-cr-00169-CCC Document 13 Filed 09/18/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 51
----

|   | a. | Consult shall provide service including introduction and participation, including entrance and participation fees in at least one event for potential investors in or near Houston, Texas in the month of December 2010. |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | b. | Introduce the company to the financial community. |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------|

|   | c. | Upon the company's approval, conduct meetings, in person or by telephone, with such persons introduced from such meetings directly made from this agreement. |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  Agreed to By:    |   |   |   |  Agreed to By:      |
|------------------------|--------|--------|--------|--------------------------|
|                   |   |   |   |                     |
|                   |   |   |   |                     |
|  /s/ Kyle Kennedy |   |   |   |  /s/ Martha Pollock |
|  Kyle Kennedy     |   |   |   |  Martha Pollock     |
|  CEO              |   |   |   |  President          |
|  Date: 12/14/10   |   |   |   |  Date:              |

----
Plaintiff,

V.

MEMORANDUM & ORDER

ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE

OF NEW JERSEY, MARLENE LYNCH

FORD, THOMAS F. KELAHER, JAMES W.HOLZAPFEL, RONALD DELIGNY, JOHN

MERCUN, SAMUEL J. MARZARELLA, E.

DAVID MILLARD, JAMES A.

CHURCHILL, DANIEL MAHONEY,

JEFFREY P. THOMPSON, OCEAN

COUNTY PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE, and

COUNTY OF OCEAN

Defendants.

SHERIDAN, U.S.D.J.

This matter is before the court on a motion to dismiss Counts 13 and the 14 ofthe Complaint

(ECF No. 28). Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief against the Attorney General of the State of New

Jersey and the Ocean County Prosecutor’s Office.

Counts 13 and 14 of the Complaint sets forth Plaintiffs claims for injunctive relief The

pertinent paragraphs read:

Defendant Attorney General for the State ofNew Jersey is sued solely

in her official capacity and only for injunctive relief, as permitted by

Ex Parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908).

COUNT Xlii

INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AS TO PLAINTIFF
COUNT XIV

INJUNCTIVE RELIEF GENERALLY

134, Plaintiffhereby incorporates by reference all ofthe foregoing

allegations in this Complaint and further alleges the following.

135. Pursuant to 42 U .S.C. § 1983 and the Constitution ofthe State

of New Jersey, Plaintiff seeks an injunction requiring the Ocean

County Prosecutor’s Office to establish policies, customs and

practices designed to prevent, minimize and correct the civil rights

violations alleged in this Complaint.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for the following relief:

F. That the Court order Defendants to expunge the Murder

Convictions from Plaintiffs criminal record;

G. That the Court enjoin Defendants from committing similar

violations of civil rights in the future;

With regard to the expungement of the murder convictions, Count 13 is dismissed for the

following reasons. First there is a statutory process that must be followed to expunge a criminal

record. N.J.S.A.2C:52-1. This is a matter upon which Plaintiff can personally proceed.

Second, at oral argument the Attorney General’s Office indicated that it would informally

assist Plaintiff in the expungement process. As such, there is no need for ordering this relief

Third, there is no ongoing violation of federal law and there is no showing that the Attorney

General is waiving the Eleventh Amendment defense.
conviction for murder has been reversed, he will not be subject to any further punishment.

IT IS on this 13th day of September, 2012;

ORDERED that the motion to dismiss (ECF No. 28) is granted as to Counts 13 and 14 ofthe

Complaint.

PETER 0. SHERIDAN, U.S.D.J.

3
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 134 (Wednesday, July 15, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 34361]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-16694]



[[Page 34361]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; 
Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive 
and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel. Type 1 Diabetes 
TrialNet: Clinical Centers.
    Date: August 3, 2009.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Bethesda Marriott Suites, 6711 Democracy Blvd, Bethesda, 
MD 20817.
    Contact Person: Carol J. Goter-Robinson, PhD, Scientific Review 
Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, 
Room 748, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452. (301) 
594-7791. <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#395e564d5c4b4b565b50574a56575a795c414d4b581757505d5d5217575051175e564f"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="25424a514057574a474c4b564a4b4665405d5157440b4b4c41414e0b4b4c4d0b424a53">[email protected]</span></a>.

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and 
funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.847, 
Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; 93.848, Digestive 
Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology 
and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: July 8, 2009.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
 [FR Doc. E9-16694 Filed 7-14-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
### UNPUBLISHED



# UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT



#  U NITED S TATES OF A MERICA ,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. No. 99-4708



# 
E RNEST F. C OBLE , J R .,

Defendant-Appellant. 

# 

 U NITED S TATES OF A MERICA ,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. No. 99-4713



# 
E RNEST F. C OBLE , J R .,

Defendant-Appellant. 

# 
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., District Judge.

(CR-99-137) Submitted: May 31, 2002 Decided: June 20, 2002 Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

COUNSEL Ernest F. Coble, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Harry L. Hobgood, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

OPINION
PER CURIAM:In these consolidated appeals, Ernest F. Coble appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion to dismiss the indictment andfrom his conviction of attempting to obstruct and impede the administration of the tax laws, in violation of 26 U.S.C.A. § 7212(a) (West 2002).* We conclude, first, that Coble’s motion to dismiss the indictment for lack of subject matter jurisdiction patently is meritless; therefore, the district court properly denied the motion. Second, ourreview of the record discloses that the evidence presented by the Government — Coble’s use of an invalid "comptroller warrant" to discharge his tax liability and to receive a substantial tax refund — was sufficient to sustain Coble’s conviction under § 7212(a). See Glasser v. United States , 315 U.S. 60, 80 (1942) (providing standard of review); United States v. Wells , 163 F.3d 889, 897 (4th Cir. 1998) (defining the elements of a § 7212(a) offense and affirming a conviction under that section). We also have reviewed all of Coble’s claims raised in his informal briefs and find them to be without merit. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of Coble’s motion to dismiss the indictment and affirm his conviction. In light of this disposition, wealso deny Coble’s motion entitled "Emergency Petition for Administrative Review." We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED *The facts underlying Coble’s conviction are provided in our prioropinion, in which we reversed Coble’s sentence and remanded for resentencing. United States v. Coble , No. 00-4247 (4th Cir. April 27, 2001) (unpublished). 2 U NITED S TATES v. C OBLE
Exhibit 32.2


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


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Regal Rock, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ended November 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, in
the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

   1.    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
         15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


Date:  January 11, 2007


/s/ Wu Chih Chun
---------------------------------------
Wu Chih Chun, Principal Financial Officer
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Respondent

v. IAN PATRICK HERENS, Petitioner : : : : : : : : : : : No. 235 MAL 2014 Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW , this 19th day of August, 2014, the Petition for All owance of Appeal is DENIED
.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Case No. l1-cr-00315 (WHW)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

vs.

CONTINUANCE AND

MITCHELL KURLANDER and SCHEDULING ORDER

ALAN ABESHAUS,

Defendants.

THIS MATTER having been opened to the Court upon the application of defendant

Mitchell Kurlander (William A. DeStefano appearing) and defendant Alan Abeshaus (Kevin H.

Marino appearing), for an order granting a continuance of the proceedings in the abovecaptioned matter and for a scheduling order, and the defendants being aware that they have the

right to have the matter brought to trial within 70 days of the date of their appearance before a

judicial officer of this court pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 3 161(c)(l), and the

defendants having consented 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 matter has been designated as a complex case pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §

316l(h)(7)(B)(ii) by order dated September 12, 2011 [Dkt. # 19];

2. Defendants have requested the aforementioned continuance due to trial

commitments in other pending matters; and

3. As a result of the foregoing, the ends ofjustice serve by granting the continuance
outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial.

WHEREFORE, on this

ofJuly, 2012,

IT IS ORDERED that the deadline to serve pretrial motions other than those by way of

Fed. R. Crim. P. 12, which have already been decided, is forty-nine (49) days before trial.

Responsive briefs shall be filed no later than twenty-one (21) days before trial. Any reply briefs

shall be filed no later han 5/urteen (14) days before trial. A hearing on the pretrial motions will

be held on /, tZ4ø ,20

IT IS FUR ER ORDERED that the trial is scheduled fo/// and

T IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action be, and hereby is, continued until

/9 ,L ‘/3, and that the period from the date of this Order through

7,7 lj shall be excludable in computing time under the Speedy Trial Act of

1974.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the remaining I’rovisions of the Or er for Discovery

and Inspection shall remain in full force and effect.

II . S

United States nior District Judge