alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The AMERICAN SECURIT COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. SHATTERPROOF GLASS CORPORATION, Defendant.

Civ. A. No. 1691.

United States District Court D. Delaware.

March 8, 1957.

*197Thomas Cooch (of Connolly, Cooch *&*Bove), Wilmington, Del., for petitioners.

H. Eugene Savery, Wilmington, Del., and John L. Seymour, New York City, for plaintiff.

Caleb S. Layton (of Richards, Layton & Finger), Wilmington, Del., and Wiliam C. McCoy (of McCoy, Greene & TeGrotenhuis), Cleveland, Ohio, for defendant.

LEAHY, Chief Judge.

On June 4, 1956, in the action of American Securit Company v. Shatterproof Glass Corporation, Civil Action 1691, this Court ordered the deposition which was to be taken of Robert Ingouf, Vice President and Treasurer of plaintiff, sealed and filed with the Court to be opened only upon its Order.

There is pending in Indiana plaintiff’s action against Hamilton Glass Company and Edith Building Corporation of Indiana and other defendants for infringement of patents, some of which are in issue here. Hamilton Glass Company and Edith Building Corporation, having taken the deposition of Ingouf in that action, now petition this Court to make available his deposition taken here in order to “compare the answers given by the deponent in two different depositions on the same subject matter for possible admissions or contradiction, and also for obtaining further evidence in the Indiana suit.”

The entry of a secrecy order under Fed.Rules Civ.Proc. rule 30(b), 28 U.S.C., is a matter within the Court’s sound discretion and, once entered, subject to modification when deemed advisable by the Court. Argument having been heard and briefs filed, I am convinced that petitioners are interested persons and may have access to the deposition in question. The following order is hereby entered:

Order

A copy of the deposition of Robert Ingouf in American Securit Company v. Shatterproof Glass Corporation, Civil Action No. 1691, is hereby ordered to be made available for examination for petitioners only, and no other party or person, with the following additional limitations :

(a) That counsel for petitioners not divulge the contents thereof to any person or party, except as to those portions contradictory of other depositions or evidence in the Indiana suit of American Securit Company v. Hamilton Glass Company, Edith Building Corporation of Indiana, et al., Civil Action No. TH 55-C-37, or furnishing facts relevant to obtaining additional evidence in said suit;

(b) That the same may be used in its entirety for purposes of framing interrogatories upon any subsequent deposition of any officer, agent or director of plaintiff, taken in said suit;

(c) That jurisdiction over petitioners be retained by this Court for the purpose of insuring good faith compliance by them with the conditions of this order.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Riley Williams, Appellant.

[854 NYS2d 152]

The Supreme Court has wide discretion in making evidentiary rulings, and those rulings should not be disturbed on appeal absent an improvident exercise of discretion. The trial court’s discretion in this regard “is circumscribed by the rules of evidence and the defendant’s constitutional right to present a defense” *(People v Carroll,*95 NY2d 375, 385 [2000]).

The Court of Appeals has ruled that it is within the trial court’s discretion to allow the People to impeach a defendant’s credibility with prior convictions, should he or she choose to take the stand *(see People v Mattiace,*77 NY2d 269, 274-275 [1990]; *People v Sandoval,*34 NY2d 371 [1974]). The court must strike an appropriate balance between the probative value of the defendant’s prior crimes on the issue of credibility and the possible prejudice to the defendant *(see People v Springer,*13 AD3d 657, 658 [2004]). The defendant bears the burden of demonstrating that “the prejudicial effect of admitting the prior conviction would so outweigh the probative worth on the issue *673of credibility as to warrant its exclusion” *(People v Brooks,*104 AD2d 999, 999 [1984]).

“That the number of prior convictions ruled admissible [is] large and that some of those prior convictions [are] remote in time are matters of substance that may properly be considered by the trial court but are not appropriate bases for this Court to second-guess the trial court’s conclusion” *(People v Walker,*83 NY2d 455, 459 [1994]). Moreover, “[t]he mere fact that defendant has an extensive misdemeanor record does not, per se, lead inevitably to the conclusion that some inquiry into that record would establish that defendant had a propensity for crime” *(People v Coe,*165 AD2d 721, 722 [1990]).

Here, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in allowing inquiry into the defendant’s prior convictions. Although the defendant declared his intention not to take the stand, the court ruled that, should the defendant choose to testify, the People could inquire into the defendant’s lone felony conviction from 1980, as well as 45 misdemeanor convictions, on the ground that they demonstrated the defendant’s willingness to place his own interests above those of society. However, the court minimized the prejudice to the defendant by ruling that the People could not inquire into the underlying facts of any of the convictions. Lifson, J.P., Ritter, Florio and Garni, JJ., concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Robert Spangenberg, Appellant.

[852 NYS2d 810]

Defendant pleaded guilty to criminal possession of marihuana in the first degree and was sentenced to five years in prison with three years of postrelease supervision. Defendant’s sole contention on this appeal is that the sentence imposed is harsh and excessive. He is precluded, however, from raising this issue inasmuch as he made a knowing, voluntary and intelligent waiver of the right to appeal, both orally and in writing *(see People v Lopez,*6 NY3d 248, 255-256 [2006]).

Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Carpinello, Malone Jr. and Kavanagh, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
**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**

|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                  |                            |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------|
|   | BLACK                SEA OIL, INC.                                                                                                                                                                                    |
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                  |                            |
|   | By:                                                                                                                                                                                                         | /s/                Marcus Segal |
|   | Name:                Marcus SegalTitle:                Chief Executive Officer, President, Chief Financial Officer and Director                (Principal Executive, Financial and Accounting                Officer) |

----
Case 3:11-mj-05028-TJB   Document 21   Filed 06/13/11   Page 1 of 1 PageID: 101
Exhibit 10.3
 
 
   Principal.
 Interest
 Non-Revolving Line of Credit
 Application of Payments
 Events of Default
  Page1




---



##### 



Remedies
   Waivers
 Page2




---



##### 



Unconditional Liability
 Waiver
of Claim Against Trust Account.
 Notices
  MBF Healthcare Acquisition Corp.
121 Alhambra Plaza, Suite 1100
Coral Gables, FL 33134
  MBF Healthcare Management, LLC
121 Alhambra Plaza, Suite 1100
Coral Gables, FL 33134
  Page3




---



##### 



Governing Law; Construction
 Severability
 signatures on following page
 Page4




---



##### 



MBF HEALTHCARE ACQUISITION CORP.By:
    /s/ Jorge L. RicoName:
    Jorge L. RicoTitle:
    Chief Operating OfficerMBF HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT, LLCBy:
    /s/ Miguel B. FernandezName:
    Miguel B. FernandezTitle:
    President Page5
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report of Mattmar Minerals, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending February 28, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
"Report"), I, Arnold P. Kling, President 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, 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.

Dated: March 27, 2009

/s/ Arnold P. Kling-----------------------------------Arnold P. KlingPresident

A signed original of this certification 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
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT
      TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350





In
      connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report On Form 10-QSB of Grace 3,
      Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”) for the quarter ending November 30,
      2007 (the “Report”), I, Virginia K. Sourlis, Chief Executive Officer and Chief
      Financial Officer of 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,
      to
      the best of my knowledge and belief, 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.





Dated:
      January 9, 2008




By:
            /s/
                Virginia K. SourlisVirginia
                K. SourlisChief
                Executive Officer andChief
                Financial Officer ofGrace
                3, Inc.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-4390

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

DENNIS MICHAEL GALLIPEAU,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at 

Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Senior District Judge. (3:08-cr-00096-JFA-1)

Submitted: December 19, 2017 Decided: December 21, 2017

Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Dennis Michael Gallipeau, Appellant Pro Se. Tommie DeWayne Pearson, Assistant 

United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, 

South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Dennis Michael Gallipeau appeals the district court’s order granting the 

Government’s motion to modify the terms of his supervised release and denying 

Gallipeau’s request to terminate his supervision. We have reviewed the record and find 

no reversible error. The district court acted within its discretion by modifying 

Gallipeau’s terms of supervised release to include 90 days of home confinement with 

electronic monitoring and to submit to a search of his home at any time during 

supervision. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d) (2012). Accordingly, we affirm. We dispense 

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in 

the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Case 2:11-cr-00080-SDW Document 142 Filed 09/27/11 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 503
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32

       CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULES 13A-14(B) OR RULE 15D-14(B) OF THE
                    SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT AND 18 U.S.C.1350

The undersigned hereby certifies, for the purposes of section 1350 of chapter 63
of title 18 of the United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in his or her capacity as an officer of Lotus
Bancorp, Inc., that, to his or her knowledge, the Quarterly Report of Lotus
Bancorp, Inc. and Subsidiary on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2007,
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such reports fairly
represents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operation of Lotus Bancorp, Inc. and Subsidiary. This written statement is being
furnished to the Securities Exchange Commission as an exhibit to such Form
10-QSB. A signed original of this statement has been provided to Lotus Bancorp,
Inc. and will be retained by Lotus Bancorp, Inc. and furnished to the Securities
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

Date: August 14, 2007


/s/ Satish B. Jasti
-----------------------
Satish B. Jasti
Chief Executive Officer


/s/ Richard E. Bauer
-----------------------
Richard E. Bauer
Chief Financial Officer


                                       24
Exhibit 12.1

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO EXCHANGEACT RULE 13a-14(a) or 15d-14(a)

 

I, Dr. Moshe BenBassat, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed this annual report onForm 20–F of ClickSoftware Technologies Ltd.;

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual reportdoes not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made,in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, and other financial information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4. The Company’s other certifyingofficer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a–15(e) and 15d–15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f)and 15d-15(f)) for the Company and have:

 

a) Designed such disclosure controlsand procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the Company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

b) Designed such internal controlover financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to providereasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for externalpurposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

 

c) Evaluated the effectivenessof the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

 

d) Disclosed in this report anychange in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual reportthat has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financialreporting; and

 

5. The Company’s other certifyingofficer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Company’sauditors and the audit committee of the Company’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

 

a) All significant deficienciesand material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the Company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

 

b) Any fraud, whether or not material,that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Company’s internal control over financialreporting.

 

Date: March 20, 2013
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-2233 GREGORY W. SMITH, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA; DAVID SANDERS, Judge; N. EDWARD EAGLOSKI; ORVILLE CONNER SPAULDING, “Hobby”, Judge,Defendants - Appellees. No. 03-2243 GREGORY W. SMITH, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA; DAVID SANDERS, Judge of the Berkeley Circuit Court, Defendants - Appellees.2 No. 03-2244 GREGORY W. SMITH, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA; N. EDWARD EAGLOSKI, Judge of the Putnam County Circuit Court, Defendants - Appellees. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Elizabeth V. Hallanan, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-171-2, CA-03-138-2, CA-03-148-2) Submitted: December 11, 2003 Decided: December 19, 2003 Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Gregory W. Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).3 PER CURIAM: In these consolidated appeals, Gregory W. Smith appeals the district court’s orders accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge to dismiss the petitions for writs of mandamus as frivolous. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeals as frivolous. 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.

DISMISSED
Exhibit 32.1
Certification of the Principal Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


The undersigned  hereby  certifies  that, to his knowledge,  (i) the Form 10-KSB
filed by Weststar  Financial  Services  Corporation  (the "Issuer") for the year
ended December 31, 2005,  fully complies with the  requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d)  of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of  1934,  and (ii) the  information
contained  in  that  report  fairly  presents,  in all  material  respects,  the
financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer on the dates and for
the periods presented therein.


                                       Weststar Financial Services Corporation


Date:   February 22, 2006              By:  /s/ G. Gordon Greenwood
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            G. Gordon Greenwood
                                            President  & Chief Executive Officer


                                       53
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 Market Data Consultants, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended August 31, 2006 (the "Report"), I, Wilson Cheung, Chief Financial 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 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, Chief Financial Officer

October 12, 2006
Exhibit
No. 32.2





CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL 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 of Juhl Wind, Inc., a Delaware corporation
(the “Company”), on Form 10Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
the undersigned, the Principal Financial Officer, hereby certifies pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act
of 2002 that, to the undersigned’s knowledge:





(1)   the
Report of the Company filed today 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 operation of the
Company.





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
or its staff upon request.






Date: November 15,
      2010
            /s/John
      J. BrandJohn
      J. BrandPrincipal
      Financial Officer
# **Exhibit32**

# **CERTIFICATIONOF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORT**

DannH. Bowman and Sandra F. Pender hereby certify as follows:

1.   They are thePresident and Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer,respectively, of Chino Commercial Bancorp.

2.   The Form 10-QSB of Chino Commercial Bancorp for the quarterlyperiod ended September 30, 2006 complies with the requirements pf Section 13(a)or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78(m) or 78(d)) andthe information contained in the report on Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of ChinoCommercial Bancorp.
| Date: November 13, 2006 |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
|                    |   |
|                    |   |
|                    | By:    | /s/ Dann H. Bowman |   |
|                    |   | Dann H. Bowman |
|                    |   | President and Chief Executive Officer |
|                    |   |   |
|                    |   |   |
|                    | By:    | /s/ Sandra F. Pender |   |
|                    |   | Sandra F. Pender |
|                    |   | Chief Financial Officer |
|                         |        |  |  |  |

 

1

----
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

UNITED STATES,

Plaintiff,

v.

FRANCESCO GUARRACI AND 

MICHAEL NOBILE

Defendants.

:

:

:

: ORDER

:

: Cr. No. 10-517 (WHW)

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Walls, Senior District Judge

It is, on this 30th day of December, 2010:

ORDERED that defendant Michael Nobile’s pre-trial motions will be due on January 13, 

2011.

s/ William H. Walls 

United States Senior District Judge

Case 2:10-cr-00517-WHW Document 41 Filed 12/30/10 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 65