alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection withthe Quarterly Report of PRIMEDIA Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ending September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Dean B. Nelson,Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

(1)         The Report fully complieswith the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

(2)         Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| /s/ DEAN  B. NELSON                               |   |
|---------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Dean B. Nelson                                    |
| *Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer* |
| November 9, 2005                             |

 

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

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained bythe Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.

----
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D17-3660

_____________________________

FREDRICK VERNEL JENNINGS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Angela M. Cox, Judge.

August 22, 2018

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROBERTS, WETHERELL, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

Fredrick Vernel Jennings, pro se, Appellant.
2

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Exhibit 23.2

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Board of Directors and Stockholders

Orchid Cellmark Inc.:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the
registration statements on Form S-3 (No. 333-60582, No. 333-85550, No. 333-98825, No. 333-105732, and No. 333-111892) and on Form S-8 (No. 333-146002, No. 333-126227, No. 333-53118, and No. 333-76744) of Orchid Cellmark
Inc. of our report dated March 15, 2007, with respect to the consolidated balance sheet of Orchid Cellmark Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2006, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders equity and
comprehensive loss, and cash flows for each of the years in the two-year period ended December 31, 2006, and the related financial statement schedule, which report appears in the December 31, 2007 annual report on Form 10-K of Orchid
Cellmark Inc.

Our report refers to the adoption of the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123(R), Share-Based Payment,effective January 1, 2006.



|                                    
|------------------------------------
|                                    
|/s/ KPMG LLP                        
|Princeton, New Jersey March 12,
2008
A06A0626.

#### HANDSPIKE v. THE STATE.

(631 SE2d 730)

SMITH, Presiding Judge.

Quinton Handspike appeals from his convictions on two counts of armed robbery. In his sole enumeration of error, Handspike contends the trial court erred when it refused to redact statements showing that he was in jail awaiting trial at the time he wrote a letter to his girlfriend.* 1 Finding no error, we affirm.

It is well settled in Georgia that “evidence that a defendant has been incarcerated in connection with the crime for which the defendant is on trial does not place the defendant’s character in issue *497[cits.]” and does not require reversal. *Murray v. State,*271 Ga. 504, 506 (5) (521 SE2d 564) (1999); *Knowles v. State,*245 Ga. App. 523, 525 (4) (538 SE2d 175) (2000). Handspike attempts to avoid our application of this rule of law by arguing that he is not making a character objection to the evidence. Instead, he asserts we should reverse because the prejudicial impact of the evidence outweighed its probative value. The resulting prejudice, he argues, is that the jury could infer from this evidence that “he was too dangerous to release on bond.” As this argument is merely a character objection in disguise, we find that it has no merit. Id. See also *Ferrell v. State,*198 Ga. App. 270, 272 (3) (401 SE2d 301) (1991).

Decided May 19, 2006.

*Gerard B. Kleinrock,*for appellant.

*Gwendolyn Keyes Fleming, District Attorney, Barbara B. Conroy, Assistant District Attorney,*for appellee.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Ruffin, C. J., and Phipps, J., concur.*

1

 The letters were admitted to show that Handspike was attempting to persuade his girlfriend to refuse to testify against him.
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.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service 

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Treasury. 

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting. 

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Language Services Issue Committee will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comment, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service. 

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Thursday, February 12, 2009. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Marisa Knispel at 1-888-912-1227 or (718) 488-3557. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that a meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Language Services Issue Committee will be held Thursday, February 12, 2009, at 2 p.m. Eastern Time. You can submit written comments to the panel by faxing to (718) 488-2062, or by mail to Taxpayer Advocacy Panel, 10 Metro Tech Center, 625 Fulton Street, Brooklyn, NY, 11201, or you can contact us at                     *http://www.improveirs.org.*                     Public comments will also be welcome during the meeting. Please contact Marisa Knispel at 1-888-912-1227 or (718) 488-3557 for additional information.                 

The agenda will include the following: Various IRS Issues. 

Dated: December 22, 2008. 

Roy L. Block, 

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

 [FR Doc. E9-164 Filed 1-8-09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
##### 



EXHIBIT 99.2

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 Simula, Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John A. Jenson, 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 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/ John A. Jenson

John A. Jenson
Chief Financial Officer
May 15, 2003
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 Infinite Group, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, James Witzel, 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, 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:
August 12, 2009





/s/
      James WitzelJames
      WitzelChief
      Financial Officer(Principal
      Financial and Accounting
Officer)




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 31.2



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO

EXCHANGE ACT RULE 13a-14(a)/15a-14(a)

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Howard M. Bailey, Chief Financial Officer of Occam Networks, Inc., certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Occam Networks, Inc.;
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does 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 this report;
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: April 15, 2005



/s/ Howard M. BaileyHoward M. BaileyChief Financial Officer
Exhibit 10.154


 


Summary of Material
Terms – Consulting Agreement with Jean Madar Holding SAS


 


1. Jean Madar Holding
SAS (“Consultant”) is act as a consultant to Inter Parfums, Inc. (“Company”), and to provide services commensurate
with the responsibilities and obligations of the Chief Executive Officer of Company in such places as may be agreed upon between
Company and Consultant, provided that no services shall be rendered within the United States.


 


2. The term of this
Agreement is for a period of one (1) year commencing as of January 1, 2013, and shall continue in effect for subsequent annual
periods unless


 


(a)either party
provides the other party with 120 days advance notice, or


 


(b)Jean Madar,
the Chief Executive Officer of Company, ceases to be the Chief Executive Officer of Company, in which case this Agreement shall
terminate coterminous with such cessation.


 


3. Compensation: For
2013, Company agrees to pay to Consultant $250,000, payable in equal monthly installments. For subsequent years, the remuneration
to be paid from Company to Consultant shall be as negotiated between Consultant and the Executive Compensation and Stock Option
Committee of the Board of Directors of Company.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 141 (Friday, July 24, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 36786]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-17618]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION


Data Collection Available for Public Comments and Recommendations

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this 
notice announces the Small Business Administration's intentions to 
request approval on a new and/or currently approved information 
collection.

DATES: Submit comments on or before September 22, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Send all comments regarding whether this information 
collection is necessary for the proper performance of the function of 
the agency, whether the burden estimates are accurate, and if there are 
ways to minimize the estimated burden and enhance the quality of the 
collection, to George Solomon, Supervisor Business Development Officer, 
Office of Business Initiatives, Small Business Administration, 409 3rd 
Street, 6th Floor, Washington, DC 20416.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: George Solomon, Supervisor Business 
Development Officer, Office of Business Initiatives, 202-205-7436 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#4324262c3124266d302c2f2c2e2c2d033021226d242c35"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f493919b869391da879b989b999b9ab4879695da939b82">[email protected]</span></a>, Curtis B. Rich, Management Analyst, 202-205-
7030 <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#27445255534e5409554e444f6754454609404851"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="1c7f696e68756f326e757f745c6f7e7d327b736a">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SBA'S strategic plan is to examine the 
impact of counseling and information services on nascent, start-up and 
in-business clients. This survey measure effects on counseling and 
information transfer on the respondent's evaluation of the 
effectiveness, usefulness, and relevancy of the services provided and 
whether these services/actions led to the creation of jobs and an 
increase in business start-ups and gross revenue.
    Title: ``Entrepreneurial Development Impact Study''.
    Description of Respondents: SBA Clients.
    Form Number: 2214.
    Annual Responses: 8,100.
    Annual Burden: 1,127.

Jacqueline White,
Chief, Administrative Information Branch.
[FR Doc. E9-17618 Filed 7-23-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P


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



1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Matritech, Inc. (the registrant):2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does 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 this report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this
report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and
cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining
disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the
registrant and have:
 a.
    
    Designed such disclosure
controls and procedures, or
caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be
designed under our
supervision, to ensure that
material information relating
to the registrant, 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.
    
    [Paragraph omitted in
accordance with SEC
transition instructions
contained in SEC Release
33-8238, 34-47986 and
33-8760.]c.
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness
of the registrants
disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in
this report our conclusions
about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and
procedures, as of the end of
the period covered by this
report based on such
evaluation; andd.
    
    Disclosed in this report any
change in the registrants
internal control over
financial reporting that
occurred during the
registrants first fiscal
quarter that has materially
affected, or is reasonably
likely to materially affect,
the registrants internal
control over financial
reporting; and
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation
of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of
registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 a.
    
    All significant deficiencies
and material weaknesses in
the design or operation of
internal controls over
financial reporting which are
reasonably likely to
adversely affect the
registrants ability to
record, process, summarize
and report financial
information; andb.
    
    Any fraud, whether or not
material, that involves
management or other employees
who have a significant role
in the registrants internal
controls over financial
reporting.
  /s/ Stephen D. Chubb

Stephen D. ChubbChief Executive Officer
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 5 A1 93 5 . CHESTNUT v

. CI TI MORTGAGE, I NC.

On J un e 1 1

, 2 0 1 5

, t h i s ap p eal was d o ck et ed i n t h is Co u rt

. Co u rt o f
Ap p eal s Ru l e 23 (a) p ro v i des t h at ap p el l an t ' s b ri ef sh al l b e fi l ed wi t h i n 2 0 d ay s aft er

t h e ap p eal i s d ock et ed

. Co u rt Ru l e 2 3 (a) al s o p ro vi d es t h at an y m o t io n fo r ex t en s i o n

o f t i m e to fi l e ap p el lan t 's b ri ef an d en u m erat i o n o f erro rs m u s t b e fi l ed b efo re t h e d at e

t h e d o cu m en t s are d u e o r t h e Co u rt m ay d i s m i s s t he ap p eal

. S mi t h v. R. Ja mes

Pr o per t ies , In c. , 2 9 2 Ga. Ap p . 3 1 7 (6 65 SE2 d 1 9 ) (2 0 0 8 ).

Up o n m ot i o n , t h i s co u rt g ran t ed t h e ap p el l an t a 3 0 -d ay ex t en s i o n o f t i m e an d

d i rect ed h i m t o fi l e h i s b ri ef b y J u ly 2 1

, 2 0 15

. As o f Sep t em b er 1 5

, 2 0 1 5

, t h e

ap p el l an t h as n o t fi l ed a b ri ef o r a n a d d i t i o n al m o t i on fo r an ex t en s i o n o f t i m e.

Acco rd in g ly

, t hi s ap p eal is o rd ered DISM ISSED. Co urt o f Ap p eal s Ru l es 7

, 1 6 (b ),

2 3 (a).

Fu rt he r , a s t h i s i s t h e ei g h th u n su cces s fu l rel at ed ap p eal o r ap p l i cat i o n fo r

ap p eal

, t h e ap p el l an t i s o rd ered t o SHOW CAUSE wi t h i n 1 5 d ay s w h y h e s ho u l d n ot

b e as s es s ed a p en al t y

o f u p t o $ 2 ,5 0 0 fo r fi l i n g a fri v o l o u s ap p eal

.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O f f i c e
, A t la n t a
,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r t if y t h a t th e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t

h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 10/01/2015 October 01, 2015
Chart 6-7. Families allocated about one-third of their total 

spending to housing and about one-fifth to transportation in 

2005

SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics

10.0

11.7

5.2

5.6

18.6

4.1

31.9

13.0

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Other expenditures

Personal insurance and pensions

Entertainment

Health care

Transportation

Apparel and services

Housing

Food

Percent of total expenditures

Expenditure category

Chart 6-7. Families allocated about one-third of their total 

spending to housing and about one-fifth to transportation in 

2005

• Families are defined here as consumer units of two or more persons. These 

consumer units are traditionally-defined families or unrelated individuals who 

make joint expenditure decisions.

• Food was the third largest component in total spending. About 13 cents of 

every expenditure dollar was allocated to food.

• From 2004 to 2005, the largest increase among the major components of 

spending occurred in housing.
* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited

circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 23, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

____________________________

Summary Calendar

No. 03-40850

____________________________

IN THE MATTER OF: LISA VELA WATSON,

Debtor.

____________________________

RUDY WAUQUIN VELA; RICHARD W. VELA;

JALINDA JOYCE BISSETT; REBECCA LEE VELA; LISA VELA WATSON,

Appellants,

versus

JESUS M. CASTELLANO; LA CASA DE NYLON,

A TEXAS PARTNERSHIP CONSISTING OF ABRAHAM GALONSKY

AND ISRAEL LIAZKA,

Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas - McAllen Division

Civil Case No. M-02-CV-245

Before JONES, BENAVIDES, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The appellants seek a reversal of the bankruptcy court’s

decision, affirmed by the district court, that annulled the

automatic stay as to a foreclosure of a tiny property interest that
2

had been transferred to Ms. Watson on the eve of foreclosure.

Appellants contend that, because the Watson bankruptcy was

eventually dismissed, the bankruptcy court lacked jurisdiction to

annul the automatic stay retroactively. On the other hand, they

want the bankruptcy court to adjudicate their claim for damages

occasioned by the alleged violation of the stay.

They cannot have it both ways. If the court had

jurisdiction to reopen the case pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 350 and

adjudicate their claim, it also had jurisdiction to annul the stay

retroactively, and we find no error in its exercise of discretion

in the annulment decision.

If the court retained jurisdiction by virtue of the

ongoing litigation between these parties over these matters for the

past seven to eight years, it had jurisdiction to order retroactive

annulment.

Finally, because the main bankruptcy case was dismissed

for want of prosecution by Ms. Watson, and because the bankruptcy

court indicated it would originally have granted relief from the

automatic stay for lack of equity in the property, appellants’

claim is essentially frivolous: they can state no damages arising

from the foreclosure.

The judgments of the district and bankruptcy courts are

AFFIRMED.
[No. 23210-7-III.

Division Three.

December 6, 2005.]

#### Leonard E. Childress, *Appellant,*v. Watson Agency, Inc., *Respondent.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Douglas County, No. 02-2-00322-0, John Hotchkiss, J., entered July 1, 2004. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Brown, J., concurred in by Sweeney, A.C.J., and Schultheis, J.