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



EXHIBIT 32.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Great Lakes Dredge & Dock
Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2003,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Douglas B. Mackie, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 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 results of operations of
the Company.

/s/ Douglas B. Mackie
Douglas B. Mackie
Chief Executive Officer
Date: August 12, 2003

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

30
No. 1233.

#### E. L. Essley Machinery Co. *v.*Delta Manufacturing Co.

June 10, 1946.

*John W. Michael*for petitioner.

*William A. Strauch*and *J. Matthews Neale*for respondent.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
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  Infinite  Group Inc.  (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Michael S. Smith, Chief Executive 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 results of operations
            of the Company.

      A signed  original  of this  written  statement  has been  provided to the
Company and will be retained  by the  Company  and  furnished  to the SEC or its
staff upon request.


/s/  MICHAEL S. SMITH
---------------------
     Michael S. Smith
     Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer

July 26, 2005


                                       26
#### **EXHIBIT 32.1**

#### ** **

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO**

## **SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

## ** **

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Great Lakes Dredge & DockCorporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30,2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, Douglas B. Mackie, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

 

(1)                                  The Report fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                                  The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/ Douglas B. Mackie        |   |
|------------------------------|--------|
| Douglas B. Mackie            |
| Chief Executive Officer      |
| Date: November 11, 2005 |

 

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906, or other documentauthenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appearsin typed form within the electronic version of this written statement requiredby Section 906, has been provided to Great Lakes Dredge & DockCorporation and will be retained by Great Lakes Dredge & DockCorporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.

 

1

----
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3383 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3383

To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located 
at 719 Church Street in Nashville, Tennessee, as the ``Fred D. Thompson 
            Federal Building and United States Courthouse''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 22, 2016

  Mr. Alexander (for himself and Mr. Corker) introduced the following 
bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment 
                            and Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located 
at 719 Church Street in Nashville, Tennessee, as the ``Fred D. Thompson 
            Federal Building and United States Courthouse''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. FRED D. THOMPSON FEDERAL BUILDING AND UNITED STATES 
              COURTHOUSE.

    (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
            (1) Fred D. Thompson was first elected to the United States 
        Senate in 1994 and served as a Senator from the State of 
        Tennessee until 2003;
            (2) Fred D. Thompson graduated from Memphis State 
        University in 1964 and Vanderbilt University School of Law in 
        1967, and served as an Assistant United States Attorney in the 
        State of Tennessee;
            (3) Fred D. Thompson was appointed by Senator Howard Baker, 
        Jr., to serve as minority counsel to the Senate Watergate 
        Committee in 1973;
            (4) following his service as a United States Senator, Fred 
        D. Thompson continued to pursue his acting career, which began 
        in 1985 with the movie ``Marie'' in which he played himself;
            (5) Fred D. Thompson was known for his integrity, humility, 
        and dedication to public service; and
            (6) the naming of the Federal building and United States 
        courthouse located at 719 Church Street in Nashville, 
        Tennessee, after Senator Fred D. Thompson would honor his name 
        and the legacy he left to all citizens of the State of 
        Tennessee.
    (b) Designation.--The Federal building and United States courthouse 
located at 719 Church Street in Nashville, Tennessee, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Fred D. Thompson Federal Building and United 
States Courthouse''.
    (c) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the Federal building and 
United States courthouse referred to in subsection (b) shall be deemed 
to be a reference to the ``Fred D. Thompson Federal Building and United 
States Courthouse''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of the
Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended May 5,
2007 of Stein Mart, Inc. (the Form 10-Q), I, James G. Delfs, Senior Vice President, Finance and 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 Form 10-Q 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 Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                    |  |  |  |                                                           
|------------------- |  |  |  | ----------------------------------------------------------
|                    |  | 
|Date: June 13, 2007 |  |  |  | /s/ James G. Delfs                                        
|                    |  |  |  | James G. Delfs                                            
|                    |  |  |  | Senior Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer
H. Res. 335

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

July 24, 2003.

Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it

shall be in order without intervention of any point of order

to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 2427) to authorize

the Secretary of Health and Human Services to promulgate

regulations for the reimportation of prescription drugs, and

for other purposes. The bill shall be considered as read for

amendment. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill to final passage without intervening motion

except: (1) one hour of debate on the bill equally divided and

controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of

the Committee on Energy and Commerce or their designees;

and (2) one motion to recommit.

SEC. 2. During consideration of H.R. 2427 pursuant to

this resolution, notwithstanding the operation of the previous
2

•HRES 335 EH

question, the Chair may postpone further consideration of the

bill to a time designated by the Speaker.

Attest:

Clerk.
<PAGE>
                                                                  Exhibit 11.1

                             NATURAL WONDERS, INC.
                       COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE NET LOSS
                     (In thousands, except per share data)



                                                Quarter Ended 
                                        ------------------------------
                                        May 3, 1997        May 4, 1996
                                        -----------        -----------

Net loss                                  $(2,099)            $(2,212)

Weighted average common shares
  outstanding                               7,988               7,792

Per share net loss                        $ (0.26)            $ (0.28)
                                          -------             -------
                                          -------             -------


There is no material difference in the number of shares used in computing per 
share amounts as calculated for primary and fully diluted earnings per share.
THE SHERWOOD GROUP, INC          EXHIBIT 11
                           AND SUBSIDIARIES
              COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER COMMON SHARE

<TABLE>
                                      Three Months Ended November 30,
                                             1995           1994
<CAPTION>
<S>                                       <C>             <C>

Common stock and common stock equivalents:
  Average common stock outstanding        12,602,174      12,616,433
  Average common stock equivalents
    issuable under stock options             823,726       1,129,554
                                          ----------      ----------
Total average common stock and common
  stock equivalents used for earnings per
  share computation                       13,425,900      13,745,987
                                          ==========      ==========


Income:

  Net income                            $  3,173,387    $  2,933,729
                                        ============    ============        
                             
Income per common and common
   equivalent share (a):<F1>

    Net income                             $    0.24       $    0.21
                                        ============     ===========























<FN>
<F1>(a) For presentation purposes, primary and fully diluted are identical.
</FN>








<PAGE>

                       THE SHERWOOD GROUP, INC.           EXHIBIT 11
                           AND SUBSIDIARIES

              COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER COMMON SHARE


</TABLE>
<TABLE>

                                           Six Months Ended November 30,
                                                 1995           1994


<CAPTION>
<S>                                           <C>           <C>

Common stock and common stock equivalents:
  Average common stock outstanding            12,502,958    12,625,854
  Average common stock equivalents
    issuable under stock options                 822,514     1,127,171
                                              ----------    -----------
Total average common stock and common
  stock equivalents used for earnings per
  share computation                           13,325,472    13,753,025
                                              ==========     ==========
                             
                             
Income:

  Net income                                 $  7,641,251  $   5,991,932
                                             ============   ============     
                             
Income per common and common
   equivalent share (a):<F1>
    Net income                                  $    0.57      $    0.44
                                              ===========    ===========











<FN>
<F1>(a) For presentation purposes, primary and fully diluted are identical.
</FN>

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>
 
<ARTICLE>      5 
<LEGEND>   THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION
           FROM THE CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND
           STATEMENT OF INCOME AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
           REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000 
       
<S>                                 <C>          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       3-MOS        3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   DEC-31-1998  DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                      JAN-01-1998  JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                        MAR-31-1998  MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                  6,176     11,571
<SECURITIES>                           14,846      8,558
<RECEIVABLES>                          22,661     20,124
<ALLOWANCES>                                0          0
<INVENTORY>                            10,576     10,675
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                       55,004     51,488
<PP&E>                                  4,669      4,722
<DEPRECIATION>                              0          0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                         63,082     59,055
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                  19,632     17,137
<BONDS>                                     0          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       0          0
<PREFERRED>                                 0          0
<COMMON>                               40,272     39,571
<OTHER-SE>                              3,178      2,347
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>           63,082     59,055
<SALES>                                14,080     13,006
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                       14,080     13,006
<CGS>                                   6,614      5,547
<TOTAL-COSTS>                           6,614      5,547
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                        6,625      6,486
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            0          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          0          0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                         1,126      1,204
<INCOME-TAX>                              281        144
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       845      1,060
<DISCONTINUED>                              0          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             0          0
<CHANGES>                                   0          0
<NET-INCOME>                              845      1,060
<EPS-PRIMARY>                           $0.08      $0.11
<EPS-DILUTED>                           $0.08      $0.10
         

</TABLE>
* 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. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED February 18, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-41074 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus MARTIN PUENTE-MORENO, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. B-03-CR-390-1

-------------------- Before HIGGINBOTHAM, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Martin Puente-Moreno appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United States after deportation/removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Puente-Moreno contends that the “felony” and “aggravated felony” provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and (2) are unconstitutional. He therefore argues that his conviction must be reduced to one under the lesser included offense found in 8 U.S.C. § 1362(a), his judgment must be reformed to reflect a conviction only underNo. 03-41074 -2- that provision, and his sentence must be vacated and the case remanded for resentencing to no more than two years’ imprisonment and one year of supervised release.
In Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. Puente-Moreno acknowledges that his arguments are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres , but asserts that the decision has been cast into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). He seeks to preserve his arguments for further review. Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres
. See Apprendi , 530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres “unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule it.” Dabeit , 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED. The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Steven N. Utter, Appellant.

[852 NYS2d 898]

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of two counts of criminal sale of a

*1273controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law § 220.39 [1], [9]). Defendant failed to preserve for our review his challenge to the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution by failing to move to withdraw the plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction *{see People v Lopez,*71 NY2d 662, 665 [1988]), and we reject his contention that this case falls within the narrow exception to the preservation doctrine *(see People v Toxey,*86 NY2d 725, 726 [1995], *rearg denied*86 NY2d 839 [1995]; *Lopez,*71 NY2d at 666). Present—Scudder, P.J., Martoche, Smith, Green and Gorski, JJ.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-1006

In Re: MINH VU HOANG,

Debtor.

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

MINH VU HOANG,

Debtor – Appellant,

v.

GARY A. ROSEN; ROGER SCHLOSSBERG,

Trustees - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, Chief District 

Judge. (8:11-cv-03431-DKC; 05-21078)

Submitted: May 21, 2012 Decided: May 25, 2012

Before KING, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Minh Vu Hoang, Appellant Pro Se. Gary A. Rosen, Rockville, 

Maryland; Roger Schlossberg, SCHLOSSBERG & ASSOCIATES, 

Hagerstown, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Minh Vu Hoang appeals the district court’s order 

dismissing as interlocutory her appeal from the bankruptcy 

court’s orders authorizing the employment of certain financial 

professionals in the underlying bankruptcy proceeding. We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, 

we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. 

Hoang v. Rosen (In Re: Minh Vu Hoang), Nos. 8:11-cv-03431-DKC; 

05-21078 (D. Md. July 11, 2011; Dec. 1, 2011; Dec. 14, 2011). 

In light of this disposition, we deny as moot the motion to 

intervene. We deny Hoang’s motion for appointment of counsel,

and 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
Exhibit 10.1

November 7, 2006

SENT VIA EMAIL AND FEDEX

Mr. Surendra Pai

Dear Suren:

By your signature below, you agree to modify Section 9.3(e) of your employment contract with Authentidate dated October 27, 2004, to extend the time within which Authentidate and you must reach agreement on a renewal of your
contract to avoid the automatic termination of your employment, to December 15, 2006. Section 9.3(e) as modified shall read as follows:

e. In the event the Company fails to notify the Employee in accordance with Section 8.2, or after notifying the Employee fails to reach an agreement on a new employment agreement prior to December 15, 2006, Employees
employment shall terminate on December 15, 2006 and the Company shall pay the Employee the Severance Payment; Accrued Compensation, and the Continuation Benefits.



|                                 |  | 
|-------------------------------- |  | 
|Very truly yours,               
|                                
|/s/ J. Edward Sheridan          
|J. Edward Sheridan              
|Chairman, Compensation Committee
|                                
|Agreed and accepted:            
|                                
|/s/ Surendra Pai                
|Surendra Pai                    



|    |  |                                    
|--- |  | -----------------------------------
|    | 
|Cc: |  | Victor H. Boyajian                 
|    |  | Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal, LLP
|    |  | 1221 Avenue of the Americas        
|    |  | New York, New York 10020