alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT
        32.2**
 
 
 **CERTIFICATION
        OF PERIODIC REPORT**
 **PURSUANT
        TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
 
 I,
        the
        undersigned, Jay C. Peterson, Chief Financial Officer of Forgent Networks,
        Inc.
        (the "Company"), do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
        adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
 
 1.
              The
                  quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended
                  October
                  31, 2005 (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.
 
 
 
 /s/
        JAY C. PETERSON
 Jay
        C.
        Peterson
 Chief
        Financial Officer
 December
        14, 2005
 
 A
        signed
        original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
        to
        Forgent Networks, Inc. and will be retained by Forgent Networks, Inc. and
        furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
        The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
        Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate
        disclosure document.
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 Commerce

###### Foreign-Trade Zones Board

          - [B-23-2017]

On March 30, 2017, SGL Automotive Carbon Fibers, LLC (SGLACF), submitted a notification of proposed revision to existing production authority to the FTZ Board for its facility within FTZ 203—Site 3, in Moses Lake, Washington.

                    The notification was processed in accordance with the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR part 400), including notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     inviting public comment (82 FR 18105, April 17, 2017). On July 28, 2017, the applicant was notified of the FTZ Board's decision that no further review of the proposed revision—involving SGLACF's admission of all foreign-status status polyacrylonitrile (PAN) fiber in privileged foreign status (19 CFR 146.41)—is warranted at this time. The proposed revision described in the notification was authorized, subject to the FTZ Act and the FTZ Board's regulations, including Section 400.14. For U.S. entry of carbon fiber produced in the FTZ, SGLACF will make duty payment at the polyacrylonitrile (PAN) fiber duty rate on the full value of PAN fiber introduced into the production process, including making duty payment at the PAN fiber duty rate on an estimated value of PAN fiber contained in scrap resulting from the production process (based on the actual percentage of scrap and the PAN to carbon fiber ratio from the preceding year's production).                

Dated: August 9, 2017.

Andrew McGilvray,

Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2017-17199 Filed 8-14-17; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
EX-10.82






Exhibit 10.82




AMENDMENT NO. 1

TO THE

NACCO MATERIALS HANDLING GROUP, INC.

EXCESS RETIREMENT PLAN

(EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2008)




     NACCO Materials Handling Group, Inc. hereby adopts this Amendment No. 1 to the NACCO Materials
Handling Group, Inc. Excess Retirement Plan (Effective January 1, 2008), effective as of January 1,
2008. Words and phrases used herein with initial capital letters that are defined in the Plan are
used herein as so defined.



Section 1




     Section 2.11(b)(ii) of the Plan is hereby amended by adding the following parenthetical phrase
to the end thereof, to read as follows:



     “(or who was a participant in the NACCO Materials Handling Group, Inc. Unfunded Benefit Plan
on December 31, 2007).”



          EXECUTED this 11th day of November, 2008.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	NACCO MATERIALS HANDLING	 	 
	 	 	GROUP, INC.	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	By:
	 	/s/ Charles Bittenbender
 

	 	 
	 	 	Title: Secretary	 	 






1
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-40948

Summary Calendar

Ofelio Muniz, Jr.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

City of Harlingen; Jim Schoepner; Robert S. Archer; Joe Vasquez,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

April 19, 2001

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Plaintiff Muniz brought this § 1983 action alleging that

defendants violated his right to due process of the law by making

false and defamatory statements about him when asked for references

by a prospective employer. The district court dismissed his

complaint under Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim. The

district court reasoned that, to overcome the qualified immunity of

the defendants, Muniz would first have to show the deprivation of

a clearly established constitutional right. Since there is no

federal constitutionally protected interest in future employment,

the district court reasoned, Muniz had made no such showing.1 711 F.2d 1217 (5th Cir. 1983).

2 We agree with the district court, and write only to clarify

the disposition of one of Muniz’s arguments on appeal. Muniz urges

that we apply Phillips v. Vandygriff

. 1 In that case, the plaintiff

showed that, by industry custom, all banks consulted Commissioner

Vandygriff before hiring people to managerial positions.

Accordingly, the court held, Vandygriff’s approval constituted a de

facto license, without which no one could manage a bank in the

State of Texas. That license could not be arbitrarily denied

without due process of law.

This case is critically different. Muniz does not allege that

security agencies generally apply to these defendants to seek their

approval before hiring a new security guard. The only reason these

defendants’ input was sought in this case at all is that Muniz

listed the Department as his former employer. We decline Muniz’s

invitation to expand Phillips to reach such situations. The

situation in which a prior employer’s reference is necessary only

for a former employee is exactly the situation covered by the

g eneral rule: one has no constitutionally protected interes t in

future employment. De facto licensing only arises where the

defendant holds some form of gatekeeping role generally – not

where the defendant’s gatekeeping function is specific to the

plaintiff merely because the plaintiff used to work for the

defendant.3

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is

AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23
 
                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
 
  We consent to the incorporation by reference in Post-Effective Amendment
Number 2 to Registration Statement Number 2-74481 on Form S-8 dated January 28,
1983, as amended and supplemented to date, Post-Effective Amendment Number 3 to
Registration Statement Number 2-74481 on Form S-8 dated October 10, 1983, Post-
Effective Amendment Number 1 to Registration Statement Number 2-97149 on Form
S-8 dated September 30, 1985, Post-Effective Amendment Number 3 to Registration
Statement Number 2-76480 on Form S-8 dated April 22, 1985, Post-Effective
Amendment Number 2 to Registration Statement Number 2-70806 on Form S-8 dated
May 20, 1981, Post-Effective Amendment Numbers 2, 1-A and 1-B to Registration
Statement Number 33-04320 on Form S-4 dated March 26, 1986, as supplemented and
amended to date, Post-Effective Amendment Numbers 2-A and 2-B to Registration
Statement Number 33-04320 on Form S-8 to Form S-4 dated June 1, 1987,
Registration Statement Numbers 33-35762 and 33-35763 on Form S-8 dated July 6,
1990, Registration Statement Number 33-52295 on Form S-8 dated February 16,
1994, and Registration Statement Number 33-58323 on Form S-8 dated March 31,
1995 of our report dated December 14, 1995 with respect to the consolidated
financial statements of Whittaker Corporation in the Annual Report (Form 10-K)
for the year ended October 31, 1995. We also consent to the reference to our
firm under the caption "Experts" in the aforementioned Registration Statements
insofar as that reference relates to our report for the year ended October 31,
1995.
 
                                          ERNST & YOUNG LLP
 
Los Angeles, California
January 24, 1996
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23
                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

   We consent to the incorporation by reference in Post-Effective Amendment
Number 2 to Registration Statement Number 2-74481 on Form S-8 dated January 28,
1983, as amended and supplemented to date, Post-Effective Amendment Number 3 to
Registration Statement Number 2-74481 on Form S-8 dated October 10, 1983, Post-
Effective Amendment Number 1 to Registration Statement Number 2-97149 on Form S-
8 dated September 30, 1985, Post-Effective Amendment Number 3 to Registration
Statement Number 2-76480 on Form S-8 dated April 22, 1985, Post-Effective
Amendment Number 2 to Registration Statement Number 2-70806 on Form S-8 dated
May 20, 1981, Post-Effective Amendment Numbers 2, 1-A and 1-B to Registration
Statement Number 33-04320 on Form S-4 dated March 26, 1986, as supplemented and
amended to date, Post-Effective Amendment Numbers 2-A and 2-B to Registration
Statement Number 33-04320 on Form S-8 to Form S-4 dated June 1, 1987,
Registration Statement Numbers 33-35762 and 33-35763 on Form S-8 dated July 6,
1990, Registration Statement Number 33-52295 on Form S-8 dated February 16,
1994, Registration Statement Number 33-58323 on Form S-8 dated March 31, 1995,
and Registration Statement Number 333-03753 on Form S-3 dated May 15, 1996, as
amended to date, of our report dated December 16, 1996 included in the Annual
Report on Form 10-K of Whittaker Corporation for the year ended October 31,
1996, with respect to the consolidated financial statements, as amended,
included in this Form 10-K/A.  We also consent to the reference to our firm
under the caption "Experts" in the aforementioned Registration Statements
insofar as that reference relates to our report for the year ended October 31,
1996.


                                       ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Los Angeles, California
January 28, 1997
Exhibit 10.35

                            FOURTH ADDENDUM TO LEASE


        This fourth addendum to lease (Fourth Addendum) is made between James W.
Cameron,  Jr., an unmarried man (Lessor) and Alternative  Technology  Resources,
Inc.,  (ATR),  previously known as 3Net Systems,  Inc., a Delaware  Corporation,
(Lessee),  to be a part of that certain  Lease,  and any addendums  thereto (the
Lease),  dated  November 7, 1995  between  Lessor and Lessee.  Lessor and Lessee
agree that, not withstanding anything to the contrary in the Lease, the Lease is
hereby modified as follows:

1.   Effective January 1, 1999,  paragraph 2(k) of the Lease is modified to read
     approximately 5,207 sq. ft., located in the basement, 2nd and 3rd floors of
     the Building. (See Exhibit A, pages A-1 through A-3 attached).

2.   Effective  January  1,  1999,  paragraphs  2(a)  and (i) of the  Lease  are
     modified  to read:  Base Rent shall now be  $91,356.84,  per year.  Monthly
     installments of Base Rent shall be $7,613.07, per month.

3.   Paragraph 2(g) is modified to extend the Lease Term to December 31, 1999.

4.   All other terms and conditions of the Lease, and all addendums thereto, not
     inconsistent  herewith are incorporated herein by reference as though fully
     set forth and remain in full force and effect unless modified by the Fourth
     Addendum to Lease.


AGREED AND ACCEPTED:

LESSOR:                                  LESSEE:
JAMES W. CAMERON, JR.                    Alternative Technology Resources, Inc.
                                         a Delaware Corporation

By     /S/                              By         /S/                       
  --------------------------               ------------------------------ 
  Clark A. Cameron                         W. Robert Keen
  Attorney in Fact                         CEO

Date: 12/1/98                           Date:  12/2/98
Nicor Gas Company
                                                                       Form 10-K
                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

      Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as created by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Nicor Gas Company (the
"Company") hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that:

      (i)  the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the
   twelve month period ended December 31, 2004 (the "Report") fully complies
   with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of
   the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

      (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
   material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
   Company.


  Dated: February 28, 2005     /s/ RUSS M. STROBEL
         -----------------     ------------------------------------
                               Russ M. Strobel
                               President and Chief Executive Officer
##### 



Exhibit 3(b)(ii)
 BYLAWS
of the
WM. WRIGLEY JR. COMPANY
 (A Delaware Corporation)
 Amended and Restated as of March 5, 2002,
as amended on October 20, 2006 (§§ 5.6 and 5.12)
and February 6, 2007 (§ 7.01)
 ARTICLE I
 Offices
 Principal Office
 Other Offices
 ARTICLE II
 Stockholders Meetings
 Place of Meetings
 Annual Meeting
 1




---



##### 



Special Meetings
 Notice of Meetings
 Business at Special Meetings
 Stockholder List
 Presiding Officer
 2




---



##### 



Quorum
 Voting
 Proxies
 3




---



##### 



Nature of Business at Meetings of Stockholders
  provided however th
  4




---



##### 



provided however
 Conduct of Meetings
 Stock Ledger
 Inspectors of Election
 5




---



##### 



ARTICLE III
 Directors
 Management of the Corporation
 Number
 Nomination of Directors
  6




---



##### 



provided however th th
   7




---



##### 



Resignations
 Meeting
 Notice
 Quorum
 8




---



##### 



Presiding Officer
 Presumption of Assent
 Meetings by Means of Conference Telephone
 Action Without Meeting
 Committees of Directors
 9




---



##### 



Composition of the Board of Directors and Nominating and Audit
Committees
   10




---



##### 



Compensation of Directors
 ARTICLE IV
 Notices
 Manner of Notice
 Waiver of Notice
 11




---



##### 



ARTICLE V
 Officers
 Election and Appointment of Officers
 Duties and Powers of Officers
 Removal and Resignations
 12




---



##### 



Vacancies
 Chairman of the Board of Directors
 Executive Chairman
 Chief Executive Officer
 President
 Secretary
 13




---



##### 



Treasurer provided however provided however
 Controller
 Salaries
 14




---



##### 



Succession of Officers
 ARTICLE VI
 Voting Power, Contracts and Checks
 Voting of Stock Owned by the Corporation
 Signing of Contracts
 Checks
 15




---



##### 



ARTICLE VII
 Certificates of Stock
 Certificates of Stock
 Certificateless Ownership
 Stock Transfers
 16




---



##### 



ARTICLE VIII
 Amendments to Bylaws
 Amendments by Stockholders
 Amendments by Directors
 ARTICLE IX
 General Provisions
 Fiscal Year
 The Corporate Seal
 17
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 May 22, 2019 p0515

Order 

Clerk

May 22, 2019

158042

In re PETITION OF BERRIEN COUNTY

TREASURER FOR FORECLOSURE.

_________________________________________

BERRIEN COUNTY TREASURER,

Petitioner-Appellee,

v SC: 158042

COA: 330795 

Berrien CC: 2014-000170-CZ

NEW PRODUCTS CORPORATION,

Respondent-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 10, 2018 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-6899

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

DAVID PATRICK WORRELL,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior

District Judge. (4:03-cr-00049-H)

Submitted: October 11, 2007 Decided: October 17, 2007

Before MICHAEL and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

David Patrick Worrell, Appellant Pro Se. Steve R. Matheny, OFFICE

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

David Patrick Worrell appeals the district court’s order

denying his motion for a writ of audita querela pursuant to the All

Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a) (2000). We have reviewed the record

and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the

reasons stated by the district court. See United States v.

Worrell, No. 4:03-cr-00049-H (E.D.N.C. May 29, 2007). 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 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 on Form 10-Q of Cynosure, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the
undersigned, Michael R. Davin, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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: May 9, 2008 |  | /s/ Michael R. Davin                           
|                  |  | Michael R. Davin                               
|                  |  | Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 32.1

Certification Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350)

The undersigned, as the Chief Executive Officer of Zale Corporation, certifies, to the best of his knowledge, that the Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended July 31, 2011, which accompanies this certification fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 and the information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Zale Corporation at the dates and for the
periods indicated. The foregoing certification is made pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350) and shall not be relied upon for any other
purpose.

Date: September 20, 2011

By:

/s/ THEO KILLION Theo Killion Chief Executive Officer
(principal executive officer of the registrant)


---



QuickLinks
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-7845

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

WILLIAM ARTHUR BROWN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Senior

District Judge. (3:92-cr-00270-1; 3:04-cv-00594)

Submitted: January 25, 2007 Decided: February 1, 2007

Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William Arthur Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, OFFICE

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

William Arthur Brown seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A

certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any

assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is

debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by

the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell,

537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Brown has not

made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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