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





**CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER**


**PURSUANT
      TO**


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


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**





Each
      of
      the undersigned hereby certifies, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in his or her
      capacity as an officer of e.Digital Corporation (the "Company"), that, to his
      or
      her knowledge, the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period
      ended June 30, 2005, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
      or
      Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
      contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
      financial condition and results of operation of the Company.





Dated:
      August 15, 2005





/s/
                ATUL ANANDPURA




Atul
                Anandpura,


Chief
                Executive Officer (Principal Executive
                Officer)




Dated:
      August 15, 2005




/s/
                ROBERT PUTNAM




Robert
                Putnam,
                Interim
                  Chief Accounting Officer,
                Treasurer
                  and Corporate Secretary (Principal Financial
                  Officer)
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                       4,444,000
<SECURITIES>                                 5,162,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,515,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            14,226,000
<PP&E>                                     193,023,000
<DEPRECIATION>                             112,648,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              94,601,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        9,212,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                    10,014,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                  15,720,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                94,601,000
<SALES>                                      4,759,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            16,305,000
<CGS>                                        2,297,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               16,172,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           3,937,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,764,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                   757,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,007,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,007,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .11
        


</TABLE>
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 32
                         SALIVA DIAGNOSTIC SYSTEMS, INC.
                                 MARCH 31, 2003


CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350

     I, Leo Ehrlich,  President and Chief Financial Officer of Saliva Diagnostic
Systems, Inc., hereby certify, to my knowledge:

     (1)  that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Saliva Diagnostic Systems,
          Inc. for the  quarterly  period ended on March 31, 2003 filed with the
          Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof at File No.
          0-21284 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section
          13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
          and

     (2)  that the information  contained in the Report fairly presents,  in all
          material respects,  the financial  condition and results of operations
          of Saliva Diagnostic Systems, Inc.

The foregoing  certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350 and is not being  filed as part of the Report or as a  separate  disclosure
document.

Dated:  April 15, 2004
                                       /s/ Leo Ehrlich
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Leo Ehrlich
                                       President & Chief Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-1784

STEPHANIE ATCHLEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versusBAPTIST HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL CENTER, and persons of Baptist Hospital and Medical Center; LEN PRESLAR, Administrator; JOHN WILLIAMS, Chief of Security; J. T. MOSER, Security; GEORGE JACOBS, Head of Security; WOMBLE, CARLYLE, SANDRIDGE AND RICE LAW FIRM; TONY BRETT, Attorney; KENNETH MOSER, Attorney, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., District Judge. (CA-99-1143-1) Submitted: August 30, 2000 Decided: September 6, 2000 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Stephanie Atchley, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Andrew Ford, DemetriusL. Worley, TUGGLE, DUGGINS & MESCHAN, P.A., Greensboro, North Carolina; William Cranford Raper, WOMBLE, CARLYLE, SANDRIDGE & RICE, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellees.2 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:Stephanie Atchley appeals the district court’s order dismissing her civil rights complaint for failing to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Atchley filed a complaint against Baptist Hospital and Medical Center (“Hospital”), several of its employees, and attorneys representing the hospital, claiming that she was improperly barred from usingthe hospital’s chapel. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s memorandum opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Atchley v. Baptist Hosp. No. CA-99-1143-1 (M.D.N.C. May 17, 2000).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
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

JOHN J. HLIS, AS BENEFICIARY AND 

PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF 

THE ESTATE OF JOHN G. HLIS, AND 

AS TRUSTEE OF THE JUNE 25, 1992 

TRUST AGREEMENT OF JOHN G. 

HLIS AND JOYCE W. HLIS,

Appellant,

v. Case No. 5D22-2996

 LT Case No. 2020-12811-PRDL

MARK J. HLIS AND STEPHEN G. 

HLIS, BENEFICIARIES TO 

DECEDENT’S WILL AND TRUST,

Appellees.

/

Opinion filed March 24, 2023

Appeal from the Circuit Court

for Volusia County,

Kathryn D. Weston, Judge.

John J. Hlis, Lutz, pro se. 

Daniel K. Schaffner, 

Clearwater, for Appellees.

ON CONFESSION OF ERROR

PER CURIAM.

Appellant appeals the trial court’s final order dismissing the amended 
2

petition to determine beneficiary and shares. Appellees filed a confession of 

error. We accept the confession of error, reverse the order, and remand for 

further proceedings.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

JAY, SOUD and BOATWRIGHT, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 99.36



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


     In connection with the Quarterly Report of IntegraMed America, Inc. (the
     "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2003 as filed with
     the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
     I, Gerardo Canet, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
     to 18 U.S.C. /s/ 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  results  of
              operations of the Company.



                                                 /s/Gerardo Canet
                                                    ----------------------------
                                                    Gerardo Canet
                                                    Chief Executive Officer
                                                    May 15, 2003



     Note: A signed original of this written  statement  required by Section 906
     has been  provided  to  IntegraMed  America,  Inc.  and will be retained by
     IntegraMed  America,  Inc.  and  furnished to the  Securities  and Exchange
     Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 1  CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS     We
consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual Report (Form 40-F) of
Talisman Energy Inc. of our report dated February 14, 2003, included in
the Annual Report to Shareholders of Talisman Energy Inc.  We
also consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8 No. 333-12812) pertaining to the Employee Stock Option
Plan and Director Stock Option Plan of Talisman Energy Inc. of our report dated
February 14, 2003, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of
Talisman Energy Inc. incorporated by reference in the Annual Report
(Form 40-F) for the year ended December 31, 2002.     ERNST & YOUNG LLPCalgary, Canada
  
  Ernst & Young LLPMarch 26, 2003
  
  Chartered Accountants
    1
##### 



Exhibit 31.1
 Certification pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) / Rule 15d-14(a),
promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Encysive Pharmaceuticals 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;
 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(s) 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
     5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) 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 the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
    /s/ George W. Cole
 
 2
#### BUESCHER v. AUTO LITE BATTERY CORP.

Civ. No. 6493.

United States District Court, N. D. Ohio, W. D.

June 26, 1951.

James G. Colonel, John Gleason and Payer, Bleiweiss, Crow & Mollison, Cleveland, Ohio, for plaintiff.

Shumaker, Loop, Kendrick & Winn, Toledo, Ohio, for defendant.

KLOEB, District Judge.

This matter comes before the Court on the motion' of the plaintiff for leave to' file his request for jury trial in accordance with the provisions of Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A.

The answer of the defendant was filed on May 25, 1951, and, on June 11, 1951, some eighteen days after the answer was filed, plaintiff filed his formal request for jury trial.

For some two years after the adoption of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, this Court was very lenient in granting belated leave for jury trial under the provisions of Rule 39(b) because of the fact that the requirement of the Rule 38 was new to counsel, and especially to counsel who seldom participated in litigation in the Federal Courts. After that period of time, the Court felt that sufficient time had elapsed to permit the bar generally to familiarize itself with the Federal Rules of 'Civil Procedure, and adopted a policy of strict requirement of the conditions of the Rule except where counsel on both sides agreed that a jury trial might be had after the expiration of the ten days required by the rule. To follow a different course would, in effect, nullify the rule.

In this case, a memorandum has been filed by the defendant in opposition to the motion. Therefore, the motion is overruled. An order is drawn accordingly.
<table class="regular" id="BLStable_2023_10_10_14_20" style="width: 618px;"><caption><span class="tableTitle"></span><strong>Chart 2. Labor force participation rates for American Indians and Alaska Natives and the total population, annual averages, 2003–21</strong></caption>
<thead>
<tr>
<th style="vertical-align: middle; min-width: 80px;" rowspan="1" scope="col">Year</th>
<th scope="col">American Indian and Alaska Native</th>
<th scope="col">Total population</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<th scope="row">
<p>2003</p>
</th>
<td>64.4</td>
<td>66.2</td>
</tr>
<tr class="greenbar">
<th scope="row">
<p>2004</p>
</th>
<td>63.8</td>
<td>66.0</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">
<p>2005</p>
</th>
<td>63.5</td>
<td>66.0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="greenbar">
<th scope="row">
<p>2006</p>
</th>
<td>63.1</td>
<td>66.2</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">
<p>2007</p>
</th>
<td>63.3</td>
<td>66.0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="greenbar">
<th scope="row">
<p>2008</p>
</th>
<td>63.7</td>
<td>66.0</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">
<p>2009</p>
</th>
<td>59.0</td>
<td>65.4</td>
</tr>
<tr class="greenbar">
<th scope="row">
<p>2010</p>
</th>
<td>57.7</td>
<td>64.7</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">
<p>2011</p>
</th>
<td>59.2</td>
<td>64.1</td>
</tr>
<tr class="greenbar">
<th scope="row">
<p>2012</p>
</th>
<td>59.3</td>
<td>63.7</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">
<p>2013</p>
</th>
<td>59.2</td>
<td>63.2</td>
</tr>
<tr class="greenbar">
<th scope="row">
<p>2014</p>
</th>
<td>60.9</td>
<td>62.9</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">
<p>2015</p>
</th>
<td>60.6</td>
<td>62.7</td>
</tr>
<tr class="greenbar">
<th scope="row">
<p>2016</p>
</th>
<td>61.1</td>
<td>62.8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">
<p>2017</p>
</th>
<td>60.3</td>
<td>62.9</td>
</tr>
<tr class="greenbar">
<th scope="row">
<p>2018</p>
</th>
<td>59.6</td>
<td>62.9</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">
<p>2019</p>
</th>
<td>60.8</td>
<td>63.1</td>
</tr>
<tr class="greenbar">
<th scope="row">
<p>2020</p>
</th>
<td>59.3</td>
<td>61.7</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th scope="row">
<p>2021</p>
</th>
<td>60.5</td>
<td>61.7</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
<tfoot id="BLStable_2023_10_10_14_20_footnotes" style="display: table-footer-group;">
<tr class="footnotes">
<td class="footnotes" colspan="3">
<p>Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Population Survey.</p>
</td>
</tr>
</tfoot>
</table>
<p></p>
*

 This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of

law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the

citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under

the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

Filed 6/3/96

TENTH CIRCUIT

ANTHONY RAY JENKINS, )

)

Plaintiff-Appellant, )

)

v. ) No. 95-3102

) (D.C. No. 95-3090-DES)

T. KEITH WILSON, Judge, ) (D. Kansas)

)

Defendant-Appellee. )

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before ANDERSON, BARRETT and LOGAN, Circuit Judges.

This matter is before the court on plaintiff Anthony Ray Jenkins’ motion for leave

to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal without payment of costs or fees.

To succeed on his motion plaintiff must show both the financial inability to pay the

required filing fees and the existence of a reasoned, nonfrivolous argument on the law and

facts in support of the issues raised on appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d); Coppedge v.

United States, 369 U.S. 438 (1962); Ragan v. Cox, 305 F.2d 58 (10th Cir. 1962).
2

Plaintiff seeks to appeal the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against

the Seward County (Kansas) judge who revoked his appeal bond. He requests damages

as well as his own release from prison. He further asserts that the state courts lack

jurisdiction over all other criminal proceedings against him. He asserts general due

process, double jeopardy and equal protection violations stemming from those state

proceedings. Plaintiff raises additional issues in his brief that appear to challenge the

legality of criminal proceedings against him, including an alleged improper interlocutory

appeal by the state and a double jeopardy violation. He seeks to relitigate issues previously decided against him in other cases he filed. The allegations are legally frivolous

and constitute another attempt by this plaintiff to obtain habeas corpus relief in a § 1983

action.

We conclude that plaintiff can make no rational argument on the law or facts in

support of the issues raised on appeal. Therefore, the motion for leave to proceed on

appeal without prepayment of costs or fees is denied. The appeal is DISMISSED.

The mandate shall issue forthwith.

Entered for the Court

James K. Logan

Circuit Judge
U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS COMPENSATION AND WORKING CONDITIONS

Page 1

National Center for Employee Ownership (NCEO) 2003 Conference

by Bryandt Rose Dickerson

Originally Posted: June 25, 2003

The annual NCEO conference was held March 26-28, 2003, in San Francisco, California. For the first time, the conference

represented a joint venture between the NCEO and the Beyster Institute, two employee-ownership organizations. Based in

Oakland, California, the NCEO is a private, nonprofit membership and research organization that provides information on

employee stock-ownership plans, broadly granted stock options and related programs, and ownership culture. The Beyster

Institute, with offices in La Jolla, California, and in Washington, DC, is a nonprofit organization that provides consulting

services on equity compensation.

This year’s conference theme was "Employee Ownership and Employee Involvement: The Entrepreneurial Edge." The 600

registered attendees participated in conference sessions with topics ranging from traditional equity compensation to

alternative methods in lieu of stock options. Discussants and presenters represented various accounting, legal, and

consulting firms specializing in equity compensation.

The session "Taking Stock of Stock Options: Where do we go from here?" covered recent stock-option developments,

including the perceived use and abuse of options in corporate America, option expensing, the future of broad-based equity

programs, and how companies are beginning to respond to these issues. This session--presented by Andrew Goldstein of

Watson Wyatt, Michael Benkowitz of Buck Consultants, and Matt Ward of Westward Pay Strategies--differed from other

sessions in that the presenters discouraged the use of restricted stock options, especially performance-restricted options. In

the opinion of these presenters, stock option accounting and expensing on financial statements will become a problem in the

future and should be avoided.

In establishing equity objectives, companies are challenged with the dichotomy of broad-based or executive equity plans. If

the decision is to continue with executive-only plans, companies may never return to using broad-based plans. While

designing equity compensation plans, companies should remember that the use of broad-based equity plans did not fail.

In his closing remarks at the adjournment of the conference, Corey Rosen, Executive Director of NCEO, encouraged the

continued use of equity compensation to foster employee ownership.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics | Division of Information and Marketing Services, PSB Suite 2850, 2 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC

20212-0001 | www.bls.gov/OPUB | Telephone: 1-202-691-5200 | Contact Us
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Amy Leann KILOUGH, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 07-10941

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Jan. 30, 2008.

C. Richard Baker, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Northern District of Texas, Lubbock, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Helen Miller Liggett, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office Northern District of Texas, Lubbock, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before REAVLEY, BENAVIDES, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Amy Leann Kilough raises arguments that are foreclosed by *United States v. Hinson,*429 F.3d 114, 119 (5th Cir. 2005), which held that a defendant is not entitled to a jury trial to determine whether the terms of supervised release have been violated. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

 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.
Unemployment rate of 16- to 24-year-olds, July 2005-2008 (not seasonally adjusted)


Year	   Unemployment rate

2005		11.0
2006		11.2
2007		10.8
2008		14.0