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 on Form 10-Q of FairPoint Communications, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarter ended
March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Eugene B. Johnson, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| |  | /s/EUGENE B. JOHNSONEugene B. Johnson Chief Executive
Officer
| |  | -------------------------------------------------------------
| |  | May 16, 2008                                                 

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---



QuickLinks
### §1795j. Agent of Federal Reserve System

The facility is authorized to act upon the request of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System as an agent of the Federal Reserve System in matters pertaining to credit unions under such terms and conditions as may be established by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

(June 26, 1934, ch. 750, title III, §311, as added Pub. L. 97–320, title V, §532, Oct. 15, 1982, 96 Stat. 1536.)
# C_2007073EN.01002401.xml

| 30.3.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 73/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.3.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 73/24

---

MEDIA 2007 — Development, distribution, promotion and training

MEDIA 2007

Call for proposals — EACEA 06/2007

Support for television broadcasting of European audiovisual works

(2007/C 73/13)

1.   Objectives and Description

This notice of a call for proposals is based on Decision No 1718/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 November 2006 concerning the implementation of a programme of support for the European audiovisual sector (MEDIA 2007) (1).

1

One of the objectives of the programme is to promote the transnational broadcasting of European audiovisual works produced by independent production companies by encouraging cooperation between broadcasters on one hand, and independent producers and distributors on the other.

2.   Eligible applicants

This notice is aimed at European companies whose activities contribute to the attainment of the above objectives, and in particular to independent TV production companies.

Applicants must be established in one of the following countries:

| — | the 27 countries of the European Union, |
| --- | --- |

—

the 27 countries of the European Union,

| — | the EFTA countries and Switzerland (subject to the conclusion of a new cooperation agreement with this country in the framework of the MEDIA 2007 programme). |
| --- | --- |

—

the EFTA countries and Switzerland (subject to the conclusion of a new cooperation agreement with this country in the framework of the MEDIA 2007 programme).

3.   Budget and Duration of projects

The total budget available is EUR 9,5 million.

The maximum financial contribution which may be awarded is EUR 500 000 per work. The financial contribution awarded will in no event exceed 12,5 % of the eligible costs submitted by the producer for fiction and animated films and 20 % of the eligible costs for documentary films.

The maximum duration of the projects is 30 or 42 (in the case of series and animation projects) months.

4.   Deadline for submission of applications

Applications must be submitted to the Executive Agency (EACEA) no later than 1 June 2007 and 2 November 2007.

1 June 2007

2 November 2007.

3.   Full details

The full text of the call for proposals, together with the application forms, can be found at the following Internet address:

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/media/producer/tv/index_en.htm

Applications must comply with all the terms of the guidelines and be submitted on the forms provided.

---

(1)  OJ L 327, 24.11.2006, p. 12.

1

---
Exhibit 99.2



RENAISSANCE MEDIA GROUP LLC
RENAISSANCE MEDIA (LOUISIANA) LLC
RENAISSANCE MEDIA (TENNESSEE) LLC
RENAISSANCE MEDIA CAPITAL CORPORATION
12405 Powerscourt Drive
St. Louis, MO 63131



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL
OFFICER REGARDING PERIODIC REPORT CONTAINING 
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

I, Kent D. Kalkwarf, the Chief Financial Officer of Renaissance Media Group LLC, Renaissance Media (Louisiana) LLC, Renaissance Media (Tennessee) LLC and Renaissance Media Capital Corporation (collectively, the "Company") in compliance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, hereby certify that, the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2002 (the "Report") filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission:

- fully complies with the requirements of Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
- the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

/s/  Kent D. KalkwarfKent D. KalkwarfChief Financial OfficerNovember 19, 2002
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997             MAR-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           5,000                 104,000
<SECURITIES>                                   171,000                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,166,000               1,269,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   227,000                 420,000
<INVENTORY>                                    920,000                 950,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,541,000               1,987,000
<PP&E>                                       2,905,000               2,683,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,653,000               2,571,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,807,000               2,113,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,495,000               4,437,000
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                  2,106,000                       0
<COMMON>                                    44,079,000              44,075,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 (47,163,000)            (46,524,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,807,000               2,113,000
<SALES>                                      5,622,000               5,184,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,622,000               5,184,000
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,487,000                4,099,00
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,894,000               3,017,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              98,000                  97,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (399,000)             (2,024,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    60,000                   1,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (459,000)             (2,025,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0               2,901,000
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (459,000)                876,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.12)                    .18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.10)                    .19
        

</TABLE>
Postal Regulatory Postal Regulatory Commission

901 New York Avenue, NW

Phone: 202-789-6829

Fax: 202-789-6891

Commission Suite 200

Washington, DC 20268-0001

www.prc.gov

Contact: Gail Adams

gail.adams@prc.gov

Press Release

April 26, 2024

PRC Directs USPS to Provide its Justification for Not Requesting an Advisory 

Opinion on Certain Initiatives Associated with its DFA Plan

Washington, DC – Today the Postal Regulatory Commission issued Order No. 7061

directing the Postal Service to either show cause within 20 days of the Commission’s order

as to why an advisory opinion is not warranted for the recent initiatives being 

implemented under its Delivering for America Plan (DFA), or else file a request for an 

advisory opinion within 40 days of the order.

In a previous order, the Commission explained that the DFA Plan is not in and of itself a 

change requiring an advisory opinion. However, the Commission noted that specific 

initiatives could require a request for an advisory opinion. Since the Commission’s last 

advisory opinion in 2022, the Postal Service has introduced and begun implementing new 

DFA initiatives, including an overhaul of its processing and delivery network, local 

transportation optimization, and logistics career insourcing. The show cause order noted a 

correlation between the DFA network changes and service problems in areas implementing 

the changes, such as Atlanta, GA, Houston, TX, and Richmond, VA. The Commission also 

noted that nationwide service performance has been declining.

Nationwide Service Performance Has Declined in FY 2024 as the Postal Service 

Implements Network Changes
- 2 -

Commission Chairman Michael Kubayanda emphasized the importance of the order and 

potential advisory opinion, noting “As the Commission issues this show cause order, we 

don’t have firm proof of what is causing the recent decline in service performance. I think 

the American public, postal stakeholders, and Congress want to understand the impact of 

the Postal Service’s network transformation plans. They want to know what is happening 

to mail service, how to stop this decline, how to keep it from spreading, and how to restore

service to targeted levels of performance. Those are the questions the Commission is 

looking to answer with this order.”

The Postal Regulatory Commission is an independent federal agency that provides regulatory oversight over the Postal Service to ensure the 

transparency and accountability of the Postal Service and foster a vital and efficient universal mail system. The Commission is comprised of five 

presidentially appointed and Senate-confirmed Commissioners, each serving terms of six years. The President designates the Chairman. In 

addition to Chairman Michael Kubayanda, the other commissioners are Vice Chairman Tom Day and Commissioners Ann Fisher, Ashley Poling, 

and Robert Taub. Follow the PRC on Twitter: @PostalRegulator and LinkedIn.
1 In The 

### Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

_________________

NO. 09
- 15
- 00309
- CV



### _________________
IN RE DONNA R. SMITH

________________________________________________________________________ Original Proceeding 284th District Court of Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 14
- 04
- 03822 CV

________________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION In her petition for a writ of mandamus, Donna R. Smith asks that the Court compel the judge of the 284t h District Court of Montgomery County, Texas to grant Smith’s motion to compel production of documents that she served on the real party in interest, The AIM Group, Inc. “T he trial court has the discretion to deny a request if it is an overly broad discovery request that it determines could have been more narrowly tailored to include only relevant matters or should have been limited in time and scope. ” In re Indeco Sales, Inc. No. 09

- 14

- 00405

- CV, 2014 WL 5490943, at *1 (Tex. App.

— Beaumont Oct. 30, 20 14, orig. proceeding)2 (mem. op.). After reviewing the mandamus petition and record, we conclude that Relator has not shown that the trial court abused its discretion. We deny the petition for a writ of mandamus.
PETITION DENIED.

PER CURIAM

Submitted on August 19 , 2015 Opinion Delivered August 2 0 , 2015 Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.
### §1143. Distribution

If a plan requires presentment or surrender of a security or the performance of any other act as a condition to participation in distribution under the plan, such action shall be taken not later than five years after the date of the entry of the order of confirmation. Any entity that has not within such time presented or surrendered such entity's security or taken any such other action that the plan requires may not participate in distribution under the plan.

(Pub. L. 95–598, Nov. 6, 1978, 92 Stat. 2639.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

#### senate report no. 95–989

Section 1143 fixes a 5-year limitation on presentment or surrender of securities or the performance of any other act that is a condition to participation in distribution under the plan. The 5 years runs from the date of the entry of the order of confirmation. Any entity that does not take the appropriate action with the 5-year period is barred from participation in the distribution under the plan.
Editorial Note on Part 900
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 900 appear at 67 FR 34602, May 15, 2002.

§ 900.229 What role will the awarding official play during an appeal? ( a ) The awarding official shall provide any data, documentation, information or support required by the CBCA for use in deciding a pending appeal.
( b ) Within 30 days of receiving an appeal or learning that an appeal has been filed, the awarding official shall assemble a file which contains all the documents which are pertinent to the appeal, including: ( 1 ) The decision and findings of fact from which the appeal is taken;
( 2 ) The contract, including specifications and pertinent modifications, plans and drawings;
( 3 ) All correspondence between the parties which relates to the appeal, including the letter or letters of claims in response to which the decision was issued;
( 4 ) Transcripts of any testimony taken during the course of the proceedings, and affidavits or statements of any witnesses on the matter in dispute, which were made before the filing of the notice of appeal with the CBCA; and
( 5 ) Any additional information which may be relevant.
[61 FR 32501, June 24, 1996, as amended at 71 FR 76601, Dec. 21, 2006]
# C_2006224EN.01001502.xml

| 16.9.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 224/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.9.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 224/15

---

Order of the Court of 13 June 2006 — Ornella Mancini v Commission of the European Communities

(Case C-172/05 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Officials - Post of medical officer - Notice of vacancy - Comparative examination of merits - Composition of the selection board - Appeal in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded)

(2006/C 224/27)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Ornella Mancini (represented by: E. Boigelot, avocat)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: C. Berardis-Kayser and G. Berscheid, Agents, and B. Wägenbaur, avocat)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re

Appeal brought against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) of 3 February 2005 in Case T-137/03 Mancini v Commission in which the Court of First Instance dismissed an application, firstly, for annulment of the Commission's decision not to appoint the applicant to the post of medical officer at the ‘Medical Service — Brusells’ unit and of the decision to appoint another candidate to that post and, secondly, for damages.

Mancini

Commission

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The appeal is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The appeal is dismissed.

| 2. | The appellant is ordered to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The appellant is ordered to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 132, 28.5.2005.

1

---
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 on Form 10-Q of FairPoint Communications, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarter ended
March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John P. Crowley, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| |  | /s/JOHN P. CROWLEYJohn P. Crowley Chief Financial Officer
| |  | ---------------------------------------------------------
| |  | May 16, 2008                                             

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---



QuickLinks
§ 226.6 Bonds. Lessees shall furnish with each lease a corporate surety bond acceptable to the Superintendent as follows: ( a ) A bond on Form D shall be filed with each lease submitted for approval. Such bond shall be in an amount of not less than $5,000 for each quarter section or fractional quarter section covered by said lease: *Provided, however,* That one bond in the penal sum or not less than $50,000 may be filed on Form G covering all oil, gas and combination oil and gas leases not in excess of 10,240 acres to which Lessee is or may become a party.
( b ) In lieu of the bonds required under paragraph (a) of this section, a bond in the penal sum of $150,000 may be filed on Form 5-5438 for full nationwide coverage of all leases, without geographic or acreage limitation, to which the Lessee is or may become a party.
( c ) A bond on Form H shall be filed in an amount of not less than $5,000 covering a lease acquired through assignment where the assignee does not have a collective bond on form G or nationwide bond, or the corporate surety does not execute its consent to remain bound under the original bond given to secure the faithful performance of the terms and conditions of the lease.
( d ) The right is specifically reserved to increase the amount of bonds prescribed in paragraphs (a) and (c) of this section in any particular case when the Superintendent deems it proper. The nationwide bond may be increased at any time in the discretion of the Secretary.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11

                STATEMENT REGARDING COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE DATA

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                   YEARS ENDED MARCH 31,
                                                         ------------------------------------------
                                                            2000             1999           1998
                                                         -----------     -----------     ----------
<S>                                                      <C>             <C>            <C>

 Net earnings (loss)                                     $  (570,733)    $(7,497,657)    $5,466,225
                                                         ===========     ===========     ==========

Per share data:


    Basic earnings (loss) per share                      $     (0.13)    $     (1.79)    $     1.37
                                                         ===========     ===========     ==========

    Dilutive earnings (loss) per share                   $     (0.13)    $     (1.79)    $     1.36
                                                         ===========     ===========     ==========

    Net earnings (loss) per share                        $     (0.13)    $     (1.79)    $     1.36
                                                         ===========     ===========     ==========

Shares used in the calculation of per share amounts:

    Basic common shares                                    4,400,210       4,178,840      4,000,210
    Dilutive impact of stock options                              --              --         25,329
                                                         -----------     -----------     ----------

    Diluted common shares                                  4,400,210       4,178,840      4,025,539
                                                         ===========     ===========     ==========
</TABLE>


      Diluted earnings per share of Common Stock includes the impact of
      outstanding dilutive stock options for the year ended March 31, 1998.
      There were no dilutive options during the years ended March 31, 2000 and
      1999.
```

 EX-34.5
(logo) Grant Thornton

Report of Independent Certified Public Accountants on Management's Assertion
on Compliance

Grant Thornton LLP
1717 Main Street, Suite 1500
Dallas, TX 75201-4667

T 214.561.2300
F 214.561.2370
GrantThornton.com
linkd.in/GrantThorntonUS
twitter.com/GrantThorntonUS

Board of Directors and Shareholders
Situs Holdings, LLC

We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying Report of
Management on Compliance ("Management's Assertion"), that Situs Holdings LLC
(the "Company") complied with certain servicing criteria set forth in paragraph
(d) of Item 1122 of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation
AB included in Appendix A as of December 31, 2012 and for the period June 1,
2012 through December 31, 2012, with respect to the Company's Operating or
Trust Advisor Services performed over the deals listed in Appendix B (the
"Platform"). Management is responsible for the Company's compliance with
the applicable servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion
on management's assertion about the Company's compliance with the applicable
servicing criteria for the Platform based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards the
standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and,
accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's
compliance with the applicable servicing criteria for the Services and
performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the
circumstances. Our examination was not designed to detect material
noncompliance that may have occurred prior to the period covered by this report
and that may have affected the Company's activities with respect to the
Platform during the period covered by this report. We believe that our
examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does
not provide a legal determination on the Company's compliance with the
applicable servicing criteria.

In our opinion, management's assertion that Situs Holdings LLC complied with
the aforementioned minimum servicing standards as of December 31, 2012 and for
the period June 1, 2012 through December 31, 2012, for the Services, is fairly
stated, in all material respects.

/s/ Grant Thornton LLP

Dallas, Texas
March 22, 2013

Grant Thornton LLP
U.S. member firm of Grant Thornton International Ltd
```