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 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the quarterly report of Purple Communications, Inc. (the “Company”) onForm 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2009 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Daniel R. Luis, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and 

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the consolidated financialcondition of the Company as of the dates presented and consolidated results of operations of the Company for the periods presented. 

Date: August 13,2009 

 

This certification has been furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jose Dario Helena, Appellant.

[823 NYS2d 898]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berk-man, J.), rendered June 16, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of three counts of kidnapping in the second degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of *l1!2*to 15 years, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of vacating one of the convictions in accordance with this decision and dismissing that count of the indictment, and otherwise affirmed.

The challenged portions of the prosecutor’s summation did not deprive defendant of a fair trial. The comments at issue generally constituted fair responses to defense arguments, and to the extent that some isolated remarks might be viewed as improper, the court took curative actions that prevented any possible prejudice *(see People v Overlee,*236 AD2d 133 [1997], *lv denied*91 NY2d 976 [1998]; *People v D’Alessandro,*184 AD2d 114, 118-119 [1992], *lv denied*81 NY2d 884 [1993]). In any event, were we to find any error, we would find it to be harmless in light of the overwhelming proof of defendant’s guilt.

As the People concede, the two convictions relating to the kidnapping of a person named Rodriguez were duplicative, so that defendant is entitled to vacatur of one of them.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Andrias, J.E, Friedman, Sullivan, Nardelli and Malone, JJ.
Editorial Note on Part 28
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 28 appear at 76 FR 76873, Dec. 9, 2011.

§ 28.49 Return of service. When service of a subpoena is effected by a person other than a United States Marshal or Deputy Marshal, that person shall certify on the return of service that service was made either: ( a ) In person,
( b ) By registered or certified mail, or
( c ) By delivery to a responsible person (named) at the residence or place of business (as appropriate) of the person to be served.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  SBA District Offices 
-  Indiana 
-  Doing Business In The Indiana District 

# Doing business in the Indiana District

## Business requirements

SBA’s Business Guide lists the requirements needed to start, grow, and expand your business. Since laws and taxes vary by state, here’s what you need to do before starting your business in our area.

### Business name and registration

Register your business name with the county clerk where your business is located. If you are a corporation, you will also need to register with the Secretary of State.

### Business licensing and zoning

Licenses are typically administered by a variety of state and local departments. It is important to consider zoning regulations when choosing a site for your business. Contact the local business license office where you plan to locate your business.

### Taxes

Indiana Taxpayer Assistance Centers575 N. Pennsylvania St.Indianapolis, IN 46204Phone: 317-685-7500

Indiana Department of Revenue100 N. Senate Ave., Room N105Indianapolis, IN 46204Phone: 317-232-2240

### Health and safety

Indiana Department of Labor402 W. Washington St., Room W195Indianapolis, IN 46204Phone: 317-232-2655

Indiana Occupational Safety and Health402 W. Washington St., Room W195Indianapolis, IN 46204Phone: 317-232-2693

##  Local assistance

          Find counselors        

## SBA lending in our area

-  Loan programs              Learn more about SBA's 7(a) loans, 504 loans, and microloans that you can use for your business.                  Find a loan 
-  Local Lenders              Download a list of participating lenders in our area.                  Download lender list 
-  Lender Match              Describe your business needs and get matched with an SBA-backed lender in your area.                  Get matched with a lender 
-  Lending activity reports              View 7(a) and 504 lending activity reports from our district.                  View lending reports 

## Additional local resources

###         State and local governments      

                    -  State of Indiana Website 
                    -  Indiana General Assembly 
                    -  Indiana State Information Center 
                    -  Indiana Economic Development Corporation 
                    -  Indiana Code 

###         Community organizations      

                    -  Indiana Association of Cities & Towns 

##           Download our guide to SBA resources        

Learn about the opportunities available for small businesses nationwide.

Download English version PDFDownload Spanish version PDF
### Part C—El Malpais National Conservation Area
Exhibit 10.120


 


SECOND AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


 


This Second Amendment
to Employment Agreement (the “2nd Amendment”) is made and entered into by and between QS Energy, Inc. (the
“Company”) and Greggory M. Bigger (“Executive”), effective as of March 10, 2016 (the “2nd
Amendment Effective Date”), with reference to the following:


 


RECITALS


 


		A.	Effective as of February 1, 2012, the Company and Executive entered into that certain Employment
Agreement (the “Employment Agreement”);



 


		B.	Effective as of September 1, 2013, the Company and Executive entered into that certain First Amendment
to Employment Agreement (the “1st Amendment”);



 


		C.	It is the desire of the Company and Executive to amend the Employment Agreement again, pursuant
to the terms and conditions of this 2nd Amendment, effective as of the 2nd Amendment Effective Date.



 


NOW, THEREFORE, the
parties hereto agree further to amend the Employment Agreement, as follows: (All capitalized terms used herein shall have the meanings
ascribed to such terms in the Employment Agreement.)


 


I.Section 1 of
the Employment Agreement is hereby amended and restated as follows:


 


Effective Date and
Term. Unless sooner terminated as provided in this Agreement, including as a result of the Company’s early termination
of this Agreement as provided in Section 4 below, the Company shall continue to employ Executive for an initial term commencing
on March 10, 2016 (the “Effective Date”), and continuing thereafter until the close of business on the day immediately
preceding the third anniversary of the Effective date (the “Expiration Date”). This Agreement shall in all respects
terminate on the Expiration Date, except for those obligations of either party that are expressly stated to continue after such
time or by nature will continue after such time. The period beginning on the Effective Date and ending on the earlier of the Expiration
Date or the date Executive's employment under this Agreement actually terminates is referred to as the “Term.” No less
than ninety (90) days prior to the Expiration Date, the Company and the Executive hereby undertake to meet and negotiate a mutually
acceptable extension of the Expiration Date.


 


II.If there are
any inconsistencies between the Employment Agreement and the 1st Amendment and the terms and conditions of this 2nd
Amendment, the terms and conditions of this 2nd Amendment shall control.


 


 


 


 


 



    	 	1	 



     

    




 


III.Except for
the changes set forth in this 2nd Amendment, all terms and conditions in the Employment Agreement and 1st
Amendment shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect.


 


Executed effective
as of the 2nd Amendment Effective Date.


 





 


	 	QS ENERGY, INC.	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	By:	/s/ MARK STUBBS	 
	 	 	Mark Stubbs,	 
	 	 	Director and Chairman of the
Audit Committee, on behalf of the Board of Directors	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	/s/
GREGGORY M. BIGGER	 
	 	 	Greggory M.
Bigger	 




 


 


 


 


 


 


 






    	 	2
# C_2011173EN.01000601.xml

| 11.6.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 173/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.6.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 173/6

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landesarbeitsgericht Berlin-Brandenburg (Germany), lodged on 29 March 2011 — Ahmed Mahamdia v People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria

(Case C-154/11)

2011/C 173/10

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Landesarbeitsgericht Berlin-Brandenburg

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Ahmed Mahamdia

Applicant:

Defendant: People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Does an embassy of a State outside the scope of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (‘Regulation No 44/2001’) (1) which is situated in a Member State constitute a branch, agency or other establishment within the meaning of Article 18(2) of Regulation No 44/2001? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does an embassy of a State outside the scope of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (‘Regulation No 44/2001’) (1) which is situated in a Member State constitute a branch, agency or other establishment within the meaning of Article 18(2) of Regulation No 44/2001?

1

| 2. | If the answer to the first question should be in the affirmative:
  Can an agreement conferring jurisdiction reached prior to the existence of a dispute confer jurisdiction on a court outside the scope of Regulation No 44/2001, if, by virtue of the agreement conferring jurisdiction, the jurisdiction conferred under Articles 18 and 19 of Regulation No 44/2001 would not apply? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the answer to the first question should be in the affirmative:

Can an agreement conferring jurisdiction reached prior to the existence of a dispute confer jurisdiction on a court outside the scope of Regulation No 44/2001, if, by virtue of the agreement conferring jurisdiction, the jurisdiction conferred under Articles 18 and 19 of Regulation No 44/2001 would not apply?

---

(1)  OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM BONTEX,
INC.'S AUDITED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF AND FOR THE YEAR ENDED
JUNE 30, 2000, AS SET FORTH IN THE COMPANY'S 2000 ANNUAL REPORT TO STOCKHOLDERS
AND ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                            457
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  12,735
<ALLOWANCES>                                      170
<INVENTORY>                                     5,465
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               18,791
<PP&E>                                         24,198
<DEPRECIATION>                                 13,491
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 30,885
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          19,129
<BONDS>                                         2,953
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                          157
<OTHER-SE>                                      8,791
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   30,885
<SALES>                                        39,455
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               39,486
<CGS>                                          28,598
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  39,810
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   92
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                834
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (324)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      335
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (659)
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (659)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.42)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.42)



</TABLE>
### SUBCHAPTER CXX—MORLEY NELSON SNAKE RIVER BIRDS OF PREY NATIONAL CONSERVATION AREA
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                              5

<S>                                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                            6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                      DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                         JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                           JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                                      0
<SECURITIES>                                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                                               0
<ALLOWANCES>                                                0
<INVENTORY>                                                 0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                            0
<PP&E>                                                      0
<DEPRECIATION>                                              0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                              0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                  16,395
<BONDS>                                                     0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                       0
<PREFERRED>                                                 0
<COMMON>                                                1,029
<OTHER-SE>                                            (17,424)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                0
<SALES>                                                     0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                            0
<CGS>                                                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                               0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                       16,300
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                          0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                       (16,300)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                   (16,300)
<DISCONTINUED>                                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                             0
<CHANGES>                                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                                          (16,300)
<EPS-BASIC>                                           (0.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                           (0.02)




</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Axel Adams, Appellant.

[823 NYS2d 907]

Application by the appellant for a writ of error coram nobis to vacate, on the ground of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, a decision and order of this Court dated July 1, 2002 *(People v Adams,*296 AD2d 418 [2002]), affirming a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered March 21, 2000.

*826Ordered that the application is denied.

The appellant has failed to establish that he was denied the effective assistance of appellate counsel *(see Jones v Barnes,*463 US 745 [1983]; *People v Stultz,*2 NY3d 277 [2004]). Prudenti, P.J., Florio, Miller and Santucci, JJ., concur.
§ 22.25 Protective Orders and In Camera Review [Rule 25]. ( a ) *Protective orders.* Upon motion of any party, or on the Board's initiative, the Board may issue a protective order to hold materials under conditions that would limit access to them on the ground that such documents are privileged or confidential, or sensitive in some other way. Any motion filed under this rule must state with specificity the grounds for such limited access. The manner in which such materials will be held, the persons that shall have access to them, and the conditions under which such access will be allowed will be specified in an order of the Board.
( b ) *In camera review.* Generally, all documents and evidence provided to the Board must also be provided to all other parties to the appeal or their legal counsel or representative. However, in limited circumstances, such as in deciding matters of privilege, it may be appropriate for the Board to review documents or evidence in camera. In camera review may be requested upon motion to the Board, or on the Board's initiative. Any motion filed under this rule must state with specificity the grounds for seeking in camera review.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE 
FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF L.A. T SPORTSWEAR, INC. FOR THE YEAR ENDED JANUARY 2,
1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-02-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-28-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-02-1999
<CASH>                                             407
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,277
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,162
<INVENTORY>                                     23,665
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                31,106
<PP&E>                                           6,836
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,635
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  34,463
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           12,486
<BONDS>                                         10,162
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        10,825
<OTHER-SE>                                         619
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    34,463
<SALES>                                         81,874
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                81,874
<CGS>                                           68,570
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   68,570
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   368
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,125
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,285
<INCOME-TAX>                                        76
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,209
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,209
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.29
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.29
        
 

</TABLE>
###### Editorial Note on Part 0

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 0 appear at 73 FR 73 FR 54947, Sept. 24, 2008.

#### § 0.29g Reprisals.

Any employee who has authority to take, direct others to take, recommend, or approve any personnel action shall not, with respect to such authority, take or threaten to take any action against any employee as a reprisal for the employee making a complaint or disclosing information to the OIG unless the complaint was made or the information was disclosed with knowledge that it was false or with willful disregard for its truth or falsity.
Feeling Sick?

Stay home when you are sick!

cdc.gov/CORONAVIRUS

CS 316129-A March 22, 2020 5:14 PM

DO NOT ENTER if you have:

If you feel unwell or have the following symptoms 

please leave the building and contact your health care provider. 

Then follow-up with your supervisor.

FEVER COUGH SHORTNESS OF 

BREATH

STOP
###### Editorial Note on Part 0

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 0 appear at 73 FR 73 FR 54947, Sept. 24, 2008.

#### § 0.183 Distribution of orders.

The distribution of orders, unless otherwise provided by the Attorney General, shall be determined by the Assistant Attorney General for Administration.
Exhibit 32.1





Certification of Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of NutraCea (the “Company”) for the period ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 Company.





Dated:  May 27, 2011/s/ W. John ShortW. John ShortChief Executive Officer





/s/ J. Dale BeltJerry Dale BeltChief Financial Officer





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.





The foregoing certification is being furnished in accordance with Securities and Exchange Commission Release No. 34-47551 and shall not be considered filed as part of the Form 10-Q.
# C_2011173EN.01000302.xml

| 11.6.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 173/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.6.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 173/3

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundespatentgericht (Germany) lodged on 25 February 2011 — Alfred Strigl v Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt

(Case C-90/11)

2011/C 173/05

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Bundespatentgericht

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Alfred Strigl

Applicant:

Defendant: Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Is the ground for refusal under Article 3(1)(b) and/or (c) of Directive 2008/95/EC (1) also applicable to a word sign which consists of a descriptive word combination and a non descriptive letter sequence, if the trade perceives the letter sequence as an abbreviation of the descriptive words because it reproduces their initial letters, and the trade mark as a whole can thus be construed as a combination of mutually explanatory descriptive indications or abbreviations?

1

---

(1)  Directive 2008/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2008 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks (Codified version); OJ 2008 L 299, p. 25.

1

---