alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                                 18 U.S.C. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the quarterly report of LegalPlay Entertainment Inc. on form
10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John Page, Director of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 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.



August 17, 2006                            /s/ John Page
---------------------------------------    -------------------------------------
(Date)                                     John Page
                                           Director / Treasurer
### §118. Interference with certain protective functions

Any person who knowingly and willfully obstructs, resists, or interferes with a Federal law enforcement agent engaged, within the United States or the special maritime territorial jurisdiction of the United States, in the performance of the protective functions authorized under section 37 of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 2709) or section 103 of the Diplomatic Security Act (22 U.S.C. 4802) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both.

(Added Pub. L. 109–472, §4(a), Jan. 11, 2007, 120 Stat. 3555.)
### §470. Counterfeit acts committed outside the United States

A person who, outside the United States, engages in the act of—

(1) making, dealing, or possessing any counterfeit obligation or other security of the United States; or

(2) making, dealing, or possessing any plate, stone, analog, digital, or electronic image, or other thing, or any part thereof, used to counterfeit such obligation or security,

if such act would constitute a violation of section 471, 473, or 474 if committed within the United States, shall be punished as is provided for the like offense within the United States.

(Added Pub. L. 103–322, title XII, §120003(a), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2021; amended Pub. L. 107–56, title III, §374(a), Oct. 26, 2001, 115 Stat. 340.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2001—Pub. L. 107–56, §374(a)(2), in concluding provisions, substituted "shall be punished as is provided for the like offense within the United States" for "shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both".

Par. (2). Pub. L. 107–56, §374(a)(1), inserted "analog, digital, or electronic image," after "plate, stone,".

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Short Title of 1992 Amendment

Pub. L. 102–550, title XV, §1551, Oct. 28, 1992, 106 Stat. 4070, provided that: "This subtitle [subtitle E (§§1551–1554) of title XV of Pub. L. 102–550, enacting section 474A of this title and amending sections 474 and 504 of this title] may be cited as the 'Counterfeit Deterrence Act of 1992'."

#### Combatting International Counterfeiting of United States Currency

Pub. L. 104–132, title VIII, §807, Apr. 24, 1996, 110 Stat. 1308, which directed the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the advanced counterfeit deterrence steering committee, to study the use and counterfeiting of United States currency abroad, develop an evaluation audit plan, and submit written reports to Congress, ceased to be effective on Apr. 24, 2006.
### §3074. Exception of governmental officials

No officer or employee of any governmental entity who, while in the performance of his or her official duties, furnishes the information described in section 3071 shall be eligible for any monetary reward under this chapter.

(Added Pub. L. 98–533, title I, §101(a), Oct. 19, 1984, 98 Stat. 2707.)
-     HOME    - Freedom of           Information 
  - Welcome 
  - RSS Page 
- NEWS    - Audio 
  - Video 
  - Seagull           Archives 
- PHOTOS    - Aircraft 
  - Ceremonies 
  - Events 
  - Historical 
  - Operations 
- ART    - Patches           / Emblems 
- HISTORY 
- RESOURCES    - Biographies 
  - Fact           Sheets 
- CAREERS 
- UNITS 
- QUESTIONS 
Join the Air National GuardResources > Seagull Archives2010 JanuaryFebruaryMarch/AprilMayJuneJuly/AugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecember2009 JanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJuly                                 / AugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecember2007 JanuaryFebruaryMarch / AprilMayJuneJuly                                 / AugustSeptember                                 /                                 October2011 JanuaryFebruaryMarch/April2008 JanuaryFebruary / MarchAprilMay / JuneJuly / AugustSeptember / OctoberNovemberDecember2006 February                                 / MarchAprilMayJune                                 / JulyAugust                                 / SeptemberDecember2005 October                                 / NovemberDecember Inside                               102IWSearchGeneralImagesVideo View All                                 RSS             The Official Web Site of 102nd Intelligence             Wing AF PortalSite MapContact                   UsQuestionsSecurity                   and Privacy noticeE-publishing
**Exhibit21**

 

**LISTOF SUBSIDIARIES**

 

The following is a list of subsidiaries and Lotus Pacific’s ownershippercentage as of June 30, 2004:

 
| **Name of Subsidiary**          |   | **Percentage of  Ownership** |   | **State of Incorporation** |   |
|---------------------------------|--------|------------------------------|--------|----------------------------|--------|
|                            |   |                         |   |                       |   |
| Opta Systems, LLC               |   | 100                          | %      | Delaware                   |   |
| Correlant  Communications, Inc. |   | 62                           | %      | Delaware                   |   |

 

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                         129,155
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   96,402
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               225,557
<PP&E>                                         231,613
<DEPRECIATION>                                  32,692
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 688,724
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,172,519
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         8,710
<OTHER-SE>                                   (542,425)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   688,724
<SALES>                                        908,323
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               908,323
<CGS>                                          737,477
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  737,477
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               947,057
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              43,204
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (845,033)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (845,033)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                106,889
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (738,144)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.09)


</TABLE>
### §2911. Study on most equitable and effective mechanism for funding State conservation plans; report to Congressional committees

The Director of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, in consultation with affected parties, shall conduct a comprehensive study to determine the most equitable and effective mechanism for funding State conservation plans and actions under this chapter, including, but not limited to, funding by means of an excise tax on appropriate items. On or before December 31, 1984, the Director shall report to the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate and to the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries of the House of Representatives the results of such study, together with his recommendations with respect thereto.

(Pub. L. 96–366, §12, Sept. 29, 1980, 94 Stat. 1330; Pub. L. 97–396, §6, Dec. 31, 1982, 96 Stat. 2006.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1982—Pub. L. 97–396 struck out ", out of funds available for the administration of this chapter" after "shall conduct", and substituted "December 31, 1984" for "the expiration of the 30-month period following the date of enactment of this Act [Sept. 29, 1980]" after "On or before".

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Abolition of House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries

Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries of House of Representatives abolished and its jurisdiction transferred by House Resolution No. 6, One Hundred Fourth Congress, Jan. 4, 1995. Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries of House of Representatives treated as referring to Committee on Resources of House of Representatives in case of provisions relating to fisheries, wildlife, international fishing agreements, marine affairs (including coastal zone management) except for measures relating to oil and other pollution of navigable waters, or oceanography by section 1(b)(3) of Pub. L. 104–14, set out as a note preceding section 21 of Title 2, The Congress. Committee on Resources of House of Representatives changed to Committee on Natural Resources of House of Representatives by House Resolution No. 6, One Hundred Tenth Congress, Jan. 5, 2007.
### §1834. Criminal forfeiture

Forfeiture, destruction, and restitution relating to this chapter shall be subject to section 2323, to the extent provided in that section, in addition to any other similar remedies provided by law.

(Added Pub. L. 104–294, title I, §101(a), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3489; amended Pub. L. 110–403, title II, §207, Oct. 13, 2008, 122 Stat. 4263.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2008—Pub. L. 110–403 amended section generally. Prior to amendment, section related to forfeiture of property either derived from or used to commit a violation of this chapter.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Before the

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

May 26, 2021

In the Matter of

Minerco, Inc. 

File No. 500-1

ORDER OF SUSPENSION OF

TRADING

It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that the public interest and the 

protection of investors require a suspension in the trading of the securities of Minerco, Inc.

(“Minerco” or “the Company”)(CIK # 0001451514), formerly a Nevada company, because of 

questions and concerns regarding the adequacy and accuracy of information about the Company 

in the marketplace and unusual and unexplained activity affecting the market for its securities. 

These include questions and concerns about the status of its corporate organization, its 

ownership, the accuracy and completeness of its public statements to investors about its 

activities, inconsistencies between its statements on social media and in its press releases as 

compared to its financial disclosures on www.OTCMarkets.com, and the possibility of 

manipulation of the market for its securities. As of May 21, 2021, the Company’s common stock 

was quoted and traded on OTC Link whose parent company is OTC Markets Group Inc., under 

the symbol MINE. As of May 21, 2021, the Company’s common stock, had seven market 

makers, and was eligible for the “piggyback” exception of Exchange Act Rule 15c2- 11(f)(3)

under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934.
2

The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the protection of investors 

require a suspension of trading in the securities of the above-listed Company.

THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange 

Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of the above-listed Company is suspended for the 

period from 9:30 a.m. EDT on May 27, 2021, through 11:59 p.m. EDT on June 10, 2021.

By the Commission.

Vanessa A. Countryman

Secretary
EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Brent M. Cook, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Raser Technologies, Inc., (the Registrant);

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 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)) for the Registrant and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the Registrant, including
its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end
of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the
Registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the Registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the Registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrants internal control over financial reporting.

5. The Registrants other
certifying officer 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):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal
control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Registrants
internal control over financial reporting.



|              |  |  |  |                        
|------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|              |  | 
|July 26, 2006 |  |  |  | /s/ Brent M. Cook      
|(Date)        |  |  |  | Brent M. Cook,         
|              |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer
### MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04

- 12

- 00343

- CR Alex CRANK , Appellant

v. The STATE of Texas , Appellee From the 227th Judicial District Court , Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2007CR10969 Honorable Philip A. Kazen, Jr. , Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Karen Angelini, Justice Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Delivered and Filed: July 11, 2012
DIS MISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION On June 4, 2012, appellant filed a notice of appeal with the trial court clerk, stating his intent to appeal “from the denial of his request for a free appellate record in his cause.” Based on the documentation attached to appellant’s notice of appeal, it appears that appellant is seeking a copy of the record to pursue a post

- conviction writ of habeas corpus. On June 18, 2012, the trial court certified to this court that no ruling was made on the document filed in the trial court; therefore, no order was ever ente r ed denying appellant’s04

- 12

- 00343

- CR

- 2

- motion. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P . 26.2(a) (permitting appeal of an appealable order). Moreover, this court has no jurisdiction over post

- conviction writs of habeas corpus in felony cases; instead, jurisdiction is reserved to the district courts and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See T EX
. C ODE C RIM
. P ROC . art. 11.07; Rodriguez v. State , No. 03

- 04

- 00076

- CR, 2004 WL 635292, at *1 (Tex. App.

— Austin Apr. 1, 2004, no pet.) (not designated for publication). By order dated June 18, 2012, appellant was ordered to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. On July 2, 2012, appellant filed a written response referencing a prior appeal number 04

- 09

- 00157

- CR, which was transferred from this
court to the Eighth Court of Appeals and assigned appeal number 08

- 09

- 00109

- CR. This court has no jurisdiction to consider any issues pertaining to the prior appeal because jurisdiction was transferred to the Eighth Court of Appeals. Moreover, appellant’s response to our J une 18, 2012 order provides no basis for this court to exercise jurisdiction over the pending appeal given that the trial court has not signed an appealable order to which the June 4, 2012 notice of appeal relates. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed fo r lack of jurisdiction.
PER CURIAM
DO NOT PUBLISH
IIB 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4908 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 23, 2020 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

AN ACT 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to prohibit the collection of a health care copayment by the Secretary of 

Veterans Affairs from a veteran who is a member of 

an Indian tribe. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 4908 RFS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Native American Vet3 eran Parity in Access to Care Today Act’’ or ‘‘Native 

4 American PACT Act’’. 

5 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON COLLECTION OF A HEALTH CARE 

6 COPAYMENT BY THE SECRETARY OF VET7 ERANS AFFAIRS FROM A VETERAN WHO IS A 

8 MEMBER OF AN INDIAN TRIBE. 

9 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1730A of title 38, United 

10 States Code, is amended— 

11 (1) in the heading, by striking ‘‘catastroph12 ically disabled’’ and inserting ‘‘certain’’; 

13 (2) by inserting ‘‘(a) PROHIBITION.—’’ before 

14 ‘‘Notwithstanding’’; 

15 (3) by striking ‘‘a veteran who is catastroph16 ically disabled, as defined by the Secretary,’’ and in17 serting ‘‘a covered veteran’’; and 

18 (4) by adding at the end the following new sub19 section: 

20 ‘‘(b) COVERED VETERAN DEFINED.—In this section, 

21 the term ‘covered veteran’ means a veteran who— 

22 ‘‘(1) is catastrophically disabled, as defined by 

23 the Secretary; or 

24 ‘‘(2) is an Indian or urban Indian, as those 

25 terms are defined in section 4 of the Indian Health 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

HR 4908 RFS

1 Care Improvement Act (Public Law 94–437; 25 

2 U.S.C. 1603).’’. 

3 (b) TECHNICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections 

4 at the beginning of chapter 17 of such title is amended 

5 by striking the item relating to section 1730A and insert6 ing the following: 

‘‘1730A. Prohibition on collection of copayments from certain veterans.’’. 

7 (c) DELAYED EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments 

8 made by this section shall take effect on the day that is 

9 one year after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 22, 

2020. 

Attest: CHERYL L. JOHNSON, 

Clerk. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 329

 343

 353

 351

 350

 365

 366

 389

 383

 370

 359

 356

 356

 363

 371

 371

 382

 377

 381

 382

 392

 382

 364

 379

 405

 423

 414

 450

 439

 463

 508

 312

 329

 334

 324

 329

 333

 344

 345

 346

 351

 332

 327

 330

 333

 347

 359

 364

 355

 361

 366

 369

 344

 343

 348

 364

 370

 357

 369

 371

 359

 396

 320

 337

 344

 339

 340

 351

 355

 368

 363

 362

 347

 342

 343

 347

 359

 367

 373

 368

 370

 373

 379

 360

 355

 363

 385

 394

 388

 409

 414

 407

 431

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

AUGUST 2020 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: October 19, 2020

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

TDS

 214

 224

 229

 226

 226

 233

 235

 243

 240

 240

 230

 227

 228

 230

 238

 243

 247

 243

 245

 247

 250

 238

 235

 240

 254

 259

 256

 269

 272

 268

 282

TOTAL 11,353

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

DELTA MENDOTA CANAL AT CHECK 21
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1297

In Re: DAVID LEWIS, 

Petitioner. 

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

(5:11-cr-00229-F-8; 5:14-cv-00374-F)

Submitted: August 2, 2016 Decided: September 1, 2016

Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. 

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

David Lewis, Petitioner Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2

PER CURIAM: 

David Lewis petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that 

the district court has unduly delayed in ruling on his 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2255 (2012) motion. He seeks an order from this court 

directing the district court to act. Our review of the district 

court’s docket reveals that the court dismissed the § 2255 

motion and dismissed as moot Lewis’ motion for adjudication of 

the § 2255 motion by order dated July 18, 2016. Accordingly, 

because the district court has recently ruled on Lewis’ motions, 

we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and deny the 

mandamus petition as moot. We dispense with oral argument 

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented 

in the materials before this court and argument would not aid 

the decisional process. 

PETITION DENIED
### §2112. Personal property of United States

Whoever robs or attempts to rob another of any kind or description of personal property belonging to the United States, shall be imprisoned not more than fifteen years.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 796; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXII, §320903(a)(2), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2124.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on title 18, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §99 (Mar. 4, 1909, ch. 321, §46, 35 Stat. 1097).

That portion of said section 99 relating to felonious taking was omitted as covered by section 641 of this title.

The punishment by fine of not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both, was changed to harmonize with section 2111 of this title. The 15–year penalty is not excessive for an offense of this type.

Minor verbal change was made.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1994—Pub. L. 103–322 inserted "or attempts to rob" after "robs".