alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit
                32.2





CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





Pursuant
      to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
      section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned
      officer of O2 Secure Wireless, Inc., a Georgia corporation (the “Company”), does
      hereby certify, to the best of her knowledge, that:





1. 
      The Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2008 (the
      “Report”) of the Company complies in all material respects with the requirements
      of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;
      and





2. 
      The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.





/s/
      Keith A. Greaves.


Keith A. Greaves, Acting Chief Financial Officer





Date:
      January 12, 2009
§ 429.205 What is not allowable under this subpart? Claims are not allowable for the following: ( a ) *Unassigned quarters in United States.* Property loss or damage in quarters you occupied within any state that were not assigned to you or otherwise provided in kind by the United States.
( b ) *Business property.* Property used for business or profit.
( c ) *Unserviceable property.* Wornout or unserviceable property.
( d ) *Illegal possession.* Property acquired, possessed, or transferred in violation of the law or in violation of applicable regulations or directives.
( e ) *Articles of extraordinary value.* Valuable articles, such as cameras, watches, jewelry, furs, or other articles of extraordinary value. This prohibition does not apply to articles in your personal custody or articles properly checked or inventoried with a common carrier, if you took reasonable protection or security measures.
( f ) *Intangible property.* Loss of property that has no extrinsic and marketable value but is merely representative or evidence of value, such as non-negotiable stock certificates, promissory notes, bonds, bills of lading, warehouse receipts, insurance policies, baggage checks, and bank books, is not compensable. Loss of a thesis, or other similar item, is compensable only to the extent of the out-of-pocket expenses you incurred in preparing the item such as the cost of the paper or other materials. No compensation is authorized for the time you spent in its preparation or for supposed literary value.
( g ) *Incidental expenses and consequential damages.* The MPCECA and this subpart authorize payment for loss of, or damage to, personal property only. Except as provided in § 429.203(c)(7), consequential damages or other types of loss or incidental expenses (such as loss of use, interest, carrying charges, cost of lodging or food while awaiting arrival of shipment, attorney fees, telephone calls, cost of transporting you or your family members, inconvenience, time spent in preparation of claim, or cost of insurance premiums) are not compensable.
( h ) *Real property.* Damage to real property is not compensable. In determining whether an item is considered to be an item of personal property, as opposed to real property, normally, any movable item is considered personal property even if physically joined to the land.
( i ) *Commercial property.* Articles acquired or held for sale or disposition by other commercial transactions on more than an occasional basis, or for use in a private profession or business enterprise.
( j ) *Commercial storage.* Property stored at a commercial facility for your convenience and at your expense.
( k ) *Claims for minimum amount.* Loss or damage amounting to less than $25.
<page>			   EXHIBIT 31.01

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Jeffrey A. Rothman, President of Demeter Management Corporation
("Demeter"), the general partner of the registrant, certify that:

1.		I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of 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





 <page> reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and




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 Demeter'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.







Date:  May 17, 2004        /s/	Jeffrey A. Rothman
		Jeffrey A. Rothman
	President,
	Demeter Management Corporation,
	general partner of the registrant
### §6206. Grantee corporate boards of directors

#### (a) In general

The corporate board of directors of each grantee under this chapter—

(1) shall be bipartisan;

(2) shall, except as otherwise provided in this Act, have the sole responsibility to operate their respective grantees within the jurisdiction of their respective States of incorporation;

(3) shall be composed of not fewer than 5 members, who shall be qualified individuals who are not employed in the public sector; and

(4) shall appoint successors in the event of vacancies on their respective boards, in accordance with applicable bylaws.

#### (b) Not Federal employees

No employee of any grantee under this chapter may be a Federal employee.

(Pub. L. 103–236, title III, §307, as added Pub. L. 117–263, div. I, title XCVII, §9704, Dec. 23, 2022, 136 Stat. 3914.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This chapter, referred to in text, was in the original "this title", meaning title III of Pub. L. 103–236, Apr. 30, 1994, 108 Stat. 432, known as the United States International Broadcasting Act of 1994, which is classified principally to this chapter. For complete classification of title III to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 6201 of this title and Tables.

This Act, referred to in subsec. (a)(2), is Pub. L. 103–236, Apr. 30, 1994, 108 Stat. 382, known as the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title of 1994 Amendment note set out under section 2651 of this title and Tables.

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 6206, Pub. L. 103–236, title III, §307, Apr. 30, 1994, 108 Stat. 436; Pub. L. 105–277, div. G, subdiv. A, title XIII, §1323(k), Oct. 21, 1998, 112 Stat. 2681–780, related to the International Broadcasting Bureau, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title XII, §1288(4), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2552.

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

#### Personal Services Contracting Pilot Program

Pub. L. 107–228, div. A, title V, §504, Sept. 30, 2002, 116 Stat. 1393, as amended by Pub. L. 109–140, §6, Dec. 22, 2005, 119 Stat. 2652; Pub. L. 109–472, §9, Jan. 11, 2007, 120 Stat. 3556; Pub. L. 110–161, div. J, title VI, §634(r), Dec. 26, 2007, 121 Stat. 2330; Pub. L. 110–321, §5, Sept. 19, 2008, 122 Stat. 3536, authorized the Director of the International Broadcasting Bureau to establish a pilot program for the purpose of hiring United States citizens or aliens as personal services contractors for service in the United States as broadcasters and other broadcasting specialists in the International Broadcasting Bureau, and provided that such authority would terminate on Dec. 31, 2009. Subsequent laws incrementally extended the authority until Sept. 30, 2016.
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-14-0001348 09-FEB-2015 08:48 AM
#### Andrew Hoefer v. Julius A. Langhorst.

Filed January 3, 1898.

No. 7694.

Review: Pleading and Proof: Variance: Factors and Brokers. . Where the claim of an agent for compensation was for finding a purchaser for the land of the defendant ready and willing to purchase, and, without objection, proof was made of the ability to purchase, as well as of the alleged readiness and willingness, the variance cannot be urged as error for the first time in the supreme court.

Error from the district court of Cass county. Tried below before Chapman, J.

*Affirmed.*

*H. D. Travis,*for plaintiff in error.

*A. N. Sullivan*and *J. S. Haldeman, contra.*

Ryan, C.

The defendant in error recovered judgment against the plaintiff in error for the sum of $150, with interest as *365prayed, in the district court of Cass county. The claim on which the judgment was rendered was for procuring a purchaser of certain land of plaintiff in error in accordance with an agreement so to do made by the defendant in error, for which service the sum of $150 was to be paid by the plaintiff in error. The evidence justified the jury in finding that the service rendered ivas that defendant in error had procured a purchaser, ready and able to buy the land which, the plaintiff in error had authorized defendant in error to sell. It is true it Avas merely alleged in the petition that the party procured as a purchaser was ready and Avilling to purchase on the required terms, but, on the trial, there Avas no objection to proof being made of the ability, as well as of the alleged readiness and willingness of the proposed purchaser. It is now too late to raise this question of a variance for the first time. It is possible that this might have been raised upon one or more of the instructions, if the assignments with respect to them had been so made as to admit of the consideration of the instructions independently of each other; but these assignments were as to groups, in each of Avhich there was an instruction not open to criticism. We cannot, therefore, inquire whether or not other instructions were faulty.

The verdict was sustained by the evidence, and the judgment of the district court is therefore

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 32.1


                                 CERTIFICATION

     Pursuant  to  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.1350,
as  adopted),  Tim  Wilkens,  Chief Executive Officer of Golden Gate Homes, Inc.
(the  "Company"),  hereby  certifies  that,  to  the  best  of  his  knowledge:

     1.  The  Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December
31,  2010,  to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the "Annual
Report")  fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d)
of  the  Securities  Exchange  Act  of  1934,  and

     2.  The  information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all
material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and results of operations of the
Company.

      IN  WITNESS  WHEREOF, the undersigned has set his hands hereto as of April
14,  2011.

                         /s/  Tim  Wilkens
                         ---------------
                         Tim  Wilkens
          Chief  Executive  Officer
                         (Principal  Executive  Officer)
#### Jean Murray, Appellant, v. Edward M. Murray, Respondent.

No opinion. Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Untermyer, Dore and Cohn, JJ.
EXHIBIT 23.1





CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We
consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
333-124521 on Form S-3 of our report dated March 13, 2008, relating to the 2007
consolidated financial statements and the retroactive adjustments to the 2006
and 2005 consolidated financial statements of Alsius Corporation and
subsidiaries (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes
explanatory paragraphs (i) regarding the retroactive application of the change
in accounting for net loss per share in 2006 and 2005 and (ii) expressing
substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern)
appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Alsius Corporation and
subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 2007.





/s/
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP





Costa
Mesa, California


March 13,
2008
Exhibit 12
                                                                     ----------

                             Chesapeake Funding LLC
                COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                             (Dollars in thousands)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                                              Period from
                                                                                                             June 24, 1999
                                                                                                              (inception)
                                                    Nine Months Ended                 Year ended                through
                                                      September 30,                  December 31,             December 31
                                              -----------------------------  ----------------------------   ---------------
                                                   2002           2001           2001            2000            1999
                                              --------------  -------------  -------------  -------------   ---------------
<S>                                           <C>             <C>            <C>            <C>             <C>
Earnings available to cover fixed charges:
Income before income taxes                    $      63,671   $      74,168  $      97,793  $      82,130   $      36,412
Plus: Fixed charges                                  49,401         100,717        115,722        172,764          71,776
                                              --------------  -------------  -------------  -------------   ---------------
Earnings available to cover fixed charges     $     113,072   $     174,885  $     213,515  $     254,894   $     108,188
                                              ==============  =============  =============  =============   ===============


Fixed charges:
Interest expense                              $      49,401   $     100,717  $     115,722  $     172,764   $      71,776
                                              --------------  -------------  -------------  -------------   ---------------
Total fixed charges                           $      49,401   $     100,717  $     115,722  $     172,764   $      71,776
                                              ==============  =============  =============  =============   ===============

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                     2.29x          1.74x          1.85x           1.48x           1.51x
                                              ==============  =============  =============  =============   ===============


</TABLE>
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****High resolution digitalelevation model of Mount St. Helens crater and upper North Fork Toutle RiverBasin, Washington, based on an airborne lidar survey of September 2009**
 
Readme | DeliveryReport | 1mDEM | 10mDEM | 1mhillshade | Metadata
 
SuDoc Number:I 19.121:904
Item Number:0621-K (online)
CGP systemNumber:000942476
 
April 25, 2018
No. 11,813.

#### Collier *v.*Lambie-Bate Construction Co.

Decided July 5, 1927.

Rehearing denied September 12, 1927.

Action for damages. Judgment for plaintiff.

*Affirmed.*

*On Application for Su/persedéas.*

1. Appeal 'and *Epjior*— Fact *Findings.*Eact findings of the trial court based on conflicting evidence will not be disturbed on review.

*Error to the District Court of the City and County of Denver, Eon. George F. Dunklee, Judge.*

Mr. Gail L. Ireland, for plaintiff in error.

Messrs. Fowler *&*Fowler, Mr. Harold T. Bate, for defendant in error.

*En Banc.*

Mr. Justice Whiteord

delivered the opinion of the court.

The defendant in error, plaintiff below, had judgment for $814.70, including interest, in an action for damages for the conversion of a Galleon sand screen, which was rented to the defendant Collier by the plaintiff company. In addition to a general denial the defendant filed a supplemental answer, alleging a settlement agreement between the plaintiff and defendant, and that the defendant had fulfilled and carried out that agreement on his part. Defendant’s witness, Ireland, testified that a definite agreement was made. Plaintiff’s witness, Bate, flatly *264contradicted the testimony of Ireland. On the trial the conversion of the screen was conceded and is not a matter of controversy here.

The questions raised here are solely questions of fact. The trial court found the issues in favor of the plaintiff, and that the value of the screen was $700 and that the conversion occurred on December 13, 1924, and allowed interest from that date.

After a careful reading of the record, we are convinced that there is ample testimony to sustain the findings of the trial court. We caniiot disturb the findings of the trial court on conflicting evidence.

Judgment affirmed.
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

 3,271

 2,058

 1,989

 1,616

 3,236

 2,508

 2,174

 2,905

 2,266

 2,069

 2,747

 2,324

 2,034

 1,414

 1,965

 2,867

 2,673

 2,715

 2,446

 2,192

 1,859

 1,955

 1,667

 2,653

 3,396

 3,108

 1,192

 1,416

 2,563

 2,563

 2,655

 47,926

 48,637

 48,161

 47,642

 46,795

 47,530

 47,536

 47,224

 47,623

 47,394

 46,990

 47,250

 47,096

 46,673

 45,683

 45,265

 45,726

 45,979

 46,259

 46,270

 46,039

 45,503

 45,085

 44,414

 44,714

 45,705

 46,372

 45,186

 44,272

 44,493

 44,703

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

AUGUST 2022 SHASTA LAKE FLOOD CONTROL REQUIREMENTS RUN DATE: September 7, 2022

 51,197

 50,695

 50,150

 49,258

 50,031

 50,038

 49,710

 50,129

 49,889

 49,463

 49,737

 49,574

 49,130

 48,087

 47,648

 48,132

 48,399

 48,694

 48,705

 48,462

 47,898

 47,458

 46,752

 47,067

 48,110

 48,813

 47,564

 46,602

 46,835

 47,056

 47,358

 5,831,000

 5,809,000

 5,788,000

 5,767,000

 5,745,000

 5,724,000

 5,703,000

 5,682,000

 5,660,000

 5,639,000

 5,618,000

 5,596,000

 5,575,000

 5,554,000

 5,532,000

 5,511,000

 5,490,000

 5,468,000

 5,447,000

 5,426,000

 5,404,000

 5,383,000

 5,362,000

 5,341,000

 5,319,000

 5,298,000

 5,277,000

 5,255,000

 5,234,000

 5,213,000

 5,191,000

 SHASTA

 INFLOW 

C. F. S. 

 PREV DAY

 F. C. PAR 

 (COL 3) 

 X .95 

 F. C. 

 PARAM 

 (COLS. 

 1 + 2 ) 

 .0356* 

 X DAYS 

 12/23 THRU

3/20 

 530,000

 MINUS 

 F. C. 

 PARAM

 (COL 3)

 COLS 

 4 X 5 

 F. C. 

 RESERV 

 (1,300,000 

 - COL 6 ) 

 MINUS 

 14,943 

 PER DAY 

 AFTER 

 3/20 

 ADJUSTED 

 F. C. 

 RESERV 

 (7-8) 

 PERM 

 STORAGE 

 COMMENTS:

 * LEAP YEAR CONSTANT = .0352 

 CONSTANT .0356 = 1,300,000 / (TOTAL DAYS X (530,000 - 110,000 ) )

 IF COL 3 IS GREATER THAN 530,000 OR LESS THAN 110,000 USE THOSE VALUES FOR COL 3 INSTEAD OF THE COMPUTED VALUE. 

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 

 50,449
EXHIBIT 32.1



             CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                  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 10Q of First
Keystone Corporation (the "Corporation") for the period ended June
30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
"Report"), I, J. Gerald Bazewicz, President and CEO, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as added by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

    1.  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
        13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

    2.  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
        all material respects, the financial condition and results
        of operations of the Corporation as of and for the period
        covered by the Report.





                                  /s/ J. Gerald Bazewicz
                                  J. Gerald Bazewicz
                                  President and CEO


August 12, 2004


                                27
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

July 31, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 130971 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, JEN-KEL CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 130971 

 COA: 257856 

Ottawa CC: 02-042329-CK 

CITY OF HOLLAND and HOLLAND 

BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS,

Defendants-Appellees. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 9, 2006 

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

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

d0724 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

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

July 31, 2006 

 Clerk
### §4509. Repealed. Pub. L. 102–138, title II, §209, Oct. 28, 1991, 105 Stat. 694

Section, Pub. L. 98–164, title VIII, §810, Nov. 22, 1983, 97 Stat. 1051, provided that provisions of this chapter were to cease to be effective at end of ten-year period beginning on Nov. 22, 1983.