alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT      32**

**CB      Financial Corporation**

**Certification      of Periodic Financial Report**

**Pursuant      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350**

|                                    |                                                                  |                                          |
|-----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------|
| Dated: March              28, 2007 |                                                                       | /s/              Norman B. Osborn   |
|                                    | Norman                B. OsbornChief                Executive Officer |

|                                    |                                                                       |                                                  |
|-----------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------|
|                                    |                                                                       |                                                  |
| Dated: March              28, 2007 |                                                                            |  /s/                Dora Kicklighter   |
|                                    | Dora                KicklighterPrincipal                Accounting Officer |

----
Exhibit 32.1




CERTIFICATIONS
UNDER SECTION 906




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), each of the
undersigned officers of Zoo Entertainment, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the
“Company”), does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that:




The
Annual Report for the year ended December 31, 2009 (the “Form 10-K”) of the
Company 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 Form 10-K
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.




Dated:
      March 31, 2010
            /s/ Mark SeremetMark Seremet(principal
      executive officer)Dated:
      March 31, 2010
            /s/ David FremedDavid Fremed(principal
      financial officer)
### §1105. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 89–656, §5, Oct. 14, 1966, 80 Stat. 906, which authorized the Secretary of the Interior to prescribe rules and regulations to carry out the provisions of this subchapter, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
§ 702.134 Payment of claimant's attorney's fees in disputed claims. ( a ) If the employer or carrier declines to pay any compensation on or before the 30th day after receiving written notice from the district director of a claim for compensation having been filed, on the ground that there is no liability for compensation within the provisions of this Act, and the person seeking benefits shall thereafter have utilized the services of an attorney at law in the successful prosecution of his claim, there shall be awarded, in addition to the award of compensation, in a compensation order, a reasonable attorney's fee against the employer or carrier in an amount approved by the person, administrative body or court before whom the service was performed, which shall be paid directly by the employer or carrier to the attorney for the claimant in a lump sum after the compensation order becomes final (Act, section 28(a)).
( b ) If the employer or carrier pays or tenders payment of compensation without an award pursuant to § 702.231 and section 14 (a) and (b) of this Act, and thereafter a controversy develops over the amount of additional compensation, if any, to which the employee may be entitled, the district director, administrative law judge, or Board shall set the matter for an informal conference and following such conference the district director, administrative law judge, or Board shall recommend in writing a disposition of the controversy. If the employer or carrier refuses to accept such written recommendation, within 14 days after its receipt by them, they shall pay or tender to the employee in writing the additional compensation, if any, to which they believe the employee is entitled. If the employee refuses to accept such payment or tender of compensation, and thereafter utilizes the services of an attorney at law, and if the compensation thereafter awarded is greater than the amount paid or tendered by the employer or carrier, a reasonable attorney's fee based solely upon the difference between the amount awarded and the amount tendered or paid shall be awarded in addition to the amount of compensation. The foregoing sentence shall not apply if the controversy relates to degree or length of disability, and if the employer or carrier offers to submit the case for evaluation by physicians employed or selected by the district director, as authorized by section 7(e) of the Act and § 702.408, and offers to tender an amount of compensation based upon the degree or length of disability found by the independent medical report at such time as an evaluation of disability can be made. If the claimant is successful in review proceedings before the Board or court in any such case an award may be made in favor of the claimant and against the employer or carrier for a reasonable attorney's fee for claimant's counsel in accord with the above provisions. In all other cases any claim for legal services shall not be assessed against the employer or carrier (see Act, section 28(b)).
#### Ivar Gundersen, Doing Business under the Name of Norse Ski Co., Appellant, *v.*All America Commerce Corp., Respondent.

First Department,

June 28, 1949.

*573
      *Eli T. Scott*for appellant.

*Meyer Kimmel*for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

After the jury was out, the learned trial court during the trial of a subsequent case received a written request for further instructions from the jury here in question, answered it in writing and directed the clerk to show to counsel on both sides the jury’s written request and the court’s written answer thereto. Plaintiff’s counsel advised the clerk that he objected and said the answer should be *“*No ” instead of *“*Yes ” as the court had answered, and asked that the. jury be brought back for further instructions; but the court directed that the note be sent to the jury with his answer as written. Plaintiff’s exception to the court’s written answer is noted in the record and considered by this court on plaintiff’s appeal.

The proper practice, and it is wise and salutary, is that further instructions requested by a jury after it has retired should be given by the justice presiding to the jury in open court when counsel for both sides are present or have been afforded the opportunity of being present, unless counsel on both sides consent to written instructions or to the requested reading of the record or parts thereof by the stenographer in the jury room. Proper practice, too, would be to have direct communication between counsel and the court on a written request of this kind *574instead of through the medium of the clerk, so that counsel may be afforded ample opportunity to make requests for further instructions on the subject of the jury’s inquiry and to obtain a ruling with respect to such requests.

In this case, however, the court’s written answer to the jury was substantially correct and in harmony with the court’s charge to which no exception or request had been made by either side, and in the light of this record and the correctness of the court’s answer, we think no prejudicial reversible error is presented. The jury’s verdict was a general one and the jury could have found that the burden of proof had not been sustained. The evidence supports the jury’s finding against plaintiff, who alone appeals, on either the question of breach or the question of damages.

The judgment appealed from should be affirmed, with costs to respondent.

Dore, J. P., Cohe, Caleahae, Vae Voorhis and Shieetag, JJ., concur.

Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. [See *post,*p. 1035.]
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 83 (Monday, April 30, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 25503]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-10273]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Proposal Review Panel for Materials Research; Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463 as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting:

    Name: Site visit review of the Materials Research Science and 
Engineering Center (MRSEC) at the University of Nebraska Lincoln by 
the Division of Materials Research (DMR) <greek-i>1203.
    Dates & Times: May 21, 2012; 7:15 a.m.-8:30 p.m., May 22, 2012; 
7:15 a.m.-3:00 p.m.
    Place: University of Nebraska Lincoln, Lincoln, NE.
    Type of Meeting: Part open.
    Contact Person for More Information: Dr. Sean L. Jones, Program 
Director, Materials Research Science and Engineering Centers 
Program, Division of Materials Research, Room 1065, National Science 
Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230, Telephone 
(703) 292-2986.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and recommendations 
concerning further support of the MRSEC at the University of 
Nebraska.

Agenda

Monday, May 21, 2012

7:15 a.m.-4:30 p.m. Open--Review of the MRSEC
5 p.m.-6:45 p.m. Closed--Executive Session
6:45 p.m.-8:30 p.m. Open--Dinner

Tuesday, May 22, 2012

7:15 a.m.-9:50 a.m. Closed--Executive Session
9:50 a.m.-3 p.m. Closed--Executive Session, Draft and Review Report
    Reason for Closing: The work being reviewed may include 
information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including 
technical information; financial data, such as salaries and personal 
information concerning individuals associated with the MRSEC. These 
matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and (6) of the 
Government in the Sunshine Act.

    Dated: April 24, 2012.
Susanne Bolton,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2012-10273 Filed 4-27-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Glenn L. Buck, Appellant, against Lester B. Rapp et al., as Councilmen of the City of Rochester, et al., Respondents.

Present—Crosby, P. J., Cunningham, Taylor, Dowling and McCurn, JJ.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsHybrid Thermal Control Testing of a Cryogenic Propellant TankThis report presents the experimental results of a hybrid thermal control system, one that integrates a passive system (multi-layer insulation) with an active system (a mechanical cyrocooler) applied to cryogenic propellant storage. These experiments were performed on a 1.39 m diameter spherical propellant tank filled with LH2 while installed in an evacuated chamber. The tank heat transfer to the cryocooler was accomplished with a condenser installed in the ullage of the tank and mated to the second stage of the cooler, and by conduction, through copper leaves mated to the first stage of the cooler. The first hybrid system test was performed with both the condenser and the leaves, a configuration that had excess capacity to remove the heat entering the tank; the second test was performed with only the condenser, with a capacity closely matched to the tank heating rate. In both of these tests, the goal of zero boil-off was achieved.Document ID19990081126Acquisition SourceGlenn Research CenterDocument TypeReprint (Version printed in journal)AuthorsPlachta, David W.*(NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland, OH United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateAugust 1, 1999Subject CategoryEngineering (General)Report/Patent NumberNASA/TM-1999-209389NAS 1.15:209389E-11818Meeting InformationMeeting: 1999 Cryogenic EngineeringLocation: Montreal, QuebecCountry: CanadaStart Date: July 12, 1999End Date: July 16, 1999Sponsors:Advances in Cryogenic EngineeringFunding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 242-81-10Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19990081126.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Roman RIOJAS-VICTORIO, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-51180.

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided Feb. 24, 2006.

Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Philip J. Lynch, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Roman Riojas-Victorio raises arguments that are foreclosed by *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), which held that a prior conviction is a sentencing factor under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
### §1300h–2. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 100–420, §4, Sept. 8, 1988, 102 Stat. 1577, which reaffirmed the Federal recognition of the band and the trust relationship between the United States and the band and provided for the band and its members to be eligible for all special programs and services provided by the United States to Indians because of their status as Indians, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
**Exhibit 31.(a)****CERTIFICATION**I, Donald R. Kimble, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A (Amendment No. 1) ofHuntington Preferred Capital, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial 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 misleadingwith respect to the period covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations, and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in ExchangeAct Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have: a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; and  b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent functions): a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably 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 orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting.Date: December 12, 2005       /s/ Donald R. Kimble     Donald R. Kimble, President
§ 672.310 What eligible activities may be funded under the YouthBuild program? Grantees may provide one or more of the following education and workforce investment and other activities to YouthBuild participants— ( a ) Eligible education activities include: ( 1 ) Services and activities designed to meet the educational needs of participants, including: ( i ) Basic skills instruction and remedial education;
( ii ) Language instruction educational programs for individuals with limited English proficiency;
( iii ) Secondary education services and activities, including tutoring, study skills training, and dropout prevention activities, designed to lead to the attainment of a secondary school diploma, GED credential, or other State- recognized equivalent (including recognized alternative standards for individuals with disabilities);
( iv ) Counseling and assistance in obtaining post-secondary education and required financial aid; and
( v ) Alternative secondary school services;
( 2 ) Counseling services and related activities, such as comprehensive guidance and counseling on drug and alcohol abuse and referral to appropriate treatment;
( 3 ) Activities designed to develop employment and leadership skills, which may include community service and peer-centered activities encouraging responsibility and other positive social behaviors, and activities related to youth policy committees that participate in decisionmaking related to the program; and
( 4 ) Supportive services, as defined under Title I of WIA Section 101(46), and provision of need-based stipends, as defined in § 672.110.
( b ) Eligible workforce investment activities include: ( 1 ) Work experience and skills training (coordinated, to the maximum extent feasible, with registered apprenticeship programs) in housing rehabilitation and construction activities described in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section;
( 2 ) Occupational skills training;
( 3 ) Other paid and unpaid work experiences, including internships and job shadowing; and
( 4 ) Job search assistance.
( c ) Other eligible activities include: ( 1 ) Supervision and training for participants in the rehabilitation or construction of housing, including residential housing for homeless individuals and families or low-income families, or transitional housing for homeless individuals and families;
( 2 ) Supervision and training for participants in the rehabilitation or construction of community or other public facilities, except that, as provided in § 672.505(b), not more than 10 percent of the funds awarded for each grant may be used for such supervision and training;
( 3 ) Ongoing training and technical assistance for staff of grant recipients that is related to developing and carrying out the YouthBuild program;
( 4 ) Payment of a portion of the administrative costs of the program as provided in § 672.505(a);
( 5 ) Adult mentoring;
( 6 ) Provision of wages, stipends, or additional benefits to participants in the program as provided in § 672.530; and
( 7 ) Follow-up services as provided in § 672.325.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsAerodynamic Characteristics and Control Effectiveness of the HL-20 Lifting Body Configuration at Mach 10 in AirA 0.0196-scale model of the HL-20 lifting-body, one of several configurations proposed for future crewed spacecraft, was tested in the Langley 31-Inch Mach 10 Tunnel. The purpose of the tests was to determine the effectiveness of fin-mounted elevons, a lower surface flush-mounted body flap, and a flush-mounted yaw controller at hypersonic speeds. The nominal angle-of-attack range, representative of hypersonic entry, was 2 deg to 41 deg, the sideslip angles were 0 deg, 2 deg, and -2 deg, and the test Reynolds number was 1.06 x 10 E6 based on model reference length. The aerodynamic, longitudinal, and lateral control effectiveness along with surface oil flow visualizations are presented and discussed. The configuration was longitudinally and laterally stable at the nominal center of gravity. The primary longitudinal control, the fin-mounted elevons, could not trim the model to the desired entry angle of attack of 30 deg. The lower surface body flaps were effective for roll control and the associated adverse yawing moment was eliminated by skewing the body flap hinge lines. A yaw controller, flush-mounted on the lower surface, was also effective, and the associated small rolling moment was favorable.Document ID19990117251Acquisition SourceLangley Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsScallion, William I.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton,VA United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateSeptember 1, 1999Subject CategoryAerodynamicsReport/Patent NumberNASA/TM-1999-209357L-17867NAS 1.15:209357Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 242-80-01-01Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19990117251.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024