alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER  PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, S. Bradford Antle, the Chief Executive Officer of SI International, Inc. (the "Company"), has executed this certification in connection
with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 29, 2007 (the "Report"). The
undersigned hereby certifies that:



Date:
March 12, 2008

| |  |        | /s/S. BRADFORD ANTLE                 
| |  | ------ | -------------------------------------
| |  | Name:  | S. Bradford Antle                    
| |  | Title: | President and Chief Executive Officer

---



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER  PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, Thomas E. Dunn, the Chief Financial Officer of SI International, Inc. (the "Company"), has executed this certification in connection with
the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 29, 2007 (the "Report"). The undersigned
hereby certifies that:



Date:
March 12, 2008

| |  |        | /s/THOMAS E. DUNN                                            
| |  | ------ | -------------------------------------------------------------
| |  | Name:  | Thomas E. Dunn                                               
| |  | Title: | Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer & Treasurer

---



QuickLinks
#### William Muhlenbeck, Respondent, v. Crosstown Street Railway Company of Buffalo and International Railway Company, Appellants.

Order affirmed, with costs. All concurred.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT NOVEMBER 30, 1998, THE CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME AT NOVEMBER 30, 1998, AND THE CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOW AT NOVEMBER 30, 1998, AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1998
<CASH>                                           2,193
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   19,436
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     15,309
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                41,148
<PP&E>                                         109,234
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 180,899
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           30,422
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         9,132
<OTHER-SE>                                      46,904
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   180,899
<SALES>                                         38,723
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                38,723
<CGS>                                           28,089
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   28,089
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 5,675
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,428
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,531
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,236
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,295
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,295
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.31
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.30
        

</TABLE>
### **Subchapter G—Breweries**

Part
I.
Establishment.
II.
Operations.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior subchapter G consisted of parts I and II, contained sections 5401 to 5403 and 5411 to 5416, respectively, prior to the general revision of this chapter by Pub. L. 85–859, title II, §201, Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1313.
#### § 3513.25 When will my suspension of operations and production (conservation concerns) take effect?

Your suspension takes effect on the date BLM specifies.
§ 4110.2-2 Specifying grazing preference. ( a ) All grazing permits and grazing leases will specify grazing preference, except for permits and leases for designated ephemeral rangelands, where BLM authorizes livestock use based upon forage availability, or designated annual rangelands. Preference includes active use and any suspended use. Active use is based on the amount of forage available for livestock grazing as established in the land use plan, activity plan, or decision of the authorized officer under § 4110.3-3, except, in the case of designated ephemeral or annual rangelands, a land use plan or activity plan may alternatively prescribe vegetation standards to be met in the use of such rangelands.
( b ) The grazing preference specified is attached to the base property supporting the grazing permit or grazing lease.
( c ) The animal unit months of grazing preference are attached to: ( 1 ) The acreage of land base property on a pro rata basis, or
( 2 ) Water base property on the basis of livestock forage production within the service area of the water.
[71 FR 39503, July 12, 2006]
§ 3105.21 Where filed. ( a ) An application to form a communitization agreement or modify an existing agreement must be filed with the proper BLM office for final approval.
( b ) An application for a communitization agreement must include: ( 1 ) A statement as to whether the proposed communitization agreement deviates from the BLM's current model communitization agreement form, and a certification that the applicant received the required signatures;
( 2 ) An Exhibit A displaying a map of the area covered by the proposed agreement and the separate agreement tracts; and
( 3 ) An Exhibit B displaying the separate tracts and ownership;
( c ) To ensure accurate reporting to ONRR, an application for a communitization agreement should be submitted at least 90 calendar days prior to first production.
( d ) An application for designations of successor operator for a communitization agreement must include the processing fee found in the fee schedule in § 3000.120 of this chapter.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-1069

ANTHONY C. CALLAHAM,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at 

Beaufort. Timothy M. Cain, District Judge. (9:16-cv-03591-TMC)

Submitted: November 27, 2018 Decided: December 21, 2018

Before WILKINSON and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Donald L. Pilzer, DON PILZER LAW, PC, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellant. 

Beth Drake, United States Attorney, Barbara M. Bowens, Assistant United States 

Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina; 

Nora Koch, Regional Chief Counsel, Taryn Jasner, Supervisory Attorney, Kristina C.E. 

Cole, Assistant Regional Counsel, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Anthony C. Callaham appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate 

judge’s recommendation and upholding the Administrative Law Judge’s (ALJ) denial of 

Callaham’s application for disability insurance benefits. “In social security proceedings, 

a court of appeals applies the same standard of review as does the district court. That is, 

a reviewing court must uphold the determination when an ALJ has applied correct legal 

standards and the ALJ’s factual findings are supported by substantial evidence.” Brown 

v. Comm’r Soc. Sec. Admin., 873 F.3d 251, 267 (4th Cir. 2017) (citation and internal 

quotation marks omitted). 

We have reviewed the administrative record, including the transcript of 

Callaham’s hearing before the ALJ, in conjunction with Callaham’s brief on appeal, and 

find no error. Specifically, despite Callaham’s assertion to the contrary, we conclude the 

ALJ applied the correct legal standard* in evaluating Callaham’s subjective claims as to 

the intensity, persistence, and effect of his pain. See Ladda v. Berryhill, No. 17-1366, 

2018 WL 5096065, at *4 (4th Cir. Oct. 18, 2018) (argued but unpublished). We also 

reject Callaham’s challenge to the standard employed by the district court in conducting 

its review of the ALJ’s ruling. Accord Ealy v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 594 F.3d 504, 512 

(6th Cir. 2010) (recognizing that the court of appeals reviews a district court’s decision in 

a social security case “de novo,” but that the appellate court’s “review is limited to 

 * See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b)-(c) (2018).
3

determining whether the Commissioner’s decision is supported by substantial evidence 

and was made pursuant to proper legal standards” (internal quotation marks omitted)). 

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment upholding the denial of 

benefits. See Callaham v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., No. 9:16-cv-03591-TMC (D.S.C. 

Dec. 11, 2017). 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.

AFFIRMED
- Skip to global NPS navigation
    - Skip to the main content
    - Skip to the footer section

National Park Service**Search

# **OpenMenu**CloseMenu

## Explore This Park

## Explore the National Park Service

## Exiting nps.gov

#### Contact Us

Thing to Do

# Backcountry Hiking South Bluff

Scotts Bluff National Monument
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 20-80763-CV-MIDDLEBROOKS

(Case no. 18-80219-CR-MIDDLEBROOKS)

MAGISTRATE JUDGE REID

STEVEN SNIPE, 

Movant,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondent. 

_________________________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Magistrate Judge Lisette Reid’s Report and 

Recommendation (DE 10) (“Report”) regarding Movant Steven Snipe’s Motion to Vacate under 

28 U.S.C. §2255. The Report was entered on October 9, 2020. No objections have been filed, 

and the deadline to do so expired on October 23, 2020. Upon consideration of the Report, I 

agree with Judge Reid’s reasoning and conclusions. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND 

ADJUDGED that: 

(1) Magistrate Judge Reid’s Report (DE 10) is ADOPTED.

(2) Steven Snipe’s Amended Motion to Vacate under 28 U.S.C. §2255 (DE 8) is 

DENIED. 

(3) I have considered the standard set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) and conclude that 

movant cannot make the requisite showing. As a result, no certificate of appealability 

shall issue.

Case 9:20-cv-80763-DMM Document 11 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/19/2020 Page 1 of 2
2

(4) The Clerk of the Court is directed to CLOSE THIS CASE.

(5) All pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT. 

SIGNED in Chambers in West Palm Beach, Florida, this 18th day of November, 2020.

Donald M. Middlebrooks

United States District Judge

Copies to: Counsel of Record

Steven Snipe

19356-104

Petersburg Medium

Federal Correctional Institution

Inmate Mail/Parcels

Post Office Box 1000

Petersburg, VA 23804

PRO SE

Case 9:20-cv-80763-DMM Document 11 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/19/2020 Page 2 of 2
### §5272. Bonds

#### (a) Requirements

Before any permit required by section 5271(a) is granted, the Secretary may require a bond, in such form and amount as he may prescribe, to insure compliance with the terms of the permit and the provisions of this chapter.

#### (b) Exceptions

No bond shall be required in the case of permits issued to the United States or any governmental agency thereof, or to the several States or any political subdivision thereof, or to the District of Columbia.

(Added Pub. L. 85–859, title II, §201, Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1372; amended Pub. L. 94–455, title XIX, §§1905(c)(3), 1906(b)(13)(A), Oct. 4, 1976, 90 Stat. 1823, 1834.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 5272, act Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 650, related to requirement and approval of bond as condition to commencing business of rectifier of spirits, prior to the general revision of this chapter by Pub. L. 85–859. See section 5173(a), (d) of this title.

Provisions similar to those comprising this section were contained in prior sections 5304(a)(5) and 5310(d), act Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 655, 658, prior to the general revision of this chapter by Pub. L. 85–859.

#### Amendments

1976—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 94–455, §1906(b)(13)(A), struck out "or his delegate" after "Secretary".

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 94–455, §1905(c)(3), struck out "and Territories" after "several States".

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

#### Effective Date of 1976 Amendment

Amendment by section 1905(c)(3) of Pub. L. 94–455 effective on first day of first month which begins more than 90 days after Oct. 4, 1976, see section 1905(d) of Pub. L. 94–455, set out as a note under section 5005 of this title.
#### § 3712.2-3 Contents of published notice.

Section 5(a) of the Act specifies in detail what the published notice shall contain, as follows:

Such notice shall describe the lands covered by such request, as provided heretofore, and shall notify whomever it may concern that if any person claiming or asserting under, or by virtue of, any unpatented mining claim heretofore located, rights as to such lands or any part thereof, shall fail to file in the office where such request for publication was filed (which office shall be specified in such notice) and within one hundred and fifty days from the date of the first publication of such notice (which date shall be specified in such notice), a verified statement which shall set forth, as to such unpatented mining claim—

(1) The date of location;

(2) The book and page of recordation of the notice or certificate of location;

(3) The section or sections of the public land surveys which embrace such mining claims; or if such lands are unsurveyed, either the section or sections which would probably embrace such mining claim when the public land surveys are extended to such lands or a tie by courses and distances to an approved United States mineral monument;

(4) Whether such claimant is a locator or purchaser under such location; and

(5) The name and address of such claimant and names and addresses so far as known to the claimant of any other person or persons claiming any interest or interests in or under such unpatented mining claim: such failure shall be conclusively deemed (i) to constitute a waiver and relinquishment by such mining claimant of any right, title or interest under such mining claim contrary to or in conflict with the limitations or restrictions specified in section 4 of this Act as to hereafter located unpatented mining claims, and (ii) to constitute a consent by such mining claimant that such mining claim, prior to issuance of patent therefor, shall be subject to the limitations and restrictions specified in section 4 of this Act as to hereafter located unpatented mining claims, and (iii) to preclude thereafter, prior to issuance of patent, any assertion by such mining claimant of any right or title to or interest in or under such mining claim contrary to or in conflict with the limitations or restrictions specified in section 4 of this Act as to hereafter located unpatented mining claims.
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. William Mueller, Respondent, against Velma Mueller, Appellant.

Order sustaining a writ of habeas corpus and awarding the care, custody and control of the infant son of the parties to his paternal grandmother, affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Lewis, P. J., Johnston, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ., concur.
#### § 429.37 Does interest accrue on monies owed to the United States during my appeal process?

Except for any period in the appeal process during which a stay is then in effect, interest on any nonpayment or underpayment, as provided in § 429.33(a), continues to accrue during an appeal of a Regional Director's final determination, an appeal of the Commissioner's decision to OHA, or during judicial review of final agency action.
Skip to global NPS navigation
Skip to the main content
Skip to the footer section






National Park Service Search Search
This Site
All NPS
 Open
Menu
Close
Menu
Explore This Park
Explore the National Park Service


Exiting nps.gov
  Cancel


Spanish Missions/Misiones Españolas





Contact Us
  Comparte tus experiencias -- Itinerario de viaje de las Misiones Coloniales Españolas del Suroeste
 Page in English
 Use the hashtag: #TravelSpanishMissions to post photographs of your trip online.
 facebook **Facebook:**https://www.facebook.com/hashtag/travelspanishmissions
 Flickr_images Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/search/?q=travelspanishmissions
 Instagram_Multi-Color_Logo_thumbnail200 Instagram:
 https://instagram.com/explore/tags/travelspanishmissions/
 pinterest Pinterest:
 https://www.pinterest.com/search/pins/?q=%23TravelSpanishMission
 Twitter_logo_safteyspace Twitter:
 https://twitter.com/hashtag/travelspanishmissions
 We will check these sites for great photographs, but if you are particularly proud of a photograph, e-mail us to let us know, with the url, and maybe we'll share it. Use the "Comments or Questions" e-mail link below.
 *Comentario o Pregunta*
 **^CIMA**
 Last updated: July 29, 2015
 Tools Site Index


This Site
All NPS 
  National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior
 Accessibility
Privacy Policy
FOIA
Notices
Contact The National Park Service NPS FAQ
No Fear Act
Disclaimer
Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
USA.gov Facebook
Youtube
Twitter
Instagram
Flickr
#### § 6.54 Use or manufacture by or for the Government.

A license is not required with respect to the manufacture or use of any invention assigned or required to be assigned without restrictions or qualifications to the United States when such manufacture or use is by or for the Government for governmental purposes. A license or sublicense may be required, however, for such manufacture or use in the case of Class B patents or patent rights when the terms under which the Secretary of the Interior acquires interests therein necessitate the issuance of a license or sublicense in such circumstances.

[31 FR 10796, Aug. 13, 1966]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>             5
<LEGEND>
         This schedule  contains summary  financial  information  extracted from
         Quantitative   Methods   Corporation   September  30,  1999   financial
         statements  and is  qualified  in its  entirety  by  reference  to such
         financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<CIK>                 0000894561
<NAME>                Quantitative Methods Corporation
<CURRENCY>            US


<S>                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                        SEP-30-1999

<EXCHANGE-RATE>                     1.00

<CASH>                                           0
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    117,861
<ALLOWANCES>                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                      0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 123,816
<PP&E>                                           97,078
<DEPRECIATION>                                   41,502
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   285,610
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            342,177
<BONDS>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<COMMON>                                         10,300
<OTHER-SE>                                       (194,946)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     285,610
<SALES>                                          0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 0
<CGS>                                            0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 429,382
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,651
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (429,382)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (429,382)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (429,382)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.04)



</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                  Exhibit 23.1

                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT







The Board of Directors
LSB Corporation:


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on
Form S-8 (No. 333-65438) of LSB Corporation of our report dated January 17,
2003, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of LSB Corporation and
subsidiaries as of December 31, 2002 and 2001, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, changes in stockholders' equity and cash flows for
each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2002, which report
is incorporated by reference into the December 31, 2002 annual report on Form
10-K of LSB Corporation.





                                                /s/ KPMG LLP
                                                ---------------------------
                                                KPMG LLP


Boston, Massachusetts
March 27, 2003
REGULATORY EVALUATION

Directorate Identifier: 2011-NM-134-AD

Costs:

Labor per airplane (4 work hours x $85/hour) $ 340

Parts per airplane $ + 0

Cost per airplane $ 340

Number of U.S.-registered airplanes 

x

 27

Total fleet cost $0*

*Dassault reported that the modification will take 140–144 work hours per airplane, and 

will be done at no cost to operators.

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific 

requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of 

transportation?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)
Case 9:20-cv-80869-RS Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/29/2020 Page 1 of 5
Case 9:20-cv-80869-RS Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/29/2020 Page 2 of 5
Case 9:20-cv-80869-RS Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/29/2020 Page 3 of 5
Case 9:20-cv-80869-RS Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/29/2020 Page 4 of 5
Case 9:20-cv-80869-RS Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/29/2020 Page 5 of 5