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

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Leslie J. Kessler, Chief Executive Officer of Water Chef, Inc., hereby
certify that the Form 10-KSB of Water Chef, Inc. for the period ended December
31, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in such report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of Water Chef, Inc.

                                            /s/  Leslie J. Kessler
                                            --------------------------------
                                                 Leslie J. Kessler, President
                                                 and Chief Executive Officer
 Date: April 14, 2007


These certifications are being furnished pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act, shall not be deemed to be filed as part of the periodic
report described herein nor shall they be deemed filed by Water Chef, Inc. for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of the written statements required by Section 906 has been
provided to Water Chef, Inc. and will be retained by Water Chef, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
§ 947.815 Performance standards—coal exploration. ( a ) Part 815 of this chapter, *Permanent Program Performance Standards—Coal Exploration,* shall apply to any person conducting coal exploration operations.
( b ) Any person who conducts coal exploration operations shall comply with the Washington Forest Practices Act, RCW 76.09, and regulations promulgated pursuant to it.
### §217. Trading in captured or abandoned property

All persons in the military or naval service of the United States are prohibited from buying or selling, trading, or in any way dealing in captured or abandoned property, whereby they shall receive or expect any profit, benefit, or advantage to themselves, or any other person, directly or indirectly connected with them; and it shall be the duty of such person whenever such property comes into his possession or custody, or within his control, to give notice thereof to some agent, appointed by virtue of this chapter, and to turn the same over to such agent without delay. Any officer of the United States, civil, military, or naval, or any sutler, soldier, or marine, or other person who shall violate any provision of this section, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall be fined not more than $5,000, and imprisoned in the penitentiary not more than three years. Violations of this section shall be cognizable before any court, civil or military, competent to try the same.

(R.S. §5313.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

R.S. §5313 derived from act July 2, 1864, ch. 225, §10, 13 Stat. 377.
Order entered January 25, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-11-00947-CR

No. 05-11-00948-CR

LAWRENCE REYNOLDS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F07-38808-M

ORDER

The Court REINSTATES the appeals.

On February 3, 2012 and November 15, 2012, the Court ordered the trial court to make 

findings regarding why appellant’s brief has not been filed in these appeals. We ADOPT the 

findings that: (1) appellant desires to pursue the appeals; (2) appellant is indigent and 

represented by court-appointed counsel David Pire; (3) the original paperwork regarding Mr. 

Pire’s appointment to represent appellant was lost or misplaced and the trial court has executed 

new appointment paperwork; (4) Mr. Pire has begun work on appellant’s brief; and (5) Mr. Pire 

can file appellant’s brief within thirty days of the January 18, 2013 hearing.
We ORDER appellant to file his brief by TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 19, 2013. Because 

appellant’s brief is already more than one year overdue, no further extensions will be granted.

We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order, by electronic transmission, to 

counsel for all parties.

/s/ DAVID W. EVANS

JUSTICE
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 9825 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 9825

   To amend the Head Start Act to include TANF, SSI, SNAP, WIC, and 
       federal housing assistance as eligible public assistance.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 25, 2024

Mr. Garamendi introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend the Head Start Act to include TANF, SSI, SNAP, WIC, and 
       federal housing assistance as eligible public assistance.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Expanding Head Start Eligibility Act 
of 2024''.

SEC. 2. DEFINITION.

     Section 637 of the Head Start Act (42 U.S.C. 9832) is amended--
            (1) by redesignating paragraphs (25) and (26) as paragraphs 
        (26) and (27), respectively, and
            (2) by inserting after paragraph (24) the following:
            ``(25) The term `public assistance', as defined by the 
        Secretary, shall include--
                    ``(A) assistance received under part A of title IV 
                of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
                    ``(B) benefits received under title XVI of the 
                Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.);
                    ``(C) supplemental nutrition assistance program 
                benefits received under the Food and Nutrition Act of 
                2008 (7 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.);
                    ``(D) the nutrition assistance program (NAP) under 
                section 19 of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 
                U.S.C. 2018) and the food distribution program on 
                Indian Reservations (FDPIR) under section 4(a) of the 
                Consumer Protection Act of 1973 (7 U.S.C. 612c note);
                    ``(E) State-funded food assistance programs, with 
                income eligibility standards identical or substantially 
                identical to those of the supplemental nutrition 
                assistance program under of the Food and Nutrition Act 
                of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.);
                    ``(F) assistance received under section 17 of the 
                Child Nutrition Act (42 U.S.C. 1786 et seq.);
                    ``(G) assistance received under section 8 of the 
                United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f et 
                seq.); and
                    ``(H) additional benefits and assistance provided 
                under Federal law as determined by the Secretary.''.
                                 <all>
```
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

FRODY HERMINIO ACEVEDOGUDIEL; HERMINIO ANTONIO

ACEVEDO-PEREZ,

 Petitioners,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 08-74861

Agency Nos. A097-340-345

 A070-076-043

MEMORANDUM*

HERMINIO ANTONIO ACEVEDOPEREZ,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 11-71496

Agency No. A070-076-043

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

FILED

MAY 27 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

2 08-74861

Submitted May 24, 2011** 

Before: PREGERSON, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

Frody Herminio Acevedo-Gudiel and Herminio Antonio Acevedo-Perez,

natives and citizens of Guatemala, petition for review of the Board of Immigration

Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s

decision denying their applications for asylum and withholding of removal. We

have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence

factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). 

We deny in part and grant in part the petition for review as to Acevedo-Gudiel, and

we remand his claims to the BIA for further proceedings. By separate order, we

open a new petition for review as to Acevedo-Perez and transfer his claims to that

separate petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s conclusion that Acevedo-Gudiel

did not suffer past persecution based on his mistreatment, including threats, by

gang members. See Lim, 224 F.3d at 936-37. As Acevedo-Gudiel has not

established past persecution, he is not entitled to a presumption of future

persecution. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(b)(1); Molina-Estrada, 293 F.3d at 1096. 
3 08-74861

With respect to future persecution, the agency did not consider Acevedo-Gudiel’s

claim based on his imputed political opinion. See Sagaydak v. Gonzales, 403 F.3d

1035, 1040 (9th Cir. 2005) (agency may not ignore arguments raised by a

petitioner). Accordingly, we deny in part and grant in part the petition for review

as to Acevedo-Gudiel, A097-340-345, and remand his asylum and withholding of

removal claims for further proceedings. See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-18

(2002) (per curiam). 

By separate order filed concurrently with this disposition, we have opened a

new petition for review as to Herminio Antonio Acevedo-Perez, A070-076-043,

and transferred his claims to that petition: No. 11-71496.

The docket is closed as to No. 08-74861.

Each party shall bear its own costs for this petition for review.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; GRANTED in part;

REMANDED.
§ 147.6 Guidance D—Sexual behavior. ( a ) *The concern.* Sexual behavior is a security concern if it involves a criminal offense, indicates a personality or emotional disorder, may subject the individual to coercion, exploitation, or duress, or reflects lack of judgment or discretion.[1] Sexual orientation or preference may not be used as a basis for or a disqualifying factor in determining a person's eligibility for a security clearance.
( b ) *Conditions that could raise a security concern and may be disqualifying include:* ( 1 ) Sexual behavior of a criminal nature, whether or not the individual has been prosecuted;
( 2 ) Compulsive or addictive sexual behavior when the person is unable to stop a pattern or self-destructive or high-risk behavior or that which is symptomatic of a personally disorder;
( 3 ) Sexual behavior that causes an individual to be vulnerable to coercion, exploitation, or duress;
( 4 ) Sexual behavior of a public nature and/or that which reflects lack of discretion or judgment.
( c ) *Conditions that could mitigate security concerns include:* ( 1 ) The behavior occurred during or prior to adolescence and there is no evidence of subsequent conduct of a similar nature;
( 2 ) The behavior was not recent and there is no evidence of subsequent conduct of a similar nature;
( 3 ) There is no other evidence of questionable judgment, irresponsibility, or emotional instability;
( 4 ) The behavior no longer serves as a basis for coercion, exploitation, or duress.
Footnotes -
147.6
[1] The adjudicator should also consider guidelines pertaining to criminal conduct (Guideline J) and emotional, mental and personality disorders (Guideline I) in determining how to resolve the security concerns raised by sexual behavior.
AFS-10-167-E March 12, 2010 Exemption No. 9704A Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2008-0332

Mr. Ian A. Shavitz Counsel for Inter American University of Puerto Rico Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld, LLP 1333 New Hampshire Avenue, NW. Washington, DC 20036

Dear Mr. Shavitz:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption No. 9704. It explains the basis for our decision and describes its effect.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated February 12, 2010, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Inter American University of Puer to Rico (Inter American) for an extension of Exemption No. 9704. That exemption from § 61.129(a)(4) and part 141, appendix D, paragraph 5(a) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations allows Inter American’s commercial pilot students to satisfy their cross-country flight of no less than 300 nautical miles (nm ) total distance, with landings at a minimum of three poi nts, one of which is a straight-line distance of at least 150 nm from the original departure point.

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition

in the Federal Register because the requested extension of the exemption would not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Inter American.2

Our Decision

The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 9704 remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I grant your petition, subject to the conditions and limitations below.

Conditions and Limitations

1. The cross-country flight must be accomplished as a solo flight.

2. The commercial student’s logbook must be endorsed by the certificated flight instructor (CFI) as follows: “I certify that (INSERT STUDENT’S FIRST NAME, MIDDLE INITIAL, LAST NAME), (INSERT PILOT CERTIFICATE), (INSERTCERTIFICATE NUMBER), has satisfactorily completed the solo single-engine crosscountry flight in Puerto Rico in accordance with the provision of FAA Exemption No. 9704 on (INSERT DATE). S/S (INSERT DATE) (INSERT CFI NAME), (INSERT CFI CERTIFICATE NUMBER), EXPIRATION DATE (INSERT DATE).

The Effect of Our Decision

Our decision extends the termination date of Exemption No. 9704 to May 31, 2012, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Sincerely,

/s/

John W. McGraw Acting Director, Flight Standards

Service
#### § 933.815 Performance standards—coal exploration.

Part 815 of this chapter, *Permanent Program Performance Standards—Coal Exploration,* shall apply to any person conducting coal exploration operations.
§ 585.410 When will my assignment result in a segregated lease? ( a ) When there is an assignment by all record title owners of 100 percent of the record title to one or more aliquots in a lease, the assigned and retained portions become segregated into separate and distinct leases. In such a case, both the new lease and the remaining portion of the original lease are referred to as “segregated leases” and the assignee becomes the record title owner of the new lease, which is subject to all the terms and conditions of the original lease. The financial assurance requirements of subpart F of this part apply separately to each segregated lease.
( b ) If a record title owner transfers an undivided interest of less than 100 percent of the record title interest in any given aliquot, that transfer will not segregate the portions of that aliquot, or the whole aliquot, in which part of the record title was transferred, into a separate lease from the portions in which no interest was transferred. Instead, that transfer will create a joint ownership between the assignee and assignor in the portions of the lease in which part of the record title interest was transferred.
( c ) When a lease becomes segregated, BOEM may issue separate Plan approvals for a segregated lease or take other actions within its discretion.
### §740. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, act May 5, 1950, ch. 169, §12, 64 Stat. 147, which authorized the Judge Advocate General of any of the armed forces to grant a new trial, vacate a sentence, restore rights and property, and substitute an administrative discharge for a dismissal or for a dishonorable or bad-conduct discharge in any court-martial case for offenses committed during World War II upon application made within one year after termination of the war or after final disposition upon initial appellate review, whichever was the later, limited new trial applications to one as to any one case, and provided that World War II was deemed to have ended as of May 31, 1951.

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Executive Order No. 10190

Ex. Ord. No. 10190, Dec. 6, 1950, 15 F.R. 8711, provided for the petition to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy or to the General Counsel of the Treasury Department, in respect to violations of Navy or Coast Guard disciplinary laws committed between Dec. 7, 1941 and May 30, 1951, for a new trial, the vacatur of sentence and restoration of rights and property, or the substitution of an administrative discharge for a dismissal, dishonorable discharge, or bad-conduct discharge; limited such petition to within one year after final disposition of the case upon initial appellate review or to any time before May 31, 1952 (whichever was the later date); prohibited submission of more than one such petition in any one case and submission after death of an accused; specified the ground for relief and the form and contents of the petition; permitted oral agreement; prescribed the rules for a hearing; authorized additional investigation; required the action granting or denying a remedy to be in writing and published; provided the procedure for a new trial; and specified the effect of a new trial upon the prior trial and sentence.
#### § 1630.46 Class 4-T: Treaty alien.

In Class 4-T shall be placed any registrant who is an alien who established that he is exempt from military service under the terms of a treaty or international agreement between the United States and the country of which he is a national, and who has made application to be exempted from liability for training and service in the Armed Forces of the United States.
#### In the Matter of George T. Scuiletti, Appellant, v. John F. Sheridan, as Chief of Police of the Town of Greenburgh, et al., Respondents.

In a proceeding under article 73 of the Civil Practice Act: (a) to annul the determination of respondent Smith, the Town Clerk of the Town of Greenburgh, and the determination of the respondents Vetrano, Coyle, Massaro, Suehin and Richman, constituting the Town Board, denying without a hearing the petitioner’s application for a taxicab driver’s license under section 5 of the Taxicab Ordinance of said town; (b) to compel respondent Sheridan, the town Chief of Police, to approve the application; and (e) to compel the Town Clerk and the Town Board to issue the license, petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated August 15, 1960, dismissing his petition on the merits. Order reversed without costs, and proceeding remitted to the respondents: (a) for the purpose of having the respondent Chief of Police conduct appropriate hearings on notice; and (b) for the purpose of having said respondent and the other respondents make their respective determinations on the basis of all the proof which may be adduced at such hearings. The petitioner and the respondents should submit, at such hearings, all the pertinent evidence as to petitioner’s general character and fitness. Since any determination by the respondent Chief of Police approving or disapproving petitioner’s application, and since any subsequent determination by the other respondents granting or denying the application, are of a judicial nature, due process requires that appropriate hearings first be held for the purpose indicated *(Matter of Hecht*v. Monaghan, 307 N. Y. 461). Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Kleinfeid, Christ and Pette, JJ., concur.
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**





**CERTIFICATION
      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 Annual Report of Simclar, Inc, (the “Company”) on Form 10-K
      for the period ending December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Barry J. Pardon,
      President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(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 result of operations of the
                Company.






/s/
      Barry
      J. Pardon


Barry
      J.
      Pardon, President


Simclar,
      Inc.


April
      6,
      2007
§ 946.13 State program provisions set aside. ( a ) Paragraphs 3.01(a)(1), 3.01(a)(4) and 3.01(a)(5) of the Virginia Coal Surface Mining and Reclamation Regulations for Operations Disturbing Two Surface Acres or Less are inconsistent with and less effective than the Federal provisions for the two-acre exemption and are set aside in their entirety under the provisions of section 505(b) of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977.
( b ) [Reserved]
[50 FR 32851, Aug. 15, 1985]
!

!

! Lander

Pinedale

Rock Springs

£¤191 £¤189

£¤287

£¤30

£¤191

¬«28

¬«789

§ ̈¦80

o

0 5 10 20

Miles

0 10 20 5

Kilometers

LUP Amendments Planning Area

BLM Field Office Boundary

Rock Springs Grazing Allotments

Counties

Water

Interstate

State / US Hwy

Cities

NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY THE BLM FOR USE OF THE DATA FOR PURPOSES NOT INTENDED BY BLM.

Wyoming Sage-grouse

Land Use Plan Amendments

Map 3-7: Livestock

Grazing Allotments

Rock Springs Field Office
§ 933.772 Requirements for coal exploration. ( a ) Part 772 of this chapter, *Requirements for Coal Exploration,* shall apply to any person who conducts or seeks to conduct coal exploration operations.
( b ) The Office shall make every effort to act on an exploration application within 60 days of receipt or such longer time as may be reasonable under the circumstances. If additional time is needed, OSMRE shall notify the applicant that the application is being reviewed, but more time is necessary to complete such review, setting forth the reasons and the additional time that is needed.
[52 FR 13811, Apr. 24, 1987]
### §20987. Consultation with Standards Board and Board of Advisors

The Commission shall carry out its duties under this part in consultation with the Standards Board and the Board of Advisors.

(Pub. L. 107–252, title II, §247, Oct. 29, 2002, 116 Stat. 1692.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 15387 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.
### **CHAPTER 1031—APPROPRIATIONS AND ACCOUNTING**

Sec.
103101.
Availability and use of appropriations.
103102.
Appropriations authorized and available for certain purposes.
103103.
Amounts provided by private entities for utility services.
103104.
Recovery of costs associated with special use permits.
#### § 937.701 General.

Sections 700.5, 700.11, 700.12, 700.13, 700.14, 700.15 and part 701 of this chapter shall apply to surface coal mining operations in Oregon.