alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 147.9 Guideline G—Alcohol consumption. ( a ) *The concern.* Excessive alcohol consumption often leads to the exercise of questionable judgment, unreliability, failure to control impulses, and increases the risk of unauthorized disclosure of classified information due to carelessness.
( b ) *Conditions that could raise a security concern and may be disqualifying include:* ( 1 ) Alcohol-related incidents away from work, such as driving while under the influence, fighting, child or spouse abuse, or other criminal incidents related to alcohol use;
( 2 ) Alcohol-related incidents at work, such as reporting for work or duty in an intoxicated or impaired condition, or drinking on the job;
( 3 ) Diagnosis by a credentialed medical professional (e.g., physician, clinical psychologist, or psychiatrist) of alcohol abuse or alcohol dependence;
( 4 ) Evaluation of alcohol abuse or alcohol dependence by a licensed clinical social worker who is a staff member of a recognized alcohol treatment program;
( 5 ) Habitual or binge consumption of alcohol to the point of impaired judgment;
( 6 ) Consumption of alcohol, subsequent to a diagnosis of alcoholism by a credentialed medical professional and following completion of an alcohol rehabilitation program.
( c ) *Conditions that could mitigate security concerns include:* ( 1 ) The alcohol related incidents do not indicate a pattern;
( 2 ) The problem occurred a number of years ago and there is no indication of a recent problem;
( 3 ) Positive changes in behavior supportive of sobriety;
( 4 ) Following diagnosis of alcohol abuse or alcohol dependence, the individual has successfully completed impatient or outpatient rehabilitation along with aftercare requirements, participates frequently in meetings of Alcoholics Anonymous or a similar organization, has abstained from alcohol for a period of at least 12 months, and received a favorable prognosis by a credentialed medical professional or a licensed clinical social worker who is a staff member of a recognized alcohol treatment program.
## 3DR X8+ 

## OVERVIEW Includes

• Controller with live on

- screen flight data

• Flight battery and charger

• Operation Manual and Flight Checklist

• Ground station radio with USB and Android adapters 

## Specs:

• Battery: 4S 14.8V 10,000 mAh 10C

• Battery Dimensions: 6.6 in x 2.6 in x 1.4 in (16.7 cm x 6.5 cm x 3.5 cm)

• Battery Weight: 803 g

• Autopilot hardware: Pixhawk v2.4.5

• Autopilot firmware: ArduCopter 3.2

• GPS: 3DR u

- blox GPS with Compass (LEA

- 6H module, 5 Hz update)

• Ground Station Radio: 3DR Radio v2 (915 MHz or 433 MHz)

• Motors: SunnySky V2216

- 12 KV800 II (The images above show conical nuts; X8+ ships with hex nuts.)

• Controller: FlySky FS

- TH9X with FrSky te lemetry module

• Frame Type: X

• Propellers: APC Propeller 11x4.7 SF (4), APC Propeller 11x4.7 SFP (4)

• Vehicle Dimensions: 13.7 in x 20.1 in x 11.8 in (35 cm x 51 cm x 20 cm)

• Payload Capacity: 800 g (1.7 lbs). Additional payload possible up to over 1kg with re duced flight time.

• Vehicle Weight with Battery: 2.56 kg (5.6 lbs)

• Maximum Estimated Flight Time: 15 min Select your frequency: Ground station radios allow you to communicate with your aircraft wirelessly in flight. For the US, select 915 MHz. Frequency reg ulations vary by country, so consult your local airspace communication authority if you're uncertain which frequency is legal in your area. Visit the X8+ Information Portal for instructions, software downloads, and user guides.
Appeal No. 76-456.

#### Filomena Ucci *v.*James Mancini *et al.*

*Joseph F. Penza, Jr.,*for plaintiff.

*William F. Hague, Jr.,*for defendant.

The plaintiff’s motion to affirm the judgment below pursuant to Rule 16(g) is denied.
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A16A1005. FIREMAN’S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY v. DEVILLE.

We granted Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company’s application forinterlocutory

review of the State Court of Fulton County’s order denying its motion for summary

judgment.

After reviewing the record in its entirety, we find that judicial economy is not

served by granting the application. Accordingly, the order granting Fireman’s Fund

Insurance Company’s application for interlocutory appeal is vacated, and its appeal

is dismissed as improvidently granted. See J.S. Jones Constr. Co. v. Moore, 138 Ga.

App. 260, 260 (226 SE2d 100) (1976).

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

07/27/2016

July 27, 2016
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 Lancer Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2003, as filed with the United States Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Christopher D.
Hughes, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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,
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.  June 28,
  2004
  /s/
  CHRISTOPHER D. HUGHESChristopher
  D. Hughes,Chief
  Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.2

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 Quarterly Report of Twenty Services, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, David J. Noble, Chairman/Director and Principal Executive Officer 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 results of operations of the Company.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ David J. NobleDavid J. NobleChairman/Director And Principal Executive
Officer11/14/06Date
§ 161.4 Policy. ( a ) It is DoD policy that a distinct DoD ID card shall be issued to uniformed service members, their dependents, DoD civilian employees, and other eligible individuals and will be used as proof of identity and DoD affiliation.
( b ) DoD ID cards shall serve as the Geneva Convention Card for eligible personnel in accordance with DoD Instruction 1000.1, “Identity Cards Required by the Geneva Convention” (available at *http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/100001p.pdf*).
( c ) DoD ID cards shall be issued through a secure and authoritative process in accordance with DoD Instruction 1000.25, “DoD Personnel Identity Protection (PIP) Program” (available at *http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/100025p.pdf*).
( d ) The CAC, a form of DoD ID card, shall serve as the Federal Personal Identity Verification (PIV) card for DoD implementation of Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12, “Policy for a Common Identification Standard for Federal Employees and Contractors” (available at *http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/laws/gc_1217616624097.shtm*).
( e ) ID cards, in a form distinct from the CAC, shall be issued and will serve as proof of identity and DoD affiliation for eligible communities that do not require the Federal PIV card that complies with Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12 and FIPS Publication 201-3, “Personal Identity Verification (PIV) of Federal Employees and Contractors” (available at *https://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.FIPS.201-3*).
[79 FR 709, Jan. 6, 2014, as amended at 81 FR 74877, Oct. 27, 2016; 89 FR 11179, Feb. 14, 2024]
EXHIBIT
      32.2*








Section
      1350 Certification








I,
      Steven G. Larson, the chief
      financial officer of LaserCard Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the
“Company”), certify pursuant to section 1350 of chapter 63 of title 18 of
      the United States Code that, to my knowledge:





(i)           the
      Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ending
      September 30, 2007 (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of
      section 13(a) or 15(d), whichever is applicable, of the Securities Exchange
      Act
      of 1934, and





(ii)           
      the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.





Date:  November
        5, 2007


/s/Steven
      G. Larson


Steven
      G.
      Larson








_______________________





*           The
      material contained in this Exhibit 32.2 is not deemed “filed” with the SEC and
      is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under
      the
      Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, whether made
      before or after the date hereof and irrespective of any general incorporation
      language contained in such filing.





47
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                   5
<MULTIPLIER>                            1,000
       
<S>                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                 DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                      SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                  1,425
<SECURITIES>                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                          18,114
<ALLOWANCES>                            1,060
<INVENTORY>                            14,083
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                       34,445
<PP&E>                                  5,542
<DEPRECIATION>                          9,725
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                         45,717
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                  27,424
<BONDS>                                     0
<COMMON>                                2,345
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       0
<PREFERRED>                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                             15,948
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>           45,717
<SALES>                                25,388
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                       25,388
<CGS>                                  20,657
<TOTAL-COSTS>                          20,657
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                        3,873
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        352
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           410
<INCOME-TAX>                                0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       410 
<DISCONTINUED>                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             0
<CHANGES>                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                              410 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                            0.07 
<EPS-DILUTED>                            0.07   

        

</TABLE>
##### 



Exhibit 32.1

EAGLEPICHER HOLDINGS, INC. AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES

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 Quarterly Report of EaglePicher Holdings, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended August 31, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John
H. Weber, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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/ John H. Weber                                    |  | Date: October 9, 2003
|                                                     |  |                      
|John H. Weber, President and Chief Executive Officer |  |                      

4
§ 196.220 Admissions. ( a ) Admissions to educational institutions prior to June 24, 1973, are not covered by these Title IX regulations.
( b ) *Administratively separate units.* For the purposes only of this section, §§ 196.225 and 196.230, and §§ 196.300 through 196.310, each administratively separate unit shall be deemed to be an educational institution.
( c ) *Application of §§ 196.300 through 196.310 .* Except as provided in paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section, §§ 196.300 through 196.310 apply to each recipient. A recipient to which §§ 196.300 through 196.310 apply shall not discriminate on the basis of sex in admission or recruitment in violation of §§ 196.300 through 196.310.
( d ) *Educational institutions.* Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section as to recipients that are educational institutions, §§ 196.300 through 196.310 apply only to institutions of vocational education, professional education, graduate higher education, and public institutions of undergraduate higher education.
( e ) *Public institutions of undergraduate higher education.* §§ 196.300 through 196.310 do not apply to any public institution of undergraduate higher education that traditionally and continually from its establishment has had a policy of admitting students of only one sex.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Pasquale Tassone, Appellant.

Motion to dismiss appeal denied. On the court’s own motion, the appeal will be heard on the original papers and on a typewritten brief. The appellant is directed to file five copies of his brief and to serve one copy on the District Attorney. The appellant’s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged to the November 1960 Term; appeal ordered to be placed on the calendar for November 7, 1960. Anthony F. Marra, Esq., 100 Centre Street, New York 13, New York, is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal. Beldock, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.
#### Michael P. Grace, II, v. Real Property Owners, Inc.

Motion to dismiss appeal granted, with $10 costs, unless the appellant procures the record on appeal and appellant’s points to be served and filed on or before August 9, 1960, with notice of argument for the September 1960 Term of this court, said appeal to be argued or submitted when reached. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Valente and Bergan, JJ.
# C_2008197EN.01003802.xml

| 2.8.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 197/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 197/38

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 18 June 2008 — Kröppelin v Council

(Case F-6/05)

(2008/C 197/75)

Language of the case: French

Language of the case: French

The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register, following amicable settlement.

---
EXHIBIT 32

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

I, David A. Conway, Chief Executive Officer of Water Chef, Inc., hereby certify
that the Form 10-KSB of Water Chef, Inc. for the period ended December 31, 2004
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/  *
                                            --------------------------------
                                            Name: David A. Conway, President,
                                                  Chief Executive Officer and
                                                  Chief Financial Officer
Date: April 5, 2005



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.
#### Evelyn E. Shea, Respondent, v. H. Gregory Shea, Appellant.

Motion by appellant for a stay, pending appeal, denied. Motion by respondent to dismiss appeal, denied with leave to renew on the argument of the appeal. Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Christ and Hill, JJ., concur.
### §306122. Contracts for management of historic property

The head of any Federal agency having responsibility for the management of any historic property may, after consultation with the Council, enter into a contract for the management of the property. The contract shall contain terms and conditions that the head of the agency considers necessary or appropriate to protect the interests of the United States and ensure adequate preservation of the historic property.

(Pub. L. 113–287, §3, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3228.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 306122 | 16 U.S.C. 470h–3(c). | Pub. L. 89–665, title I, §111(c), as added Pub. L. 96–515, title II, §207, Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 2997. |

Section
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.7



                               September 30, 2003



Sionix Corporation
9272 Jeronimo Road, Suite 108
Irvine, CA 92618

         Re:   STOCK RESTRICTION AGREEMENT; CANCELLATION OF SHARES
               ---------------------------------------------------

Dear Sirs:

         This is to confirm that, pursuant to a Stock Restriction Agreement
between the undersigned and Sionix Corporation (the "Agreement"), during 1999
and 2000 Sionix Corporation awarded an aggregate of 194,394 shares of Common
Stock (the "Award Shares") to the undersigned. The Agreement provided that the
Award Shares were subject to substantial restrictions, and could not be sold or
transferred until certain conditions were met.

         Since the conditions in the Agreement have not been met, we have agreed
that the Award Shares will be cancelled immediately. Accordingly, accompanying
this letter are certificates representing all of the Award Shares for
cancellation. The undersigned hereby transfers the Award Shares to you for
cancellation, and agrees to execute any Stock Assignment or Stock Power you may
request.

        Please instruct your Transfer Agent to cancel the certificates, remove
the shares from the stock register, and return the shares to the status of
authorized but unissued shares on its records.


                                                              Very truly yours,

                                                              /S/ JOAN HOROWITZ
                                                              -----------------
                                                              Joan Horowitz

Agreed and accepted:

Sionix Corporation

By:  /S/ JAMES J. HOUTZ
     ------------------
#### The People *of*the State *of New York ex rel.*Edwin Ellett Berg, Appellant, v. Walter H. Wilkins, as Warden of Attica Prison, Respondent.

Order unanimously affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party. (Appeal from order of Wyoming County Court dismissing the writ of habeas corpus and remanding relator to the custody of the Warden of Attica Prison.) Present — Bastow, J. P., Goldman, Halpern, McClusky and Henry, JJ.
# C_2008209EN.01004101.xml

| 15.8.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 209/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 209/41

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber) of 8 July 2008 — BPB v Commission

(Case T-53/03) (1)

1

(Competition - Cartels - Plasterboard market - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Single and continuous infringement - Repeated infringement - Fine - Guidelines on the method of setting fines - Leniency Notice)

(2008/C 209/69)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: BPB plc (Slough, United Kingdom) (represented by: T. Sharpe QC, and A. Nourry, Solicitor)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, Agent, J. Flynn QC, and C. Kilroy, Barrister)

Defendant:

Re:

Application for annulment in part of Commission Decision 2005/471/EC of 27 November 2002 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] against BPB plc, Gebrüder Knauf Westdeutsche Gipswerke KG, Société Lafarge SA and Gyproc Benelux NV (Case No COMP/E-1/37.152 — Plasterboard) (OJ 2005 L 166, p. 8), or, in the alternative, annulment or reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Sets the amount of the fine imposed on BPB plc by Article 3 of Commission Decision 2005/471/EC of 27 November 2002 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] against BPB plc, Gebrüder Knauf Westdeutsche Gipswerke KG, Société Lafarge SA and Gyproc Benelux NV (Case No COMP/E-1/37.152 — Plasterboard) at EUR 118,8 million; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Sets the amount of the fine imposed on BPB plc by Article 3 of Commission Decision 2005/471/EC of 27 November 2002 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] against BPB plc, Gebrüder Knauf Westdeutsche Gipswerke KG, Société Lafarge SA and Gyproc Benelux NV (Case No COMP/E-1/37.152 — Plasterboard) at EUR 118,8 million;

| 2. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders the Commission to pay one tenth of its own costs and one tenth of the costs incurred by BPB; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Commission to pay one tenth of its own costs and one tenth of the costs incurred by BPB;

| 4. | Orders BPB to pay nine tenths of its own costs and nine tenths of the costs incurred by the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Orders BPB to pay nine tenths of its own costs and nine tenths of the costs incurred by the Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 101, 26.4.2003.

1

---
#### HERMAN, Respondent, v. RADER, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

January 9, 1903.)

Action by Abraham Herman against Charles Rader.

No opinion. Judgment of the Municipal Court affirmed, with costs.
#### County of Nassau, Appellant, v. National Surety Corporation, Respondent. (Action No. 1.) Carolynn Budnik, as Administratrix, Respondent, v. County of Nassau, Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant. Mechanical Installations, Inc., et al., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent. (Action No. 2.)

Motion by the County of Nassau for a stay of trial in Action No. 2, pending appeal, denied. Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Christ and Hill, JJ., concur.