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

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2010 (the Report) of Community Bankers Trust
Corporation (the Company), the undersigned President and Chief Executive Officer and Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to their knowledge:

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

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
consolidated financial condition and results of operations of the Company and its subsidiaries as of, and for, the periods presented in the Report.



/s/ George M. Longest, Jr.George M. Longest, Jr.President and Chief Executive Officer/s/ Bruce E. ThomasBruce E. ThomasSenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


Date: May 10, 2010
#### HANN et al. v. BRETTLER et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

June 15, 1906.)

Action by David Hanu and another against Max Brettler and another.

No opinion. Motion granted. Order signed.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 218 (Friday, November 12, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69518-69519]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-28506]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 7165]


Overseas Security Advisory Council (Osac) Renewal

    The Department of State has renewed the Charter of the Overseas 
Security Advisory Council. This advisory council will continue to 
interact on overseas security matters of mutual interest between the 
U.S. Government and the American private sector. The Council's 
initiatives and security publications provide a unique contribution to 
protecting American private sector interests abroad. The Under 
Secretary for Management has determined that the Council is necessary 
and in the public interest.
    The Council consists of representatives from four (4) U.S. 
Government agencies and thirty (30) American private sector companies 
and

[[Page 69519]]

organizations. The Council will follow the procedures prescribed by the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (Pub. L. 92-463). Meetings will 
be open to the public unless a determination is made in accordance with 
Section 10(d) of the FACA, 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1) and (4), that a meeting 
or a portion of the meeting should be closed to the public. Notice of 
each meeting will be provided in the Federal Register at least 15 days 
prior to the meeting.
    For more information contact Marsha Thurman, Overseas Security 
Advisory Council, Bureau of Diplomatic Security, U.S. Department of 
State, Washington, DC 20522-2008, phone: 571-345-2214.

    Dated: October 15, 2010.
Jeffrey W. Culver,
Director of the Diplomatic Security Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-28506 Filed 11-10-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-24-P
#### Wilbur O. ARCHIE, Appellant, v. SHELL OIL COMPANY, Inc., et al., Appellees.

No. 14734.

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.

March 12, 1954.

Rehearing Denied March 30, 1954.

I. H. Spears, in pro. per.

Gordon O. Ewin, New Orleans, La., Elton A. Darsey, Houma, La., H. H. Hillyer, Jr., Ernest M. Sutter, New Orleans, La., for appellees.

Before HUTCHESON, Chief Judge, and HOLMES and BORAH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

In his will considered and thoughtful opinion,1 stating the issues joined and the facts proved, the district judge canvassed and disposed of, adversely to him, plaintiff’s claims.

Upon full and careful consideration of the opinion in the light of the record, the briefs and the oral arguments, we find ourselves in agreement with the conclusions reached by the district judge. We will not, therefore, write other than to say that, for the reasons given by the district judge in support of it, the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

1

. Archie v. Shell Oil Co., D.C., 110 F. Supp. 542.
###### Editorial Note on Part 1940

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1940 appear at 80 FR 9876, Feb. 24, 2015.

#### §§ 1940.569-1940.574 [Reserved]
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Inconnection with the quarterly report of Data Call Technologies, Inc. (the“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2008 (the“Report”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof, I, Larry Mosley, CFO and Director 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. TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

2. Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

/s/ Larry Mosley

Larry MosleyCFO and DirectorDated: May 20, 2008

A signed original of this writtenstatement required by Section 906 has been provided to Data Call Technologies, Inc. andwill be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission orits staff upon request.
###### Editorial Note on Part 1924

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1924 appear at 80 FR 9870, Feb. 24, 2015.

#### § 1924.101 Purpose.

This subpart establishes the basic Rural Housing Service (RHS) policies for planning and performing site development work. It also provides the procedures and guidelines for preparing site development plans consistent with Federal laws, regulations, and Executive Orders.
EXHIBIT 32.1

                  SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION OF FRANK AIELLO


                        CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

     In connection with the Periodic Report of Cal Alta
 Auto Glass, Inc.,(the "Company")
on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2007 as
filed with the Securities
and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I,
Frank Aiello,  President
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 results
of operations of the
Company.

Date: November 19, 2007    By: /s/ Frank Aiello
                             -------------------
                                  Frank Aiello
         President/CEO/Principal Accounting Officer/ Dir.
#### § 1782.2 Objectives.

Loan and grant servicing is provided by Rural Development in order to assist recipients in complying with the established objectives and requirements for loans and grants, repaying loans on schedule, acting in accordance with any necessary agreements, and protecting Rural Development's financial interest. Servicing by Rural Development includes, but is not limited to, the review of budgets, management reports, audits, and financial statements; performing operational inspections; providing, arranging, or recommending technical assistance; evaluating environmental impacts of proposed actions by the borrower; and performing civil rights compliance and graduation reviews.
F r o m : " K le i n , M ichae l " < M icha e l .K l ei n @ dep

. s t a t e

. nj

. u s>

T o : St anle y T ong /R 9 /USEPA/U S @EPA C c : " B ou z id

, B a c h i r " < B a c hi r.B o u z id @ dep

. s t a t e

. nj

. u s> D a t e : 07 / 24 / 20 1 2 06 : 51 A M S ubj e c t : RE: N J r u l e s f o r m un i ci p al s o li d w a s t e ( M S W ) N O x li m i t s ?

S ub19 - 20 1 1

. pd f

S t a n – A t t ac h e d i s t h e r e gu la t i o n. S

e e S e c t i o n 1 9

. 1 2

. L i m i t is 1 5 0 pp m v d@ 7 % O 2 b as e d o n a ca l e nd ar d a y (

2 4

- h r), d ete r m i n e d b y C

E M S. W i t h

t h a t sai d

, I l o o k

e d a t t h e c

u rr e n t ( S t a te ) all o w a b l e s f o r o u r 4 M

WCs

. A ll l i m i t s a r e b y C E M S :

Ess e x

– 3 0 0 pp m v d@ 7 % O 2 ( 1

- h r), 1 5

5 p p mv d @ 7 % O 2 ( 3

- h r )
Warr e n

– 3 0 0 pp m v d@ 7% O 2 ( 3

- h r )
U n i o n – 2 2 5 p p mv d @ 7% O 2 ( 3

- h r), 18 0 pp m v d@ 7 % O 2 ( 24

- h r ) Gl o u c e s te r

– 1 5 0 pp m v d @ 7% O 2 ( 24

- h r )

, al s o h i gh e r l i m i t

s t h a t e x p ir

e d p e r r u l e

. Ca m d e n

- 1 50 p p mv

d @ 7 % O 2 ( 24

- h r )

, 3 0 0 pp m v d@ 7 % O 2 ( 3

- h r)

, al s

o o t h e r l i m i t

t h a t e x p ir e d p e r r u l e (

bu t n o t s t a te d i t

e x p ir e d. )

T h r ee o f t h e f i v e h a v e l i m i t s t h a t a r e n o t c o n sis t e n t w i t h t h e r e gu la t i o n. I ass

u m e t h a t t h ey h a

v e A l te r n a t i v

e E m iss i o n L i m i t s a pp r o v e d

, p e r S e c t i o n 19

. 13 o f t h e r u l e

. I ’ v

e c o p i e d Bac h ir B o uz i d ( S e c t i o n C h i e f o f O p e r

a t i ng P e r m i t s ) i n cas e h e h as a n yt h i ng a dd i t i o n a l t

o a dd r e g ar d i ng t h e l i m i t s

.

M ic h a e l A. Kl e i n NJ D E P – B

T S ( 6 0 9 ) 5 3 0

- 4 041

F r o m: S ta n l e y T o n g [ ma il t o : T o n g

. S ta n l e y @ e p ama il. e p a .gov ] S e n t: F rid a y
, J u l y 2

0

, 2 0 12 2: 4 1 PM T o: K l e i n
, Mi c h ael C c: Id a li a Pe r

e z ; R ob e r t

M a ri n a ro S u b j e c t: N J r u l e s f

or m un i c ip a l solid wa s te ( M S W ) N O x li m i t

s ?

M i c h a e l,

I ' m s ea rc h i ng f o r th e N J r u l e s and N Ox li m i t s f o r M S W

. E a r th J u s t i c e c o m m ented t hat N J h ad m o r e s t r i ng e nt N Ox li m i t s ( o r

we r e a d op t i n g m o r e s t r i ng e nt l i m i t s) than S an J o aq u i n V a l l e y

.

Can y o u g i v e m e a li n k to t he N J r u l e a nd i f the r e a r e p l a n s to a m end t he r u l e

- o r f o r w a r d t h i s t o t h e r i g ht s e c t i on ?

Al s o, j u s t wo n de r i n g ..

. I F we h a d to d i g m o r e, w o u l d p a s t te s t r e p o r t s be a v a i l a b l e f o r y ou r M S W f a c ili t i e s ? T han k s.

S tan

S ta n l e y T on g U. S

. E P A R e g i on I X
Ru l e s O ff i c e ( A IR

- 4 )
75 H a wtho r ne S t

. S an Fr a n c i sc o, C A 9 41 05

415

- 9 47

- 4 1 22

- v o i c e 415

- 9 47

- 3 5 79

- f ax
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

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

                        FARMERS & MERCHANTS BANCORP, INC

     In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Farmers & Merchants
     Bancorp, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2003, as filed with the
     Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Joe E. Crossgrove,
     Chief Executive Officer, of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
     1350, as added by 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

               1.   The Report fully complies with the requirement 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.

               Date: February 27, 2004

                                                       /s/ Joe E. Crossgrove
                                                       ------------------------
                                                       Joe E. Crossgrove
                                                       Chief Executive Officer
#### Felts &c. *vs.*Brown’s Administrator.

Ghakc Case 36.

.Error to the Logan Circuit; BrodkAx, Judge,

*Administration de bonis non. Waste. Assets.*Distribution.

The right fy? recover for assets wasted hi former administrator is in dis'ribu tees, not in administrator *da imli von.*

April 5

Judge Nicholas

delivered (he opinion of the Court.

Complainant, as administrator *de bonis non,*filed his bill against Felts and his sureties in administration bond as a former administrator of the deceased Brown, to recover from them the amount of the assets which come to the hands of said Felts whilst administrator, and which it is alleged he converted to his own use and wasted.

The defendants below defaulted; the bill was taken for confessed, and a decree rendered against them.

The right to recover for the assets which came *to*the hands oí the first administrator and were by him wasted, is in the distributees of Brown, and not. the administrator *de bonis non.*See Graves &c. *vs*Downeys III, Mon. 855.

*148Breathitt, for plaintiffs.

The decree is therefore reversed, and the cause remanded to the circuit court with directions to dismiss complainant’s bill.
Appeal No. 78-52.

#### Eastern Scientific Co. *v.*Pleasant View Nursing Home, Inc. *v.*Carrom Furniture Division of Affiliated Hospital Products, Inc.

This is an action for monies due and payable on book account. The defendant counterclaimed by alleging breach of an agreement concerning delivery of certain hospital supplies and furnishings. The plaintiff impleaded its supplier as a third party defendant. The defendant moved to amend its counterclaim to add the supplier as a party to the counterclaim. This motion was granted but the amended counterclaim was not filed for a period of thirteen months due to unexplained delay on the part of the defendant.

After said filing, the third party defendant moved to strike the amended counterclaim on the ground that this unreasonable delay had interfered with its ability to defend. The motion was granted.

When the matter came on for trial, a justice of the Superior Court denied a motion to reargue the striking of the amended counterclaim, and granted plaintiffs motion to narrow the issues, holding that only the complaint was properly before the court, and that no counterclaim could be considered. Faced with the elimination of its counterclaim, the defendant stipulated to judgment on the complaint but reserved its right of appeal if any.

On this record we issued an order to the plaintiff to show cause why the defendant’s appeal should not be sustained and the matter remanded for trial on the counterclaim and third party complaint. We heard argument pursuant to this show cause order on December 5, 1979. We are of the opinion that the plaintiff has failed to show cause why this matter should not be remanded for hearing on the defendant’s original counterclaim and the third party complaint. We believe that the trial justice was in error in not allowing the defendant to go forward on its original counterclaim although it *902had lost the right to proceed on the amended counterclaim. We find no error in the denial of the motion to reargue. The relief granted to the third party defendant was proper under the circumstances. However, the gratuitous benefit conferred upon the plaintiff against whom a counterclaim had been timely filed was not justified. *See Harrigan*v. *Mason & Winograd,*121 R.I. 209, 397 A.2d 514 (1979). Since the amended counterclaim was stricken as a result of its having been tardily filed, it never had the effect of superseding the original counterclaim. Therefore, when the amended counterclaim was stricken, the original counterclaim remained as a valid, existing pleading in the case. Obviously the plaintiff should have the right in such circumstances to proceed with its third party complaint against the supplier.

*Roberts, Carroll, Feldstein 6- Tucker, David W. Carroll,*for plaintiff, *Brian J. Sarault,*for Pleasant View Nursing Home, *Robert K. Mattson,*for Affiliated Hospital Products, Inc.

Therefore, the case is remanded to the Superior Court for further proceedings consistent with this order.
§ 1782.23 Use of Rural Development loans and grants for other purposes. ( a ) If, after making a loan or a grant, the Administrator determines that the circumstances under which the loan or grant was made have sufficiently changed to make the project or activity for which the loan or grant was made available no longer appropriate, the Administrator may allow the borrower or grantee to use property (real and personal) purchased or improved with the loan or grant funds, or proceeds from the sale of property (real and personal) purchased with such funds, for another project or activity that: ( 1 ) Will be carried out in the same area as the original project or activity;
( 2 ) Meets the criteria for a loan or grant described in section 381E(d) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (Pub. L. 87-128), as amended; and
( 3 ) Satisfies such additional requirements as are established by the Administrator.
( b ) If the new use of the property is under the authority of another USDA Agency Administrator, the other Administrator will be consulted on whether the new use will meet the criteria of the other program. Since the new project or activity must be carried out in the same area as the original project or activity, a new rural area determination will not be necessary.
( c ) Borrowers and grantees that wish to use the proceeds for other purposes may make their request through the appropriate Rural Development State Office. Permission to use this option will be exercised on a case-by-case-basis on applications submitted through the State Office to the Administrator for consideration. If the proposal is approved, the Administrator will issue a memorandum to the State Director outlining the conditions necessary to complete the transaction.
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  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q of WNC Housing Tax
Credit Fund VI, L.P., Series 14 (the  "Partnership")  for the quarter ended June
30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"),  and pursuant to 18 U.S.C., section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  I,  Wilfred N.  Cooper,  Jr.,
President and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc., general partner
of the Partnership, hereby certify 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 Partnership.




/s/WILFRED N. COOPER, JR.
-------------------------
Wilfred N. Cooper, Jr.
President and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.
August 21, 2006
§ 1709.217 Grant award. ( a ) *Notification of applicants.* The Agency will notify all applicants in writing whether or not they have been selected for a grant award.
( b ) *Letter of conditions.* The Agency will notify a selected applicant in writing, setting out the amount of grant approved and the conditions under which the grant will be made.
( c ) *Applicant's intent to meet conditions.* Upon reviewing the conditions and requirements in the letter of conditions, the selected applicant must complete, sign and return the Agency's “Letter of Intent to Meet Conditions,” or, if certain conditions cannot be met, the applicant may propose alternate conditions to the Agency. The Agency must concur with any changes proposed to the letter of conditions by the applicant before the application will be further processed.
( d ) *Grant agreement.* The Agency and the grantee must execute a grant agreement acceptable to the Agency prior to the advance of funds.
Exhibit 32.1



Certification of Chief Executive Officer Required by Rule 13a-14(b)

and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code



I, J. Reid Porter, the President and Chief Executive Officer of PRP-GP LLC, which is the Administrative Managing General Partner of Phosphate Resource
Partners Limited Partnership (PLP), and in that capacity also the chief executive officer of PLP, certify that (i) the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the Fiscal Year ended December 31, 2003 of PLP as amended by Amendment No. 1 thereto
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
PLP.



September 14, 2004



|                  
|------------------
|                  
|/s/ J. Reid Porter
|J. Reid Porter
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A18D0383. KEVIN BASCOM v. THE STATE.

In 2004, KevinBascompleaded guilty to theft by receiving stolen property and

received a sentence of two years, with three months to serve. In 2017, Bascom filed

an extraordinary motion for new trial. By order entered on December 28, 2017, the

trial court denied the motion. On March 15, 2018, Bascom filed this application for

discretionary appeal. We, however, lack jurisdiction.

An application for discretionary appeal must be filed within 30 days of the

entry of the order or judgment to be appealed. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (d). The

requirements of OCGA § 5-6-35 are jurisdictional, and this Court cannot accept an

application for appeal not made in compliance therewith. See Boyle v. State, 190 Ga.

App. 734 (380 SE2d 57) (1989). Here, Bascom did not file his application until 77

day after entry of the trial court’s order.1 

1 Bascom did submit a motion for an extension of time to file a discretionary

application, but we could not docket the motion because it contained neither a proper

certificate of service nor a copy of the trial court’s order. See Court of Appeals Rules

6 (b) (certificate of service must show that copy was served upon opposing counsel);

16 (c) (requests for extension of time to file discretionary applications must comply

with Rule 40 (b), Emergency Motions); Rule 40 (b) (2) (emergency motion must

contain a stamped “filed” copy of order to be appealed).

April 16, 2018
Accordingly, the application is untimely, and it is hereby DISMISSED for lack

of jurisdiction.

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.

04/16/2018
§ 1737.40 General. ( a ) Under special circumstances a borrower may request that RUS approve interim financing for interim construction. This subpart describes the circumstances in which RUS will consider approving interim financing of construction, the information to be submitted to RUS to support the borrower's request, RUS's requirements relating to interim construction, and related matters.
( b ) For a borrower to preserve the option of obtaining loan funds for reimbursement of interim financing, it must obtain prior RUS approval of its interim financing plan and follow the procedures in 7 CFR 1737.41 and 7 CFR 1737.42.
( c ) RUS will approve interim financing only for projects which must be performed immediately.
( d ) RUS approval of interim financing is not a commitment that RUS will make loan funds available.
( e ) Equal employment opportunity requirements apply to interim construction. See RUS Bulletin 320-15.