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


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNTIED STATES CODE,


as adopted pursuant to


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In connection with the annual report of Theragenics Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, M. Christine Jacobs, 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; and


(2)           the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periods referred to in the Report.




Date: February 25, 2011


/s/ M. Christine JacobsM. Christine JacobsChief Executive Officer
#### § 352.12 Baggage.

Products or articles subject to this part which are contained in baggage shall be subject to the requirements of this part in the same manner as cargo.
§ 322.26 Inspection and handling. ( a ) All shipments of restricted organisms transiting the United States are subject to inspection at the port in the United States for compliance with this part. If, upon inspection, a transit shipment of restricted articles is found not to meet the requirements of this part, we will destroy the shipment at your expense.
( b ) *Transloading* — ( 1 ) *Adult bees.* You may transload adult bees from one aircraft to another aircraft at the port of arrival in the United States only under the supervision of an inspector. If the adult bees cannot be transloaded immediately to the subsequent flight, you must store them within a completely enclosed building. Adult bees may not be transloaded from an aircraft to ground transportation for subsequent movement through the United States.
( 2 ) *Bee germ plasm.* You may transload bee germ plasm from one aircraft to another at the port of arrival in the United States only under the supervision of an inspector.
8.000 Scope of part.

This part deals with prioritizing sources of supplies and services for use by the Government.

Parent topic: Part 8 - Required Sources of Supplies and Services
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2448 

To increase the minimum penalties for violations of the Federal Mine Safety 

and Health Act of 1977, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 16 (legislative day, MARCH 15), 2006 

Mr. DURBIN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To increase the minimum penalties for violations of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, and for other 

purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Mine Safety Enforce5 ment, Reporting, and Training Act’’. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
2 

•S 2448 IS

1 SEC. 2. INCREASED MINIMUM PENALTIES FOR, AND IMME2 DIATE PAYMENT OF, MINE SAFETY VIOLA3 TIONS. 

4 (a) INCREASED MINIMUM PENALTIES.—Section 110 

5 of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (30 

6 U.S.C. 820) is amended— 

7 (1) by redesignating subsection (l) as subsection 

8 (m); 

9 (2) by inserting after subsection (k) the fol10 lowing: 

11 ‘‘(l) MINIMUM PENALTY.—The amount of a fine or 

12 civil penalty assessed for a violation of a mandatory health 

13 or safety standard or other provision of this Act shall be 

14 not less than $500.’’; and 

15 (3) in subsection (g), by striking ‘‘shall not be 

16 more than $250’’ and inserting ‘‘shall be $500’’. 

17 (b) IMMEDIATE PAYMENT OF PENALTIES.—Section 

18 110(j) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 

19 (30 U.S.C. 820(j)) is amended by adding at the end the 

20 following: ‘‘An operator shall pay a civil penalty owed 

21 under this Act promptly after such penalty is assessed and 

22 prior to contesting the penalty before the Commission or 

23 appealing the decision to the appropriate court.’’. 

24 (c) REPORT.—Section 110 of the Federal Mine Safe25 ty and Health Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 820) is further 

26 amended by adding at the end the following: 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
3 

•S 2448 IS

1 ‘‘(n) REPORT.— 

2 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall annu3 ally prepare and submit a report to Congress detail4 ing, for the previous fiscal year— 

5 ‘‘(A) the amount of fines assessed under 

6 this Act for each operator; 

7 ‘‘(B) the amount of fines actually collected 

8 from each operator; and 

9 ‘‘(C) the total amount of fines assessed, 

10 and the total amount of fines collected, under 

11 this Act. 

12 ‘‘(2) AVAILABILITY ON INTERNET.—The Sec13 retary shall post the report described in paragraph 

14 (1) on the website of the Department of Labor in a 

15 conspicuous and prominent location.’’. 

16 SEC. 3. INCREASING AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS 

17 FOR HEALTH AND SAFETY GRANTS. 

18 Section 503(h) of the Federal Mine Safety and 

19 Health Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 953(h)) is amended in the 

20 first sentence by striking ‘‘$10,000,000’’ and inserting 

21 ‘‘$20,000,000’’. 

Æ 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
Case 4:03-cv-00107-SPM-AK   Document 207   Filed 01/03/07   Page 1 of 5

Case 4:03-cv-00107-SPM-AK   Document 207   Filed 01/03/07   Page 2 of 5

Case 4:03-cv-00107-SPM-AK   Document 207   Filed 01/03/07   Page 3 of 5

Case 4:03-cv-00107-SPM-AK   Document 207   Filed 01/03/07   Page 4 of 5

Case 4:03-cv-00107-SPM-AK   Document 207   Filed 01/03/07   Page 5 of 5
**Exhibit32.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

Pursuantto section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) ofsection 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersignedofficer of O2 Secure Wireless, Inc., a Georgia corporation (the “Company”),does hereby certify, to the best of his knowledge, that:

1. The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2007 (the “Report”)of the Company complies in all material respects with the requirements ofsection 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 materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| /s/ Craig Sellars                      |   |
|----------------------------------------|--------|
| Craig Sellars, Chief Executive Officer |   |
| Date: August 13, 2007                  |   |

 

 

----
September 4, 2015

Mr. Jeremy Abshire

Unmanned Tropo Reconnaissance

12011 Indian Wells Drive

Houston, TX 77066

Dear Mr. Abshire :

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your petition for an exemption from

§ § 61.113 (a) and (b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1)

and (a)(2), and 91.417(a) and (b) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulati ons (14 CFR). It

explains why we cannot process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can No t Process Your Request

We received your June 1, 2015, exemption request on behalf of Unmanned Tropo

Reconnaissance filed in D ocket No

. FAA− 20 15

− 2480 , but we are unable to process your

request any further. Your petition does no t comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy

enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would

benefit the public as a whole.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

For more detailed information relating to submitting petitions f or exemption, please visit

http://aes.faa.gov/petition/index.html . This website helps the petitioner to meet Federal

Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements outlines in § 11.81 and helps answer any

questions you may have.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must submit the requested information

within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption

at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemptio n.2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further.

If you have any questions you may call the 333 Information Line (202) 267

- 2999.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and

Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure3
P. 1 

# OAR Box 1865 Prepped byCharmelle Mathews


### Document

Number: 

# 29 ) IV-E-1 7 Docket Number: 

# A-83-2 7

Printed 12/3/20089:15:27

AM Sheet 29of 105P. 2 

# A-83-2 7 IV-E-1 7 CONTAC TREPOR T 

# - r Date >J , ^\Ucl/ r M Originato r CONTACTBY : TELEPHON E ft MEETIN G D Othe r 

# MorS NAME , TITL E & ORGANIZATIO N Srue cfteua^rfj 

### CWev/fc ^ uS/ 1 ADDRES S & TELEPHON E NUMBE R 57 5 /Mdrh. £^ 

## ?V/o s PURPOS E O R SUBJEC

T(Give project numbe ri fappropriate ) SUMMAR Y 

### M r 

### - Seue^r t ^jiar^ec L ^ cf^df " Ctavrc M o/de j prod^Jtt

$s,d frxdr^t a /ou)-Solfj rfj-e. 1 ©; / (ft$.clod ( o;/ j d{ fivt af- t'h' fCys/ierrts . 1^* - ^

tas "

^ Svi ( fu rcc^ i A

wro fo,aS-o.SC> 0 

### Sw^r . "fta . L5p O i s prociucec vb^ d<s^lU"ko n d^io C We/iotfn o o j /QUJAJJ^I CT-JJ^ - 

### oils . Chev/rcv \ n& s fuj o revduu/v i n^c/rockj j Jx/r/e a n'-^ i J^'t^ b u t t ^

a/« - OSec t / o nrd&t&t jUo l for

c<m\ftrs;vr\

fro^e^*? 

### /VV ~ fie^d^t tas bee ^ e^-fV*^ ^

M^j U i a fro^/rdr^y 5j [[jr ccM

kv{ " d fr«-^* r M f r o^^ rfr«ic>tyvi f£> rv/dr-'o^ j cr^c V ACTIO N C D Distribution :P. 3 •

^ 

# 5

• ^ 

## o ^ 

### o / — ^ ^ 

# c ^ 0 

# - 4

—•* * 

# o 

# (P i . ^ ^ 0 <T 

### '<D ^ /•

o 

## 3- 2 § ^ C I n >



## rfil P
p i p . 

## I T o O o ** * A C X L « 

# 8 Hob ^-J^< £ r < (- A 

## 0 o

—rn 

## 6 6 0 d 

# 4 c - ' - 

## ^ Q 0 6 

# 1 ,
- C 

## J 

## 5 

# S " i ^ 

# 5 1 °\ * • 

### H o : c LA O « •%o ^



### m m Q* 

## o o 0 ' d

Ss-e > r ^ 

## d d
0—»^> > 

## d o
O o O 0 

### P o 6 Q 

## T5 

# o o O O

^ rf i 

## ^ d £ o t r<t j 

## d o o o O' O



## ° 2 d 6


# ° 5 t o 

# P -« = * -> N



## " ? ^ o o 

## d 0 *

-7 5 

## d
r — 

## 0 

# 3 c 

# - 5 vjlf ^

f » y 

## d d
o o r- 3 ri rt 

## 6 d V P o 

## d o

O o <^^ L /T 3 

# P £ o

^*i p 

## O d 

# ^ 2 d d

M 5 iy > 

## O d 0 - ^ 

## o d o o o tf o O 

## 6 

# < > - M o 

### UJLi J

< ns
\y\

c ^ pr t o 

## ' 6 ^ >P. 4



### ^ 5 

# Ik . rv > ^

_ns 

### O d d 

## n r— o ; ^ . 

## o 0* - * O 

## d o d d

-T S —— 

## d o d P

## o o O P

dddo 0 yp^r^n j ns1 

## dd° N i p



## d o i o i O IP 6 i 

## d o 

## >s <&o 

# A, +> -IryJ^oo o •\n 0 —.^ilOf ^ I^T S rr * r ^ r ^ " ^ 

### 6 o'oo o o

7 0 0 5 <^« . 

### n S n f •



### o o ^ n j n i A

• \ ~ — 

### O d d V o— 0 ~ > o r K ^ r ^ ^ ~ * 

## o ' o d o ^ o ' 

## n V\ rs ^ r o 

## r-- :

n s m 

## o d

, o — - \p.<r\ £

0 9 > « 

# 1^ 4 0 - d d d o



# s^ - ^ < 5 i J 5 S ^

• ' ^ 

## *g<tf&\£c £ o

d o>

~ n j 

# 3^ * 

# •M l O rv \ J n 

## J ? 

# u & o ft 

### K

J o

-a
#### Joseph M. Ralabate, Respondent, v. Arthur J. Rumizen, Appellant, et al., Defendants.

—Judgment and order unanimously reversed on the law and facts and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. Memorandum: The verdict is against the weight of the evidence. (Appeal from judgment and order of Brie Trial Term for plaintiff, in an automobile negligence action. Order denied motion for a directed verdict and to set aside verdict.) Present — Bastow, J. P., Goldman, Henry, Del Vecehio and Marsh, JJ.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2208 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2208

         To suspend temporarily the duty on para-Chlorophenol.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 30, 2006

  Mr. DeMint introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
         To suspend temporarily the duty on para-Chlorophenol.

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

SECTION 1. PARA-CHLOROPHENOL.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.09.26      para-Chlorophenol   Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         (CAS No. 106-48-                                                   31/2008
                         9) (provided for
                         in subheading
                         2908.10.60)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
##### 



Exhibit 31.2 CERTIFICATE OF PERSON PERFORMING
FUNCTIONS OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER I, Thomas K. Emery, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of
Yager/Kuester
Public Fund Limited Partnership; 2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any
untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual
report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other
financial
information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report; 4. The registrants other certifying officer and I are
responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have: a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer,
including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within
those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared; b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuers
disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and c) disclosed in this report any change in the small business
issuers
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small
business issuers most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or
is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal
control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have
disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting. Date: March 24, 2004 /s/Thomas K. EmeryThomas K. Emery(Serving in the function of Principal Accounting Officer)
§ 3550.207 Payment moratorium. RHS may defer a borrowers scheduled payments for up to 2 years. NP borrowers are not eligible for a payment moratorium. ( a ) *Borrower eligibility.* For a borrower to be eligible for a moratorium, all of the following conditions must be met: ( 1 ) Due to circumstances beyond the borrower's control, the borrower is temporarily unable to continue making scheduled payments because: ( i ) The borrower's repayment income fell by at least 20 percent within the past 12 months;
( ii ) The borrower must pay unexpected and unreimbursed expenses resulting from the illness, injury, or death of the borrower or a family member; or
( iii ) The borrower must pay unexpected and unreimbursed expenses resulting from damage to the security property in cases where adequate hazard insurance was not available or was prohibitively expensive.
( 2 ) The borrower occupies the dwelling, unless RHS determines that it is uninhabitable.
( 3 ) The borrower's account is not currently accelerated.
( b ) *Reviews of borrower eligibility.* ( 1 ) Periodically RHS may require the borrower to submit financial information to demonstrate that the moratorium should be continued. The moratorium may be canceled if: ( i ) The borrower does not respond to a request for financial information;
( ii ) RHS receives information indicating that the moratorium is no longer required; or
( iii ) In the case of a moratorium granted to pay unexpected or unreimbursed expenses, the borrower cannot show that an amount at least equal to the deferred payments has been applied toward the expenses.
( 2 ) At least 30 days before the moratorium is scheduled to expire, the borrower must provide financial information needed to process the re-amortization of the loan(s).
( c ) *Resumption of scheduled payments.* When the moratorium expires or is cancelled, the loan will be re-amortized to include the amount deferred during the moratorium and the borrower will be required to escrow. If the new monthly payment, after consideration of the maximum amount of payment subsidy available to the borrower, exceeds the borrower's repayment ability, all or part of the interest that has accrued during the moratorium may be forgiven so that the new monthly payment optimizes both affordability to the borrower as well as the best interest of the Government.
[61 FR 59779, Nov. 22, 1996, as amended at 87 FR 6773, Feb. 7, 2022]
#### § 3550.65 [Reserved]
§ 4279.126 Loan terms. ( a ) The length of the loan term must be the same for both the guaranteed and unguaranteed portions of the loan. The maximum repayment for loans for real estate will not exceed 30 years; machinery and equipment repayment will not exceed the useful life of the machinery and equipment or 15 years, whichever is less; and working capital repayment will not exceed 7 years. The term for a debt refinancing loan may be based on the collateral the lender will take to secure the loan.
( b ) A loan's maturity will take into consideration the use of proceeds, the useful life of assets being financed and those used as collateral, and the borrower's ability to repay the loan.
( c ) Only loans that require a periodic payment schedule that will retire the debt over the term of the loan without a balloon payment will be guaranteed.
( d ) The first installment of principal and interest will, if possible, be scheduled for payment after the facility is operational and has begun to generate income. However, the first full installment must be due and payable within 3 years from the date of the promissory note and be paid at least annually thereafter. In cases where there is an interest-only period, interest will be paid at least annually from the date of the note.
( e ) There must be no “due-on-demand” clauses without cause. Regardless of any “due-on-demand” with cause provision in a lender's promissory note, the Agency must concur in any acceleration of the loan unless the basis for acceleration is monetary default.
United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED April 29, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk 

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-50820

LARRY D. SKINNER, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus SAN FELIPE DEL RIO CONSOLIDATED INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT; ET AL., Defendants, SAN FELIPE DEL RIO CONSOLIDATED INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT; EDDIE BACA, in his individual capacity; JOANNE RUARK-ACKERMANN, DR., in her individual capacity; ANN DIXON, DR., in her individual capacity; KAY HERNANDEZ; FRED HERNANDEZ, Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas (USDC No. DR-01-CV-7)

_______________________________________________________ Before KING, Chief Judge, REAVLEY and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. 2 

### PER CURIAM: * Appellant appeals both the award of attorney’s fees and the amount awarded to appellee. We affirm for the following reasons. In assessing whether fees are appropriate under Christiansburg Garment Co. v. EEOC , 434 U.S. 412, 421 (1978), for frivolous or meritless litigation, this Court has been guided by the Mississippi

factors: (1) whether the plaintiff established a prima facie case; (2) whether the defendant offered to settle; and (3) whether there was a full-blown trial on the merits. United States v. Mississippi , 921 F.2d 604, 609 (5th Cir. 1991). It is important to note that “[t]hese factors are, however, guideposts, not hard and fast rules. Determinations regarding frivolity are to be made on a case-by-case basis.” See EEOC v. L. B. Foster Co. , 123 F.3d 746, 751 (3d Cir. 1997) (internal citations and quotations omitted). While satisfying a prima facie case usually precludes the award of attorney’s fees, there are instances in which the prima facie case may be shown but the case is still ultimately frivolous. See EEOC v. Union Camp. Corp. , 536 F. Supp. 64, 66 (W.D. Mich. 1982). Whether or not the district court correctly determined that the appellant did not establish the elements of his prima facie case of discrimination, this litigation was ultimately groundless and frivolous. The court did not abuse its discretion. In his reply brief, appellant also challenges the amount of the attorney’s fees. He contests whether the hours were reasonable as the Defendants did not provide a breakdown of the reasonable hours expended, argues the Johnson factors did not support the lodestar amount, and contends that specific deposition and copy costs should not have been deemed recoverable. As3

these specific issues were not clearly raised before the trial court, they are deemed waived. See United States ex rel. Wallace v. Flintco Inc. , 143 F.3d 955, 971 (5th Cir. 1998). 

### AFFIRMED.
#### §§ 3560.464-3560.499 [Reserved]
Consent of Independent Public Accountants
                    -----------------------------------------


As independent public accountants,  we hereby consent to the incoporation of our
report  included in this Form  10-K/A,  dated  February  27,  1998,  except with
respect  to Note 6 as to  which  date is March  31,  1998,  into  the  Company's
previously filed  Registration  Statement File No. 333-6237 on Form S-8 relating
to the 1997 Management Stock Option Plan of The Leslie Fay Company Inc. and into
the Company's  Registration Statement File No. 333-62379 on Form S-8 relating to
the 1997  Non-Employee  Director  Stock Option and Stock  Incentive  Plan of The
Leslie Fay Company, Inc.




/s/ Arthur Andersen LLP
-------------------------

New York, New York
September 9, 1998