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

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

         In connection with the accompanying amended Quarterly Report on Form
10-QSB of Velocity Asset Management Inc. for the three months ended March 31,
2006, I, John C. Kleinert, Chief Executive Officer of Velocity Asset Management,
Inc. hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

         (1) such amended Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the three months
ended March 31, 2006, 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 such amended Quarterly Report on Form
10-QSB for the three months ended March 31, 2006, fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Velocity
Asset Management, Inc.


                                       /s/ JOHN C. KLEINERT
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       John C. Kleinert
                                       Chief Executive Officer

May 22, 2006

                                       29
**Order entered December 20, 2012**

**In The**

**Court of Appeals**

**Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

**No. 05-12-01004-CR**

**No. 05-12-01005-CR**

**Quentarrius Deontray Baldwin, Appellant**

**V.**

**The State of Texas, Appellee**

**On Appeal from the 363rd Judicial District Court**

**Dallas County, Texas**

**Trial Court Cause Nos. F11-54128-W, F11-54133-W**

**ORDER**

 The Court **ORDERS** the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine why appellant’s brief has not been filed.  In this regard, the trial court shall make appropriate findings and recommendations and determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeals, whether appellant is indigent, or if not indigent, whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeals.  *See* Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(*b*).  If the trial court cannot obtain appellant’s presence at the hearing, the trial court shall conduct the hearing in appellant’s absence.  *See Meza v. State*, 742 S.W.2d 708 (Tex. App.–Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.) (per curiam).  If appellant is indigent, the trial court is **ORDERED** to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective representation, which may include appointment of new counsel.

We **ORDER** the trial court to transmit a record of the proceedings, which shall include written findings and recommendations, to this Court within **THIRTY DAYS** of the date of this order.

The appeals are **ABATED** to allow the trial court to comply with the above order.  The appeals shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the findings are received, whichever is earlier.

/s/DAVID L. BRIDGESJUSTICE
Editorial Note on Part 180
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 180 appear at 79 FR 75879, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 180.865 How long may my debarment last? ( a ) If the debarring official decides to debar you, your period of debarment will be based on the seriousness of the cause(s) upon which your debarment is based. Generally, debarment should not exceed three years. However, if circumstances warrant, the debarring official may impose a longer period of debarment.
( b ) In determining the period of debarment, the debarring official may consider the factors in § 180.860. If a suspension has preceded your debarment, the debarring official must consider the time you were suspended.
( c ) If the debarment is for a violation of the provisions of the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988, your period of debarment may not exceed five years.
#### § 1327.101 Adoption of 2 CFR Part 200.

Under the authority listed above, the Department of Commerce adopts the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Guidance in 2 CFR part 200. Thus, this part gives regulatory effect to the OMB guidance and supplements the guidance as needed for the Department.
1 

# DRAFT AGENDA

FIFRA SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY PANEL (SAP)

OPEN MEETING

March 19

- 21, 201 3

FIFRA SAP WEB SITE http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap/

OPP Docket Telephone: (703) 305

- 5805

Docket Number: EPA

- HQ

- OPP

- 20 1 2

- 0 5 7 4

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Conferen ce Center

- Lobby Level

One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.)

2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA 22202



### Draft Product Performance Data Needs Assessment for Products Claiming

Efficacy Against Invertebrate Pests

Please note that all times are approximate (see no te at end of Agenda)

.



### Day 1

Tuesday, March 19 , 201 3

8 : 3 0 a.m. Opening of Meeting and Administrative Procedures

– Joseph Bailey , Designated

Federal Official, Office of Science Coordination and Policy, EPA

8:35 a.m. Welcome and Introduction of Panel Me mbers

– Daniel Schlenk , Ph .D., FIFRA SAP

Chair

8:4 0 a.m. Opening Remarks

– Steven Bradbury, Ph.D., Director

- Of fice of Pesticide Programs

(OPP)

, EPA

8 : 5 0 a.m. Overview of Topic

- Lois Rossi, Division Director, Registration Division (RD) , OPP , EPA

9: 10 a.m

. EPA Presentations

– Kevin Sweeney, MS

- RD, OPP, EPA

10: 15 a.m. Break

10: 30 a.m. EPA Presentations

– Kevin Sweeney, MS

- R D, OPP, EPA

12:30 a.m. Lunch

1: 30 p.m. Public Comments

3 : 30 p.m. Break

3: 4 5 p.m. Charge to Panel

5:00 p.m. Meeting Adjourns2 

### Day 2

Wednesday

, March 20 , 201 3

8 : 3 0 a.m. Opening of Meeting and Administrative Procedures

– Joseph Bailey, Designated

Federal Official, Office of Science Coordination and Policy, EPA

8 : 3 5 a.m. I ntroduction of Panel Members

– Daniel Schlenk , Ph.D., FIF RA Scientific Advisory

Panel Chair

8 : 4 0 a.m. Follow

- up from Previous Day Discussions

9:00 a.m. Charge to Panel

10:15 a.m. Break

10:30 a.m. Charge to Panel

12: 0 0 p.m. Lunch

1:00 p.m. Charge to Panel

3: 0 0 p.m. Break

3: 1 5 p.m. Charge to Panel

5: 00 p.m. Meeti ng Adjourns



### Day 3

Thursday

, March 21 , 201 3

8 : 30 a.m. Opening of Meeting and Administrative Procedures

– Joseph Bailey, Designated

Federal Official, Office of Science Coordination and Policy, EPA

8 : 35 a.m. Introduction of Panel Members

– Daniel Schlen k , Ph.D., FIFRA Scientific Advisory

Panel Chair

8 : 40 a.m. Follow

- up from Previous Day Discussions

9:00 a.m. Charge to Panel

10:15 a.m. Break

10:30 a.m. Charge to Panel

12:00 p.m. Lunch

1:00 p.m. Charge to Panel

3: 0 0 p.m. Break

3:15 p.m. Charge to Panel

5: 00 p.m. Meeting Adjourns

P lease be advised that agenda times are approximate; when the discussion for one topic is

completed, discussions for the next topic will begin. For further information, please contact the

Designated Federal Official for this mee ting, Joseph Bailey, via telephone: (202) 564

- 2045; fax: (202)

564

- 8382; or email: bailey.joseph@epa.gov
Editorial Note on Part 117
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 117 appear at 81 FR 49896, July 29, 2016.

§ 117.260 Compliance with, or appeal of, an order to withdraw a qualified facility exemption. ( a ) If you receive an order under § 117.254 to withdraw a qualified facility exemption, you must either: ( 1 ) Comply with applicable requirements of this part within 120 calendar days of the date of receipt of the order, or within a reasonable timeframe, agreed to by FDA, based on a written justification, submitted to FDA, for a timeframe that exceeds 120 calendar days from the date of receipt of the order; or
( 2 ) Appeal the order within 15 calendar days of the date of receipt of the order in accordance with the requirements of § 117.264.
( b ) Submission of an appeal, including submission of a request for an informal hearing, will not operate to delay or stay any administrative action, including enforcement action by FDA, unless the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, as a matter of discretion, determines that delay or a stay is in the public interest.
( c ) If you appeal the order, and FDA confirms the order: ( 1 ) You must comply with applicable requirements of this part within 120 calendar days of the date of receipt of the order, or within a reasonable timeframe, agreed to by FDA, based on a written justification, submitted to FDA, for a timeframe that exceeds 120 calendar days from the date of receipt of the order; and
( 2 ) You are no longer subject to the modified requirements in § 117.201.
###### Editorial Note on Part 25

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 25 appear at 79 FR 75879, Dec. 19, 2014.

#### § 25.210 Authority to modify agency application forms or formats.

To implement the policies in §§ 25.200 and 25.205, a Federal awarding agency may add a unique entity identifier field to information collections previously approved by OMB, without having to obtain further approval to add the field.

[85 FR 49523, Aug. 13, 2020]
§ 5800.20 Does this part apply to me? This part and, through this part, pertinent portions of the OMB guidance in subparts A through I of 2 CFR part (see table at 2 CFR 180.100(b)) apply to you if you are a— ( a ) Participant or principal in a “covered transaction” (see subpart B of 2 CFR part 180 and the definition of “nonprocurement transaction” at 2 CFR 180.970);
( b ) Respondent in a Commission suspension or debarment action;
( c ) Commission debarment or suspension official; or
( d ) Commission grants officer, agreements officer, or other official authorized to enter into any type of nonprocurement transaction that is a covered transaction.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
JASON INCORPORATED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT MARCH 31, 2000, AND
CONSOLIDATED INCOME STATEMENT FOR THE THREE MONTH PERIOD ENDED
MARCH 31, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000813471
<NAME> JASON INCORPORATED
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-29-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                           5,261
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   63,812
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0<F1>
<INVENTORY>                                     47,998
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               129,030
<PP&E>                                         198,997
<DEPRECIATION>                                  96,568
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 320,589
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           82,478
<BONDS>                                         70,349<F2>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        36,325
<OTHER-SE>                                     106,943
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   320,589
<SALES>                                        121,487
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               121,487
<CGS>                                           93,604
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   93,604
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,599
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,641
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,225
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,416
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,416
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.17<F3>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.16
<FN>
<F1>COMPANY PRESENTS RECEIVABLES ON A NET BASIS IN COMPLIANCE WITH ARTICLE 10
REGULATION S-X.
<F2>INCLUDES ALL NON-CURRENT PORTION OF DEBT OBLIGATIONS.
<F3>THE EPS UNDER THE EPS PRIMARY TAG REPRESENTS BASIC
EARNINGS PER SHARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL
ACCOUNTING STANDARD NO. 128 EARNINGS PER SHARE.
</FN>


</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 101
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 101 appear at 63 FR 14035, Mar. 24, 1998, 66 FR 17358, Mar. 30, 2001, 66 FR 56035, Nov. 6, 2001, and 81 FR 49895, July 29, 2016.

§ 101.1 Principal display panel of package form food. The term *principal display panel* as it applies to food in package form and as used in this part, means the part of a label that is most likely to be displayed, presented, shown, or examined under customary conditions of display for retail sale. The principal display panel shall be large enough to accommodate all the mandatory label information required to be placed thereon by this part with clarity and conspicuousness and without obscuring design, vignettes, or crowding. Where packages bear alternate principal display panels, information required to be placed on the principal display panel shall be duplicated on each principal display panel. For the purpose of obtaining uniform type size in declaring the quantity of contents for all packages of substantially the same size, the term *area of the principal display panel* means the area of the side or surface that bears the principal display panel, which area shall be: ( a ) In the case of a rectangular package where one entire side properly can be considered to be the principal display panel side, the product of the height times the width of that side;
( b ) In the case of a cylindrical or nearly cylindrical container, 40 percent of the product of the height of the container times the circumference;
( c ) In the case of any otherwise shaped container, 40 percent of the total surface of the container: *Provided, however,* That where such container presents an obvious “principal display panel” such as the top of a triangular or circular package of cheese, the area shall consist of the entire top surface. In determining the area of the principal display panel, exclude tops, bottoms, flanges at tops and bottoms of cans, and shoulders and necks of bottles or jars. In the case of cylindrical or nearly cylindrical containers, information required by this part to appear on the principal display panel shall appear within that 40 percent of the circumference which is most likely to be displayed, presented, shown, or examined under customary conditions of display for retail sale.
§ 1301.32 Action on applications for research in Schedule I substances. ( a ) In the case of an application for registration to conduct research with controlled substances listed in Schedule I, the Administrator shall process the application and protocol and forward a copy of each to the Secretary of Health and Human Services (Secretary) within 7 days after receipt. The Secretary shall determine the qualifications and competency of the applicant, as well as the merits of the protocol (and shall notify the Administrator of his/her determination) within 21 days after receipt of the application and complete protocol, except that in the case of a clinical investigation, the Secretary shall have 30 days to make such determination and notify the Administrator. The Secretary, in determining the merits of the protocol, shall consult with the Administrator as to effective procedures to safeguard adequately against diversion of such controlled substances from legitimate medical or scientific use.
( b ) An applicant whose protocol is defective shall be notified by the Secretary within 21 days after receipt of such protocol from the Administrator (or in the case of a clinical investigation within 30 days), and he/she shall be requested to correct the existing defects before consideration shall be given to his/her submission.
( c ) If the Secretary determines the applicant qualified and competent and the research protocol meritorious, he/she shall notify the Administrator in writing of such determination. The Administrator shall issue a certificate of registration within 10 days after receipt of this notice, unless he/she determines that the certificate of registration should be denied on a ground specified in section 304(a) of the Act (21 U.S.C. 824(a)). In the case of a supplemental protocol, a replacement certificate of registration shall be issued by the Administrator.
( d ) If the Secretary determines that the protocol is not meritorious and/or the applicant is not qualified or competent, he/she shall notify the Administrator in writing setting forth the reasons for such determination. If the Administrator determines that grounds exist for the denial of the application, he/she shall within 10 days issue an order to show cause pursuant to § 1301.37 and, if requested by the applicant, hold a hearing on the application pursuant to § 1301.41. If the grounds for denial of the application include a determination by the Secretary, the Secretary or his duly authorized agent shall furnish testimony and documents pertaining to his determination at such hearing.
( e ) Supplemental protocols will be processed in the same manner as original research protocols. If the processing of an application or research protocol is delayed beyond the time limits imposed by this section, the applicant shall be so notified in writing.
[62 FR 13953, Mar. 24, 1997]
#### Harvey S. KORNIT, Appellant, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF the PLAINVIEW-OLD BETHPAGE CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, NEW YORK, Appellee.

No. 849, Docket 81-7840.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Argued March 25, 1982.

Decided April 8, 1982.

Harvey S. Kornit, Forest Hills, N. Y., appellant pro se.

Gregory Guercio, Plainview, N. Y. (Campanella, Zolotorofe & Guercio, P.C., Plain-view, N. Y., of counsel), for appellee.

Before FEINBERG, Chief Judge, and MANSFIELD and OAKES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Plaintiff Harvey S. Kornit appeals pro se from a memorandum and order dated October 23, 1981 by George C. Pratt, J. of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. Judge Pratt’s decision dismissed appellant’s complaint, which sought injunctive relief against defendant Board of Education of the Plain-view-Old Bethpage Central School District, New York for alleged violations of Title III of the Consumer Credit Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1671-1677. Appellant, a public school teacher, challenges the deduction of two days’ wages for his participation in an illegal strike under New York State’s Taylor Law, N.Y.Civ.Serv.Law §§ 200-214 (McKinney 1973 & Supp. 1981-1982).1 He *14contends that this deduction constitutes an impermissible garnishment under Title III. Appellant invoked federal jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1343(3) and 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

We affirm for the reasons set forth in Judge Pratt’s decision, which is reported at 534 F.Supp. 94 (1981).

1

. This is not the first time that appellant has challenged the Taylor Law. He previously contested the deduction of his wages after a work stoppage in 1972 on the grounds that his right to due process had been violated because the school board members were not impartial decisionmakers and because the procedure provided by N.Y.Civ.Serv.Law § 210 amounted to a garnishment without hearing or court order in violation of *Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp.,*395 U.S. 337, 89 S.Ct. 1820, 23 L.Ed.2d 349 (1969). Judge Orrin G. Judd of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York dismissed the complaint on the mer*14its in a memorandum and order dated July 22, 1975. On appeal, this court vacated the judgment with instructions to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. *Kornit v. Board of Education,*542 F.2d 593 (2d Cir. 1976) (per curiam). The Supreme Court granted certiorari and remanded for further consideration in light of *Monell v. Department of Social Services,*436 U.S. 658, 98 S.Ct. 2018, 56 L.Ed.2d 611 (1978). 438 U.S. 902, 98 S.Ct. 3118, 57 L.Ed.2d 1144 (1978). On remand, this court by order dated October 4, 1978 affirmed Judge Judd’s decision for the reasons set forth in his July 22 memorandum and order. 591 F.2d 1330 (1978). The Supreme Court subsequently denied certiorari, 440 U.S. 936, 99 S.Ct. 1281, 59 L.Ed.2d 495 (1979), and a petition for rehearing, 441 U.S. 917, 99 S.Ct. 2020, 60 L.Ed.2d 390 (1979).
Exhibit 31.2

# CERTIFICATION UNDER
SECTION 302 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Lawrence P. Reinhold,
Chief Financial Officer of Systemax Inc., certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Systemax Inc. (the
registrant); 

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 (except as
disclosed in Item 9A of this annual report on Form 10-K) we have: 

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to reasonably
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within these entities,
particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared; 

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant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 registrants internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants fourth
fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrants control over financial reporting. 

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 the registrants
board of directors: 

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting known to me 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 controls
over financial reporting.

Date:  March 30, 2007

/s/ LAWRENCE P. REINHOLD
Lawrence Reinhold, Chief Financial Officer