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

# CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO

# 18
U.S.C. §1350,

# AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Cognigen Networks, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ended December 31, 2004 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Thomas S. Smith, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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.
|-- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | /s/
Thomas S. SmithThomas S. SmithPresident and Chief Executive Officer
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: September
7, 2005

---
HomeLiberia

# Liberia

71 items

        -    Press Statement  		Liberian Presidential Elections	  Matthew MillerNovember 17, 2023 
        -    Overseas Schools Fact Sheet  		Monrovia, Liberia: American International School of Monrovia: 2023-2024 Fact Sheet	  November 3, 2023 
        -    Press Statement  		Visa Restriction Policy on Undermining Democracy in Liberia	  Antony J. BlinkenSeptember 27, 2023 
        -    Question 2.1: Foreign Assistance  		The Impact of Aid on Economic Growth: Analysis of Quasi-Experimental Evaluations in Agriculture and Food Security	   
        -    Report  		2023 Investment Climate Statements: 	  July 26, 2023 
        -    Press Statement  		Liberia National Day Message	  Antony J. BlinkenJuly 26, 2023 
        -    Remarks  		"The Legal, Practical, and Policy Implications of the Russia-Ukraine Conflict Panel II: Adjudicating Atrocities from the Russia-Ukraine War: Can It Be Done, In What Tribunals, and Should There Be Limits?"	  Beth Van SchaackJune 29, 2023The Federalist SocietyWashington, D.C. 
        -    Report  		2023 Fiscal Transparency Report: Liberia 	  June 27, 2023 
        -    Report  		2023 Trafficking in Persons Report: Liberia	  June 15, 2023 
        -    DipNote  		Training Together to Save Lives: The State Department and Department of Defense Prepare for U.S. Citizen Evacuations	  May 23, 2023 

previous page1234…8next page

Back to Top
I

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 2999

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude certain severance

payment amounts from income.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 29, 1996

Mr. TORRICELLI introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude

certain severance payment amounts from income.

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

3 SECTION 1. EXCLUSION FROM INCOME OF SEVERANCE

4 PAYMENT AMOUNTS.

5 (A) IN GENERAL.—Part III of subchapter B of chap6 ter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to

7 items specifically excluded from gross income) is amended

8 by redesignating section 137 as section 138 and by insert9 ing after section 136 the following new section:
2

•HR 2999 IH

1 ‘‘SEC. 137. SEVERANCE PAYMENTS.

2 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—In the case of an individual,

3 gross income shall not include any qualified severance pay4 ment.

5 ‘‘(b) LIMITATION.—The amount to which the exclu6 sion under subsection (a) applies shall not exceed $50,000

7 with respect to any separation from employment.

8 ‘‘(c) QUALIFIED SEVERANCE PAYMENT.—For pur9 poses of this section, the term ‘qualified severance pay10 ment’ means any payment received by an individual if—

11 ‘‘(1) such payment was paid by such individ12 ual’s employer on account of such individual’s sepa13 ration from employment, and

14 ‘‘(2) such separation was in connection with a

15 reduction in the work force of the employer.’’

16 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections

17 for part III of subchapter B of chapter 1 of such Code

18 is amended by striking the item relating to section 137

19 and inserting the following new items:

‘‘Sec. 137. Severance payments.

‘‘Sec. 138. Cross references to other Acts.’’

20 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

21 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after

22 December 31, 1995.

Æ
##### 



Exhibit 21
  Name
    
    Jurisdiction of OrganizationC-Cube International Limited
    
    Hong KongC-Cube Microsystems (Asia Pacific) Ltd.
    
    Hong KongC-Cube Microsystems (Canada) Ltd.
    
    CanadaC-Cube Microsystems International Ltd.
    
    BermudaC-Cube Technology Limited
    
    BermudaC-Cube US, Inc.
    
    DelawareEngenio Information Technologies Limited
    
    United KingdomLSI (Spain) Technology Development S.L
    
    SpainLSI (Thai) Ltd.
    
    ThailandLSI Asia Pacific Corporation
    
    DelawareLSI Canada Corp.
    
    CanadaLSI China Technology (Shanghai) Co. Ltd.
    
    ChinaLSI China Trading (Shanghai) Co. Ltd.
    
    ChinaLSI Corporation (Mexico) S.de R.L. de C.V.
    
    MexicoLSI Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG
    
    GermanyLSI Deutschland Verwaltungs GMBH
    
    GermanyLSI EMEA Corporation
    
    DelawareLSI Holdings Corporation
    
    DelawareLSI International LLC
    
    DelawareLSI Investments Pte. Ltd.
    
    SingaporeLSI Israel Ltd.
    
    IsraelLSI Japan Ltd.
    
    JapanLSI Logic (Australia) Pty Ltd
    
    AustraliaLSI Logic AB
    
    SwedenLSI Logic Asia, Inc.
    
    DelawareLSI Logic Canada Corporation
    
    CanadaLSI Logic Corporation of Canada, Inc.
    
    CanadaLSI Logic Corporation of Korea, Inc.
    
    KoreaLSI Logic Europe Limited
    
    United KingdomLSI Logic GmbH
    
    GermanyLSI Logic HK Holdings
    
    Cayman IslandsLSI Logic Hong Kong Ltd.
    
    Hong KongLSI Logic Hungary LLC
    
    HungaryLSI Logic India Private Limited
    
    IndiaLSI Logic International Services, Inc.
    
    CaliforniaLSI Logic Japan Semiconductor, Inc.
    
    JapanLSI Logic K.K.
    
    JapanLSI Logic LLC
    
    DelawareLSI Logic Malta Ltd.
    
    MaltaLSI Logic Netherlands B.V.
    
    NetherlandsLSI Logic Resale Corporation
    
    DelawareLSI Logic s.r.l.
    
    ItalyLSI Logic SAS
    
    FranceLSI Technology (Beijing) Company Ltd.
    
    ChinaLSI Logic Singapore Ltd.
    
    SingaporeLSI Logic Storage Systems Europe Holdings Ltd.
    
    IrelandLSI Management Services Corporation
    
    Delaware




---



##### 



Name
    
    Jurisdiction of OrganizationLSI Research (India) Private Limited
    
    IndiaLSI Research & Development Pune Private Ltd.
    
    IndiaLSI Storage Cyprus Limited
    
    CyprusLSI Storage Ireland Limited
    
    IrelandLSI Technologies Israel Ltd.
    
    IsraelLSI Technology (Singapore) Pte. Ltd.
    
    SingaporeLSI Technology Investments S.L
    
    SpainLSI Technology Limited
    
    United KingdomMedia Computer Technologies, Inc.
    
    CaliforniaMetta Technology (Mauritius)
    
    MauritiusSilicon Manufacturing Partners Pte Ltd.
    
    SingaporeStoreAge (Beijing) Co., Ltd.
    
    ChinaSubLSI (Korea) Co., Ltd.
    
    KoreaVelio Communications International Inc.
    
    Cayman IslandsAgere Systems (Ireland) Design Ltd
    
    IrelandAgere Systems (Ireland) Limited
    
    IrelandAgere Systems American Parkway LP
    
    DelawareAgere Systems Inc.
    
    DelawareAgere Systems LVCC LLC
    
    DelawareAgere Systems Nederland B.V.
    
    Netherlands
#### § 136.330 Indian health scholarships.

Indian Health Scholarships will be awarded by the Secretary pursuant to 338A through 339G of the Public Health Service Act, and such implementing regulations as may be promulgated by the Secretary except as set out in this subdivision for the purpose of providing scholarships to Indian and other students at health professions schools in order to obtain health professionals to serve Indians.

[42 FR 59646, Nov. 18, 1977, as amended at 50 FR 1855, Jan. 14, 1985]
§ 137.440 What happens in the case of an immediate reassumption under section 507(a)(2)(C) of the Act [25 U.S.C. 458aaa-6(a)(2)(C)]? ( a ) The Secretary may, upon written notification to the Self-Governance Tribe, immediately reassume operation of a program, service, function, or activity (or portion thereof) if: ( 1 ) The Secretary makes a finding of imminent substantial and irreparable endangerment of the public health caused by an act or omission of the Self-Governance Tribe; and
( 2 ) The endangerment arises out of a failure to carry out the compact or funding agreement.
( b ) When the Secretary advises a Self-Governance Tribe that the Secretary intends to take an action referred to in paragraph (a) of this section, the Secretary must also notify the Deputy Director of the Office of Hearings and Appeals, Department of the Interior, 801 North Quincy St., Suite 300, Arlington, VA 22203.
[67 FR 35342, May 17, 2002, as amended at 80 FR 64353, Oct. 23, 2015]
Office of the Governor 

State Capitol 

1900 Kanawha Boulevard, East 

Charleston, WV 25305 

Telephone: (304) 558-2000 

Toll Free: 1-888-438-2731 

FAX: (304) 342-7025 

www.wvgov.org 

July 05,201 1 

The Honorable Lisa P. Jackson 

Administrator 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20460 

Re: Proposed Regulation of Cooling Water Intake Structures 

Dear Ms. Jackson: 

I am writing again to comment on the Environmental Protection Agency's draft 316(b) rule, 

regarding cooling water intakes at power plants. I appreciate receiving your response dated 

March 24,201 1, wherein you committed to a rules proposal that would "reflect a common-sense 

approach that reasonably accommodates site-specific circumstances while minimizing adverse 

environmental impact." On behalf of the citizens and businesses of West Virginia, I implore you 

to keep those words in mind and reevaluate your agency's proposed regulations to strike a better 

balance between the costs and benefits. 

I know that you are hearing comments on a host of issues. I would like to emphasize several that 

are important to West Virginians. These include: 

Providing clarification that man-made lakes built to cool power stations do not constitute 

waters of the United States for purposes of this regulation; 

Employing a more appropriate cost-benefit analysis test, as the social impact model 

proposed in the rule is very tilted towards excessive regulations and does not 

appropriately consider costs; 

Employing more flexible and attainable impingement standard for all power stations; 
- 

OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR / T 

Providing clarification that when it is appropriate to pursue closed cycle cooling, doing so 

represents full compliance with the standard without the need for further analysis or 

controls; and 

Providing flexibility in timing for the required studies at nuclear and fossil fuel stations 

and resulting retrofits to allow the regulated community to complete needed capital 

investments in an orderly and cost-effective way. 

Thank you for considering my comments. As you know, energy is an important part of the West 

Virginia economy and we take pride in our energy independence and affordable energy prices. 

Please amend this rule in such a way that these assets our State enjoys are not threatened. 

Sincerely, 

Earl ~a~ Tomblin 

Governor 

cc: Honorable Cass R. Sunstein, Administrator 

Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

The Office of Management and Budget
EXHIBIT 32.2


                  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) and
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                 Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


     In connection with the filing by Wincroft, Inc. (the "Company") of the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ending December 31, 2006 (the
"Report"), I, Danny Wettreich, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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)
               and 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
               operation of the Company.




                                               /s/ Danny Wettreich
                                               ---------------------------------
                                               Danny Wettreich
                                               Chief Financial Officer


Dated:  February 17, 2007
EXHIBIT 32.1



BIOVEST INTERNATIONAL, INC.



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 Biovest International, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the period ending September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Steven Arikian, Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my 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 financial condition and result of operations of the Company.



|                                                           
|-----------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Steven Arikian                                         
|Steven Arikian CEO, President and Chairman January 13, 2005
From: Meg.Garakani@holcim.com

To: Keith Barnett/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: ruksana.mirza@holcim.com

Date: 02/05/2007 05:25 PM

Subject: Holcim Mercury Testing

Hi Keith, 

Following up to our last Friday phone conversation, this is to confirm that both Holcim plants (Midlothian 

and Portland) will voluntarily participate in the Mercury testing program. As we discussed, the ML 

scrubbers are going through optimization. The optimization would be critical in achieving the study 

objectives of establishing a more accurate range for the mercury emission reduction capability across the 

scrubber. Therefore, this needs to be considered in the ML test schedule planning. At present, we are 

working with PCA in developing the test plan and the schedule. Please let me know if you have any 

questions. Regards, Meg
**Exhibit 31.2****CERTIFICATIONS**  I, Linda J. Miles, certify that: 1) I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Bank of Commerce Holdings (the“registrant”); 2) Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this annual report; 3) Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, resultsof operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisannual report; 4) The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13-a-14 and15d-14) for the registrant and we have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this annual report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date ofthis annual report (the “Evaluation Date”); and  (c) Presented in this annual report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluationas of the Evaluation Date;5) The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors: (a) All significant deficiencies in the design or operation ofinternal controls which could adversely affect the registrant’s ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified forthe registrant’s auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls: and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrols; and6) The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have indicated in this annual report whetheror not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that couldsignificantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation,including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses.   */s/* LINDA J. MILES   Linda J. Miles  Executive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer  (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)  Dated March 6, 2006
# C_2005296EN.01001301.xml

| 26.11.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 296/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.11.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 296/13

---

Appeal brought on 15 September 2005 (fax 9 September 2005) by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) against the judgment delivered on 15 June 2005 by the Third Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in Case T-7/04 between Shaker di L. Laudato & C. Sas and the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market, the other party to the proceedings being Limiñana y Botella, SL

(Case C-334/05 P)

(2005/C 296/25)

Language of the case: Italian

An appeal against the judgment of the Third Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities of 15 June 2005 in Case T-7/04 between Shaker di L. Laudato & C. Sas and the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 15 September 2005 by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market, represented by O. Montalto and M. Capostagno, acting as Agents, the other party to the proceedings being Limiñana y Botella, SL.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| 1. | set aside the judgment under appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

set aside the judgment under appeal;

| 2. | order the Shaker to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

order the Shaker to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant considers that the judgment of the Court of First Instance under appeal in this case is vitiated by misinterpretation and misapplication of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark.

It is settled principle that the assessment of likelihood of confusion between trade marks under Article 8(1)(b) of the regulation on the Community trade mark is based on two distinct elements: first, an analytical comparison between both the signs and the goods, and then a concise evaluation of the results obtained in order to determine whether the average consumer of the goods in question might believe that those goods come from the same undertaking or from economically-linked undertakings. In particular, as regards the comparison between the signs, the analysis directed at establishing whether the signs are similar must take into consideration the visual, phonetic and conceptual aspects to arrive at a global assessment based on the general impression given by the marks themselves, taking particular account of their distinctive and dominant components.

The applicant claims that the Court of First Instance failed to give effect to the principle cited above and, in particular, it dismissed the possibility of confusion, basing its assessment exclusively on the visual perception of the contested mark, without taking any account of the further elements which may not be ignored in the overall assessment the likelihood of confusion.

The applicant also submits that the judgment under appeal is vitiated by manifest inconsistency and illogicality.

---
§ 3.516 Discovery. ( a ) A party may make a request to another party for production of documents for inspection and copying that are relevant and material to the issues before the ALJ.
( b ) For the purpose of this section, the term “documents” includes information, reports, answers, records, accounts, papers and other data and documentary evidence. Nothing contained in this section may be interpreted to require the creation of a document, except that requested data stored in an electronic data storage system must be produced in a form accessible to the requesting party.
( c ) Requests for documents, requests for admissions, written interrogatories, depositions and any forms of discovery, other than those permitted under paragraph (a) of this section, are not authorized.
( d ) This section may not be construed to require the disclosure of interview reports or statements obtained by any party, or on behalf of any party, of persons who will not be called as witnesses by that party, or analyses and summaries prepared in conjunction with the investigation or litigation of the case, or any otherwise privileged documents.
( e ) ( 1 ) When a request for production of documents has been received, within 30 days the party receiving that request must either fully respond to the request, or state that the request is being objected to and the reasons for that objection. If objection is made to part of an item or category, the part must be specified. Upon receiving any objections, the party seeking production may then, within 30 days or any other time frame set by the ALJ, file a motion for an order compelling discovery. The party receiving a request for production may also file a motion for protective order any time before the date the production is due.
( 2 ) The ALJ may grant a motion for protective order or deny a motion for an order compelling discovery if the ALJ finds that the discovery sought— ( i ) Is irrelevant;
( ii ) Is unduly costly or burdensome;
( iii ) Will unduly delay the proceeding; or
( iv ) Seeks privileged information.
( 3 ) The ALJ may extend any of the time frames set forth in paragraph (e)(1) of this section.
( 4 ) The burden of showing that discovery should be allowed is on the party seeking discovery.
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION


Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. 1350


(Section
302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)





In
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of China Swine Genetics, Inc.
(the “Company”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2010, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Zhenyu
Shang, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, 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.







Date:
      May 20, 2010
            By:  
      /s/ Zhenyu
      ShangName:
      Zhenyu ShangTitle:
      Chief Executive Officer