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



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Interep National Radio Sales, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
Report), I, Ralph C. Guild, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, 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 14, 2005 |  |  |  | /s/    RALPH C. GUILD                            
|                        |  |  |  | Ralph C. Guild                                   
|                        |  |  |  | Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer



---

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Interep National Radio Sales, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the Report), I, William J. McEntee, Jr., Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, 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 14, 2005 |  |  |  | /s/    WILLIAM J. MCENTEE,
JR.                   
|                        |  |  |  | William J. McEntee, Jr.                          
|                        |  |  |  | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Editorial Note on Part 702
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 702 appear at 84 FR 1606, Feb. 5, 2019.

§ 702.201 Scope and definition. ( a ) *Scope.* This subpart B applies in lieu of subpart A of this part exclusively to credit unions defined in paragraph (b) of this section as “new” pursuant to section 216(b)(2) of the FCUA, 12 U.S.C. 1790d(b)(2).
( b ) *New credit union defined.* A “new” credit union for purposes of this subpart is a credit union that both has been in operation for less than ten (10) years and has total assets of not more than $10 million. Once a credit union reports total assets of more than $10 million on a Call Report, the credit union is no longer new, even if its assets subsequently decline below $10 million.
( c ) *Effect of spin-offs.* A credit union formed as the result of a “spin-off” of a group from the field of membership of an existing credit union is deemed to be in operation since the effective date of the spin-off. A credit union whose total assets decline below $10 million because a group within its field of membership has been spun-off is deemed “new” if it has been in operation less than 10 years.
( d ) *Actions to evade prompt corrective action.* If the NCUA Board determines that a credit union was formed, or was reduced in asset size as a result of a spin-off, or was merged, primarily to qualify as “new” under this subpart, the credit union shall be deemed subject to prompt corrective action under subpart A of this part.
§ 121.308 Lavatory fire protection. ( a ) Except as provided in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section, no person may operate a passenger-carrying airplane unless each lavatory in the airplane is equipped with a smoke detector system or equivalent that provides a warning light in the cockpit or provides a warning light or audio warning in the passenger cabin which would be readily detected by a flight attendant, taking into consideration the positioning of flight attendants throughout the passenger compartment during various phases of flight.
( b ) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, no person may operate a passenger-carrying airplane unless each lavatory in the airplane is equipped with a built-in fire extinguisher for each disposal receptacle for towels, paper, or waste located within the lavatory. The built-in fire extinguisher must be designed to discharge automatically into each disposal receptacle upon occurrence of a fire in the receptacle.
( c ) Until December 22, 1997, a certificate holder described in § 121.2(a) (1) or (2) may operate an airplane with a passenger seat configuration of 30 or fewer seats that does not comply with the smoke detector system requirements described in paragraph (a) of this section and the fire extinguisher requirements described in paragraph (b) of this section.
( d ) After December 22, 1997, no person may operate a nontransport category airplane type certificated after December 31, 1964, with a passenger seat configuration of 10-19 seats unless that airplane complies with the smoke detector system requirements described in paragraph (a) of this section, except that the smoke detector system or equivalent must provide a warning light in the cockpit or an audio warning that would be readily detected by the flightcrew.
[Doc. No. 28154, 60 FR 65929, Dec. 20, 1995]
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, James A. Clark, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Critical Path, Inc.; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact 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 report; 

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly presentin all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

 

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, 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 theregistrant’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 theregistrant’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 internal control overfinancial reporting; and 

 

5. The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) 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 performingthe equivalent functions): 

 

a) All significantdeficiencies 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 financialinformation; and 

 

b) Any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
§ 125.379 Landing weather minimums: IFR. ( a ) If the pilot in command of an airplane has not served 100 hours as pilot in command in the type of airplane being operated, the MDA or DA/DH and visibility landing minimums in the certificate holder's operations specification are increased by 100 feet and one-half mile (or the RVR equivalent). The MDA or DA/DH and visibility minimums need not be increased above those applicable to the airport when used as an alternate airport, but in no event may the landing minimums be less than a 300-foot ceiling and 1 mile of visibility.
( b ) The 100 hours of pilot-in-command experience required by paragraph (a) may be reduced (not to exceed 50 percent) by substituting one landing in operations under this part in the type of airplane for 1 required hour of pilot-in-command experience if the pilot has at least 100 hours as pilot in command of another type airplane in operations under this part.
( c ) Category II minimums, when authorized in the certificate holder's operations specifications, do not apply until the pilot in command subject to paragraph (a) of this section meets the requirements of that paragraph in the type of airplane the pilot is operating.
[Doc. No. 19779, 45 FR 67235, Oct. 9, 1980, as amended by Amdt. 125-52, 72 FR 31683, June 7, 2007]
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3753 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3753

   To provide for the restoration of the Benjamin Franklin National 
                   Memorial, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 3, 2004

 Mr. Hoeffel (for himself, Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania, Mr. Fattah, Mr. 
  Greenwood, and Mr. Holden) introduced the following bill; which was 
                 referred to the Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To provide for the restoration of the Benjamin Franklin National 
                   Memorial, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. RESTORATION AND IMPROVEMENT OF BENJAMIN FRANKLIN NATIONAL 
              MEMORIAL.

    (a) Authorization of Activities; Cooperative Agreement.--The 
Secretary of the Interior, through the National Park Service, shall 
rehabilitate and make improvements to the Benjamin Franklin National 
Memorial, including the Memorial Hall and the Franklin statue, located 
in The Franklin Institute Science Museum in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 
The Secretary may enter into a cooperative agreement with The Franklin 
Institute to carry out the activities under this section.
    (b) Activities.--Activities under subsection (a) shall include the 
following:
            (1) Repair and restoration of the dome of the Memorial 
        Hall.
            (2) Construction of ramps and handrails in The Franklin 
        Institute to improve access to the Memorial.
            (3) Cleaning and refurbishing the entrance stairs, marble 
        walls, and floors of the Memorial Hall.
            (4) Cleaning and refurbishing the Franklin statue located 
        in the Memorial Hall.
            (5) Creation of an updated visitor education experience for 
        the Memorial that includes sound, video, and holographic 
        technologies.
            (6) Updated lighting and signage, appropriate inscription 
        of inspirational quotations, and audiovisual additions to 
        enhance the experience of visitors to the Memorial.
            (7) Creation of a 10,000 square foot exhibit adjacent to 
        the Memorial Hall dedicated to Benjamin Franklin.
    (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be 
appropriated to the Secretary of the Interior to carry out this 
section, $10,000,000 for fiscal years 2005 through 2009.
                                 <all>
```
#### § 129.25 Airplane security.

Foreign air carriers conducting operations under this part must comply with the applicable security requirements in 49 CFR chapter XII.

[67 FR 8350, Feb. 22, 2002]
§ 13.210 Filing of documents. ( a ) *General rule.* Unless provided otherwise in this subpart, all documents in proceedings under this subpart must be tendered for filing with the FAA Hearing Docket.
( b ) *Methods of filing.* Filing must be by email, personal delivery, mail, or fax.
( c ) *Address for filing.* A person filing a document with the FAA Hearing Docket must use the address identified for the method of filing as follows: ( 1 ) *If delivery is in person, or by expedited or overnight express courier service.* Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue SW, Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W100, Washington, DC 20597; Attention: FAA Hearing Docket, AGC-70.
( 2 ) *If delivery is via U.S. mail, or U.S. certified or registered mail.* Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: FAA Hearing Docket, AGC-70, Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W100.
( 3 ) *If delivery is via email or fax.* The email address and fax number for the FAA Hearing Docket, made available on the FAA Office of Adjudication website.
( d ) *Date of filing.* If a document is filed by fax or email, the date of filing is the date the email or fax is sent. If a document is filed by personal delivery, the date of filing is the date that personal delivery is accomplished. If a document is filed by mail, the date of filing is the date shown on the certificate of service, the date shown on the postmark if there is no certificate of service, or the mailing date shown by other evidence if there is no certificate of service or postmark.
( e ) *Form.* Each document must be typewritten or legibly handwritten.
( f ) *Contents.* Unless otherwise specified in this subpart, each document must contain a short, plain statement of the facts on which the person's case rests and a brief statement of the action requested.
( g ) *Requirement to file an original document and number of copies.* A party must file an original document and one copy when filing by personal delivery or by mail. Only one copy must be filed if filing is accomplished by email or fax.
( h ) *Filing by email.* A document that is filed by email must be attached as a PDF file to an email. The document must be signed in accordance with § 13.207. The email message does not constitute a submission, but serves only to deliver the attached PDF file to the FAA Hearing Docket.
[Cite as Fifth Third Mtge. Co. v. Bihn, 134 Ohio St.3d 367, 2012-Ohio-5494.]

F IFTH T HIRD M ORTGAGE C OMPANY , A PPELLEE , v . B IHN , A PPELLANT . [Cite as Fifth Third Mtge. Co. v. Bihn, 134 Ohio St.3d 367, 2012-Ohio-5494.] Court of appeals’ judgment reversed and c ause remanded for further proceedings consistent with Fed. Home Loan Mtge. Corp. v. Schwartzwald. (No. 2012-0867—Submitted December 4, 2012—Decided December 5, 2012.) C ERTIFIED BY the Court of Appeals for Montgomery County, No. 24691, 2012-Ohio-637.

__________________ {¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with Fed. Home Loan Mtge. Corp. v. Schwartzwald , 134 Ohio St.3d 13, 2012-Ohio-5017, 979 N.E.2d 1214

. O’C ONNOR , C.J., and P FEIFER , L UNDBERG S TRATTON , O’D ONNELL , L ANZINGER , and C UPP , JJ., concur.
M C G EE B ROWN , J., not participating.

__________________ Maguire & Schneider, L.L.P., Karl H. Schneider, and Mark R. Meterko, for appellee. Gudorf Law Group, L.L.C., and Ted Gudo rf, for appellant, Jacqueline S. Bihn.

______________________
Swanson, Brian (OST)

From: Sent: To: Subject: Devany, Dennis (OST) Saturday, August 04, 2012 2:08 PM Swanson, Brian (OST) FW: SkyWest Proposal for Rhinelander Airport

From: Judith Bloom [mailto:bloomvillenorth@frontiernet.net] Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2012 2:06 PM To: Devany, Dennis (OST); .brianswanson@dot.gov Subject: SkyWest Proposal for Rhinelander Airport Dear Dennis and Brian, • '' \)

I am a frequent flyer for bothbusiness and personal and I strongly urge that the SkyWest proposalbe selected for Rhinelander CountyAirport. I have written the same to Airport ManagerJoe Brauer and Airport Commission President Bob Heck. · Having theabilityto fly from Rhinelander on a Delta partnerto Minneapolis will significantly increase my productivityfor my employer, RedPrairie,Inc. and I lookforward to the prospect ofbeing able to do so.
Best regards,

Judith Bloom 8250 Bloomville Lane LakeTomahawk, WI 54539 715-277-4133

1
August 15, 2013

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

WOLF HOLLOW I, L.P., Appellant

NO. 14-09-00118-CV V.

EL PASO MARKETING, L.P. AND ENTERPRISE TEXAS PIPELINE, LLC, 

Appellees

________________________________

This cause, an appeal from the judgment signed December 30, 2008 in favor 

of appellees El Paso Marketing, L.P. and Enterprise Texas Pipeline, LLC, was 

heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find as 

follows:

1. The trial court did not err in issuing the first and second declarations of its 

final judgment (i.e., declaring that the four interruptions of service “constitute 

events of Force Majeure as defined in the Gas Supply and Fuel Management 

Agreement as amended” and that “El Paso gave Wolf Hollow proper notice of 

these events of Force Majeure as required by the Agreement and El Paso has no 

liability” regarding the service interruptions of August 8, 2006, September 11, 

2006, January 8, 2007, and January 11, 2007). We according AFFIRM these 

portions of the judgment.

2. The trial court erred in 

a. issuing the third and fourth declarations of its final judgment (i.e., 

declaring that “Wolf Hollow’s exclusive remedy regarding gas quality 
claims for gas delivered by Enterprise Texas Pipeline is to receive an 

assignment as set forth in Article XIV, Section 14.1 of any claims that El 

Paso Marketing, L.P. may have against such transporter” and declaring that 

“Article XXI of the Agreement does not apply to gas quality claims for gas 

delivered to Wolf Hollow on the Enterprise Texas Pipeline . . . .”);

b. declaring that Wolf Hollow shall take nothing on its counterclaims 

against El Paso Marketing, L.P.;

c. declaring that Wolf Hollow shall take nothing on its cross-claim 

against Enterprise Texas Pipeline, LLC;

d. holding that the claims regarding indemnity are moot;

e. denying relief not expressly granted in the final judgment;

f. awarding El Paso and Enterprise their costs of court;

We accordingly order these portions of the judgment REVERSED and we 

REMAND the case for further proceedings in accordance with this court’s 

opinion.

We order appellees El Paso Marketing, L.P. and Enterprise Texas Pipeline, 

LLC jointly and severally to pay all costs incurred in this appeal. 

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
#### CITY OF TULSA v. COCKRELL.

No. 31473.

June 12, 1945.

*159 P. 2d 711.*

E. M. Gallaher, L. A. Justus, Philip J. Kramer, and C. Lawrence Elder, all of Tulsa, for plaintiff in error.

Remington Rogers, of Tulsa, for defendant in error.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error has appealed from a judgment entered against it in the trial court, and on August 11, 1943, filed its brief. The authorities therein cited reasonably sustain the allegations of error. The defendant in error has filed no brief and has offered no excuse for such failure. Under such circumstances, as stated in Gooldy v. Hines, 186 Okla. 583, 99 P. 2d 498, it is not the duty of this court to search the record for some theory upon which to sustain the action of the trial court, but the cause may be reversed and remanded, with directions.

The cause is reversed and remanded, with directions to vacate the judgment entered for the defendant in error and to enter judgment for the plaintiff in error.

GIBSON, C.J., HURST, V.C.J., and RILEY, OSBORN, BAYLESS, WELCH, DAVISON, and ARNOLD, JJ., concur.
#### SEATON *v.*CORDRAY.

Slander — evil disposition — mere intention — imputing crime — heat and passion — nominal damages.

It is not actionable to accuse another with an evil disposition, a mere intention to commit a crime.

To make words imputing crime actionable, they must be such, as, if true, would subject the accused to infamous punish.ment.

Slanderous words, uttered in heat and passion, or provoked by the plaintiff, entitle the plaintiff to merely nominal damages.

• Slander. The words charged were, 4 You are a thief, and have been guilty of stealing, and I can prove it.’ Issue was taken upon not guilty.

The plaintiff, who is a lawyer, had a suit before a justice, with Cordray, and had got cast. After the trial, they met in the bar room of a tavern, when the defendant said, speaking of the trial, to the plaintiff, ‘You are snake bit.’ Some taunting words followed, when the defendant said to the plaintiff’, ‘ I understand you said I was a damned old rascal.’ The plaintiff replied, ‘ I never said so, but said you would lie by times.’ The defendant then said, ‘if you said that there, you *will lie and*steal, and I can prove it.’ Both parties were in a passion. The plaintiff went out and immediately brought this suit.

*Goodenow*and Atherton, for the plaintiff.

*S. W. Culbertson,*contra.

The Court,

to the jury. An action may be sustained for charging another with being a thief, or with having stolen, but not for imputing a *mere intention to steal,*or with having an *evil disposition.*The foundation of the slander is, that the charge, if true, would subject the accused to infamous punishment; an evil disposition, without act, cannot so subject any one. If you find that the words spoken by the defendant only imputed to the plaintiff an *intent*to steal, the defendant is entitled to your verdict. So, if the words spoken were provoked, and drawn out of the defendant by the plaintiff himself, with a design to sue. Courts should not be resorted to for such purposes. If the words spoken do impute crime, but were spoken in heat and passion, while the parties were excited, and in contest, the damages should be merely nominal for the plaintiff.

Verdict for the plaintiff, twenty-five cents. Judgment for that sum without costs.
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:24523 Filed:06/09/23 Entered:06/12/23 17:08:06 Desc: Main

Document Page 1 of 4
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:24523 Filed:06/09/23 Entered:06/12/23 17:08:06 Desc: Main

Document Page 2 of 4
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:24523 Filed:06/09/23 Entered:06/12/23 17:08:06 Desc: Main

Document Page 3 of 4
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:24523 Filed:06/09/23 Entered:06/12/23 17:08:06 Desc: Main

Document Page 4 of 4
**Exhibit 23**

**Consent of Independent Registered PublicAccounting Firm**

**The Board of DirectorsAksys, Ltd.:**

We consent to incorporation by reference in theregistration statements (Nos. 333-76142, 333-44668,333-36674, 333-89188, 333-97763, 333-100557, 333-102651and 333-114396) on Form S-3 and (Nos. 333-64134, 333-64136,and 333-18073) on Form S-8 of Aksys, Ltd. andsubsidiaries of our report dated April 13, 2006, with respect to theconsolidated balance sheets of Aksys, Ltd. and subsidiaries as of December 31,2005 and 2004, and the related consolidated statements of operations,stockholders’ equity (deficit) and comprehensive income (loss), and cash flowsfor each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2005,which report appears in the December 31, 2005 annual report on Form 10-K/Aof Aksys, Ltd.

**KPMG LLP**

Chicago, IllinoisApril 24, 2006

----