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




CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. § 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


§
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002







In
connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the
Quarterly Report of Lakeland Industries, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for
the period ending July 31, 2008 (the “Report”), I, Christopher J. Ryan, Chief
Executive Officer, President, Secretary and General Counsel of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of 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 results of operations of the Company.








September
      9,2008
            /s/Christopher J.
      RyanChristopher
      J. RyanChief
      Executive Officer, President,Secretary
      and General Counsel
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3701

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to extend the provisions 

governing nonimmigrant status for spouses and children of permanent 

resident aliens awaiting the availability of an immigrant visa, and for 

other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 20, 2004

Mr. ANDREWS (for himself and Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to extend 

the provisions governing nonimmigrant status for spouses 

and children of permanent resident aliens awaiting the 

availability of an immigrant visa, 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. NONIMMIGRANT STATUS FOR SPOUSES AND 

4 CHILDREN OF PERMANENT RESIDENTS 

5 AWAITING THE AVAILABILITY OF AN IMMI6 GRANT VISA. 

7 Section 101(a)(15)(V) of the Immigration and Na8 tionality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(V)) is amended—
2

•HR 3701 IH 

1 (1) by striking ‘‘the date of the enactment of 

2 the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act,’’ and in3 serting ‘‘January 1, 2011,’’; and 

4 (2) by striking ‘‘3 years’’ each place such term 

5 appears and inserting ‘‘6 months’’.

Æ
#### D. B. Wilder, Appellant, v. Emma F. Alderman et al., Appellees.

Appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court for DeSoto' County.

Rogers & Blanton, and Treadwell & Treadwell, for Appellant.

Leitner & Leitner, for Appellees.

Per Curiam.

This cause having been submitted to the court upon the transcript of the record and brief of counsel for the respective parties, and the court having fully *545considered the same and finding no reversible error, it is considered, ordered and adjudged by the court that the decree of the Circuit Court to which the appeal was taken, be and the same is hereby affirmed at the cost of the appellant.
§ 13.65 Appeal to the Administrator, reconsideration, and judicial review. ( a ) Any party to a hearing may appeal from the order of the hearing officer by filing with the FAA Hearing Docket a notice of appeal to the Administrator within 20 days after the date of issuance of the order. Filing and service of the notice of appeal, and any other papers, are accomplished according to the procedures in § 13.43.
( b ) If a notice of appeal is not filed from the order issued by a hearing officer, such order is final with respect to the parties. Such order is not binding precedent and is not subject to judicial review.
( c ) Any person filing an appeal authorized by paragraph (a) of this section must file an appeal brief with the Administrator within 40 days after the date of issuance of the order, and serve a copy on the other party. A reply brief must be filed within 40 days after service of the appeal brief and a copy served on the appellant.
( d ) On appeal, the Administrator reviews the record of the proceeding and issues an order dismissing, reversing, modifying or affirming the order. The Administrator's order includes the reasons for the Administrator's action. The Administrator considers only whether: ( 1 ) Each finding of fact is supported by a preponderance of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence;
( 2 ) Each conclusion is made in accordance with law, precedent, and policy; and
( 3 ) The hearing officer committed any prejudicial error.
( e ) The Director and legal personnel of the Office of Adjudication serve as the advisors to the Administrator for appeals under this section. ( 1 ) The Director has the authority to: ( i ) Manage all or portions of individual appeals; and to prepare written decisions and proposed final orders in such appeals;
( ii ) Issue procedural and other interlocutory orders aimed at proper and efficient appeal management, including, without limitation, scheduling and sanctions orders;
( iii ) Grant or deny motions to dismiss appeals;
( iv ) Dismiss appeals upon request of the appellant or by agreement of the parties;
( v ) Stay decisions and orders of the Administrator, pending judicial review or reconsideration by the Administrator;
( vi ) Summarily dismiss repetitious or frivolous petitions to reconsider or modify orders;
( vii ) Correct typographical, grammatical, and similar errors in the Administrator's decisions and orders, and to make non-substantive editorial changes; and
( viii ) Take all other reasonable steps deemed necessary and proper for the management of the appeals process, in accordance with this part and applicable law.
( 2 ) The Director's authority in paragraph (e)(1) of this section may be re-delegated, as necessary, except to hearing officers and others materially involved in the hearing that is the subject of the appeal.
( f ) Motions to reconsider the final order of the Administrator must be filed with the FAA Hearing Docket within thirty days of service of the Administrator's order.
( g ) Judicial review of the Administrator's final order under this section is provided in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5127 or 46110, as applicable.
§ 27.75 Landing. ( a ) The rotorcraft must be able to be landed with no excessive vertical acceleration, no tendency to bounce, nose over, ground loop, porpoise, or water loop, and without exceptional piloting skill or exceptionally favorable conditions, with— ( 1 ) Approach or autorotation speeds appropriate to the type of rotorcraft and selected by the applicant;
( 2 ) The approach and landing made with— ( i ) Power off, for single engine rotorcraft and entered from steady state autorotation; or
( ii ) One-engine inoperative (OEI) for multiengine rotorcraft, with each operating engine within approved operating limitations, and entered from an established OEI approach.
( b ) Multiengine rotorcraft must be able to be landed safely after complete power failure under normal operating conditions.
[Doc. No. 5074, 29 FR 15695, Nov. 24, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 27-14, 43 FR 2324, Jan. 16, 1978; Amdt. 27-44, 73 FR 10999, Feb. 29, 2008]
§ 25.499 Nose-wheel yaw and steering. ( a ) A vertical load factor of 1.0 at the airplane center of gravity, and a side component at the nose wheel ground contact equal to 0.8 of the vertical ground reaction at that point are assumed.
( b ) With the airplane assumed to be in static equilibrium with the loads resulting from the use of brakes on one side of the main landing gear, the nose gear, its attaching structure, and the fuselage structure forward of the center of gravity must be designed for the following loads: ( 1 ) A vertical load factor at the center of gravity of 1.0.
( 2 ) A forward acting load at the airplane center of gravity of 0.8 times the vertical load on one main gear.
( 3 ) Side and vertical loads at the ground contact point on the nose gear that are required for static equilibrium.
( 4 ) A side load factor at the airplane center of gravity of zero.
( c ) If the loads prescribed in paragraph (b) of this section result in a nose gear side load higher than 0.8 times the vertical nose gear load, the design nose gear side load may be limited to 0.8 times the vertical load, with unbalanced yawing moments assumed to be resisted by airplane inertia forces.
( d ) For other than the nose gear, its attaching structure, and the forward fuselage structure, the loading conditions are those prescribed in paragraph (b) of this section, except that— ( 1 ) A lower drag reaction may be used if an effective drag force of 0.8 times the vertical reaction cannot be reached under any likely loading condition; and
( 2 ) The forward acting load at the center of gravity need not exceed the maximum drag reaction on one main gear, determined in accordance with § 25.493(b).
( e ) With the airplane at design ramp weight, and the nose gear in any steerable position, the combined application of full normal steering torque and vertical force equal to 1.33 times the maximum static reaction on the nose gear must be considered in designing the nose gear, its attaching structure, and the forward fuselage structure.
[Doc. No. 5066, 29 FR 18291, Dec. 24, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 25-23, 35 FR 5673, Apr. 8, 1970; Amdt. 25-46, 43 FR 50595, Oct. 30, 1978; Amdt. 25-91, 62 FR 40705, July 29, 1997]
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3782 Considered and Passed Senate (CPS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3782

To modify the amount authorized for commitments for 7(a) loans, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 20, 2020

   Ms. Duckworth (for herself, Mr. Rubio, Mr. Coons, Mr. Risch, Mrs. 
Blackburn, Mr. Cardin, and Mrs. Shaheen) introduced the following bill; 
   which was read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To modify the amount authorized for commitments for 7(a) loans, 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. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Small Business Lending Continuity 
Act of 2020''.

SEC. 2. COMMITMENTS FOR 7(A) LOANS.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the amounts authorized 
for commitments for general business loans authorized under section 
7(a) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(a)) under the heading 
``business loans program account'' under the heading ``Small Business 
Administration'' under title V of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 
2020 (Public Law 116-93; 133 Stat. 2475) shall apply with respect to 
loans made under such section 7(a), other than loans made under 
paragraph (36) of such section 7(a), on and after the date of enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3893 

To amend the Food Security Act of 1985 to allow for emergency use of 

certain land during a pandemic, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 4, 2020 

Mr. THUNE (for himself and Ms. SMITH) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, 

and Forestry 

A BILL 

To amend the Food Security Act of 1985 to allow for emergency use of certain land during a pandemic, 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 ‘‘Pandemic Authority 

5 Suitable To Utilize Reserve Easements Act’’ or the ‘‘PAS6 TURE Act’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3893 IS

1 SEC. 2. EMERGENCY USE OF LAND ENROLLED IN THE CON2 SERVATION RESERVE PROGRAM DURING A 

3 PANDEMIC. 

4 Section 1233(b)(1)(B)(i)(I) of the Food Security Act 

5 of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3833(b)(1)(B)(i)(I)) is amended— 

6 (1) in the matter preceding item (aa), by strik7 ing ‘‘or other emergency,’’ and inserting ‘‘or other 

8 emergency (including a pandemic),’’; and 

9 (2) in item (cc), by inserting ‘‘or pandemic’’ 

10 after ‘‘disaster event’’. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
#### Rogers *et al. v.*M’Daniel.

The record must show a judgment in order to give jurisdiction to the appellate' court.

The written evidence ’relidd on in the court below, should be set out in the bill of exceptions, if tó be reviewed by the appellate court.

IN error from Leah county.

This was an action of *assumpsit,*founded on-the promissory note of the plaintiffs' in error.

The defendants below- pleaded the general issue. It was proved by a certain title bond, that said note was given in part payment ofa tract of land. The certificate of the register of the land office ''whs offered in evidence to show that said land had been entered by one Pearl, previous to the purchase of the defendants below. It was also proved that notice, was served on the plaintiff in the action to produce his titles, &c. All of which evidence was excluded from the jury by the court below, and a bill of exceptions tendered and signed, but neither said bond for title, nor the certificate of the register was embodied in the bill of exceptions.

Huntington, for plaintiff in error.

Per Curiam, Sharkey, C. J.

We are compelled to dismiss this case because the record does not show a judgment, or that any judgment was rendered on the verdict of the jury. But if this defect could be obviated, there is still nothing in the record which could avail the plaintiff in error! The action was on a note, and a plea of *non assumpsit.*The bill of exceptions shows, that the defendants relied on a failure of consideration. In support of their defence, they introduced a bond to make title, in order to prove that the note was given for land. They also offered the certificate of the register to prove, that the land *173was entered by another person, but neither the bond, nor the certificate are set out in the bill of exceptions, and both were material to enable the court to judge of the nature of the contract. The bill of exceptions is also defective in not showing when the exceptions were taken.

Let the cause be dismissed.
Neffs Bancorp, Inc. 10-Q





EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER




PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





The undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in connection with this quarterly report on Form 10-Q, that:





·
the report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and


·
the information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the Corporation’s financial condition and results of operations of the corporation as of the dates and for the periods expressed in this quarterly report.








/s/ Kevin A. Schmidt


Kevin A. Schmidt


Principal Financial Officer







Dated:  November 16, 2009
#### § 125.171 Fire-detector systems.

Enough quick-acting fire detectors must be provided in each designated fire zone to assure the detection of any fire that may occur in that zone.
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of the Chief Executive Officer

and the Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Cost
Plus, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period August 2, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Barry J. Feld, Chief Executive Officer and President, and Jane L.
Baughman, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, hereby certify, 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.



|                                                                                                
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Barry J. Feld                                                                               
|Barry J. Feld Chief Executive Officer, President (Principal Executive Officer)                  
|                                                                                                
|September 8, 2008                                                                               
|                                                                                                
|/s/ Jane L. Baughman                                                                            
|Jane L. Baughman Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)
|                                                                                                
|September 8, 2008
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Labor

In accordance with Section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Public Law 92-463), announcement is hereby given of a meeting of the President's Committee on the ILO:

*Name:*                     President's Committee on the International Labor Organization.                

*Date:*                     Tuesday, May 16, 2000.                

*Time:*                     2 p.m.                

*Place:*                     U.S. Department of Labor, Third & Constitution Ave., N.W., Room S-2508, Washington, D.C. 20210.                

Purpose: The meeting will include a review and discussion of current issues relating to United States' negotiating positions with member nations of the International Labor Organization. The meeting will concern matters the disclosure of which would seriously compromise the Government's negotiating objectives and bargaining positions. Accordingly, the meeting will be closed to the public, pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act and Section 9(B) of the Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B).

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Andrew J. Samet, President's Committee on the International Labor Organization, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Room S-2235, Washington, D.C. 20210, Telephone (202) 693-4770.

      ( print page 25944)    
Signed at Washington, DC this 1st day of May, 2000.

Alexis M. Herman,

Secretary of Labor.

[FR Doc. 00-11154  Filed 5-3-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-23-M
#### JOHNSON v. THE STATE.

(Decided May 13, 1915.)

Appeal from Walker Law and Equity Court.

Heard before Hon. T. L. Sowell.

No counsel marked for appellant. W. L. Martin, Attorney General, for the State.

Pelham, P. J.

Appeal dismissed on authority of *Ogden v. State, infra,*68 South. 701.
#### J. O. Hover *et al.,*Appellants, v. C. C. Thompson, *Appellee.*

Orders denying a temporary injunction and sustaining a demurrer to a bill of complaint with leave to amend, will not be re- ' versed when the purpose of the bill is to enforce ambiguous terms of a lease.

Appealed from the Circuit Court for Manatee County.

The facts in the case are stated in the opinion of the court.

*Singletary*& Reeves, for Appellants;

*Curry*& Crichlow, for Appellee.

Whitfield, C. J.

The appellants executed to the appellee a lease containing the following: “Whereas C. C. Thompson desires space upon Main St. Dock to be used as an oyster, ice and retail fish market, and marine sport*302ing goods, to be occupied *by*himself, therefore the owners of the dock-agree to have constructed a building” constructed as specified on a certain dock or wharf. Then follows this provision: “The lessee shall not be permitted to handle inflamable or lubricating oils of any kind, and shall not limit his merchandise to such goods as above indicated.” The lessors brought a bill in equity to enjoin the lessee from using the place for “conducting or carrying on the business of a wholesale fish dealer.” A decree *pro confesso*was entered for failure to plead, answer or demurrer. Subsequently the court made the following order: “This cause having been argued April 27, 1912, on motion for temporary injunction and the court being of opinion that the right claimed by complainant was doubtful on a construction of the instrument involved, a temporary injunction should not issue, no order was made or requested, but thereafter a motion to dismiss was made by defendant, which the court did not act on for want of notice thereof, and thereupon a decree *pro confesso*was entered inadvertently for want of pleadings, but while motions were pending during defendant’s counsel’s absence, it is ordered that said default be set aside, no objections being made thereto. It is further ordered that a temporary injunction be denied, counsel for complainant claiming right to introduce testimony to explain ambiguity if any in contract under the allegations in bill that the intention and understanding of the parties was to forbid a wholesale fish house, it is ordered that defendant plead, answer or demur in 10 days of notice of this order.

Aug. 13-12. F. A. WHITNEY, Judge.”

A demurrer to the bill of complaint was sustained with leave to amend, and the complainants appealed from the two orders mentioned.

*303As there is apparent ambiguity in the terms of the lease, the chancellor correctly held “that the right claimed by-complainant was doubtful on a construction of the instrument,” and there was consequently no error in the rulings complained of.

The orders appealed from are affirmed.

Shackleford, Cockrell and Hocker, J. J., concur.

Taylor, J., not participating.