alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32

Section 906 Certification

Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officers of Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc., the general partner of Host Hotels & Resorts, L.P., (the Company) hereby certify, to such
officers knowledge, that:

(i) the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2007
(the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;

and

(ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated: February 29, 2008



/s/    W. EDWARD WALTERW. Edward WalterChief Executive Officer of Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc., general partner of Host Hotels & Resorts, L.P./s/    LARRY K. HARVEYLarry K. HarveyChief Financial Officer of Host Hotels & Resorts,Inc.,general partner of Host Hotels & Resorts, L.P.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3955 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3955

         To prohibit no-knock warrants, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 11, 2020

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
         To prohibit no-knock warrants, 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 ``Justice for Breonna Taylor Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON NO-KNOCK WARRANTS.

    (a) Federal Prohibition.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
law, a Federal law enforcement officer (as defined in section 115 of 
title 18, United States Code) may not execute a warrant until after the 
officer provides notice of his or her authority and purpose.
    (b) State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies.--Beginning in the 
first fiscal year beginning after the date of enactment of this Act, 
and each fiscal year thereafter, a State or local law enforcement 
agency that receive funds from the Department of Justice during the 
fiscal year may not execute a warrant that does not require the law 
enforcement officer serving the warrant to provide notice of his or her 
authority and purpose before forcibly entering a premises.
                                 <all>
```
#### UNITED STATES v. U.S. LIGHT & HEAT CORPORATION (Three Cases)

*[Ante,*p. 23;

291 U.S. 671]

Petition for writ of certiorari *denied*by Supreme Court February 19, 1934.
!	"#

$
%
			


					&'
"$
!""(	)		*	

			)

"

+	,'(*)
		

	%
	-	

			


"%
	

)	.,,"

$
					
		
		

	)	
-/0	

(	)		*			%
	-

	

"

+	12)"0		*.&'	
%
	

3	(	)		4	(*
	

)	
-	

"*&'	
	

		
	)	.(*"

*&'	
	
				

.

		5		

	
	
		
	

		

!	"

6	.	.
		

		

	
	)

.	)		

".	

)		.)	
).


(*0				
	

.
	
	
"

(*

.
	7	
8		




	
)
)	

%
	-	

"(*		

		9

 $
5	

*&'		.


(*-)"

 $
5	

*&'	
			



"

	
 

	





$
(*
			

		.
		

)	%
	-	

	

"

	




	

	

 !"

#"$"%&

'()*+	"



$

.	9

 :"	")	

3+3/" (*;<4;=;,>;

?7
8"

 		;@")

 	.(*3	

!""(	)		*	

	 %,',,$,

*		)	)"/
		

3,
A"

	.



3.'	.

		
.



					

		)"

(*).	

.				



)
	%
	-

	

"

	
		
	


 :"	")73

+3/" (*;<4;=;,>;?8"

 ;';A,;'
>

'9>""
9>""

 	(	;

@")73+3/"

(*;<4;=;,>;?8"
EXHIBIT 10.42

                              MEMO OF UNDERSTANDING

                 iENTERTAINMENT NETWORK WITH RAYMOND E. RUTLEDGE

The parties agree as follows:

1.       The February 1, 1995 employment agreement with Raymond E. Rutledge has
         been satisfied. In full satisfaction of this agreement, the company
         grants the following consideration effective October 18, 1999:

         A)      A 3-year extension on the exercise period on all existing
                 stock options to October 18, 2002 (See attachment number 1).

         B)      A free iEntertainment Network account through October 18, 2002.

2.       Whereas the Company requires the services of Raymond E. Rutledge in the
         area of new business development, the Company has entered into a
         Consulting Agreement for the period December 1, 1999 through November
         30, 2000. The compensation will be $10,300 (ten thousand three hundred
         dollars) per month, for this 12-month period, in fully registered,
         unrestricted company stock, payable by the 5th day of the following
         month. The price utilized to determine the number of shares will be the
         average closing price for the last 5 (five) trading days of the
         preceding month. The terms will be further defined in the Consulting
         Agreement (Attachment 2).

Raymond E. Rutledge and the Company agree to release all past, current, and
future claims and restrictions of any kind against one another, and further
Raymond E. Rutledge agrees that the Company has no further liability as it
relates to his past employment and past employment agreements.

This agreement is agreed to and accepted this 1st day of December, 1999.


---------------------------------    -------------------------------------------
Raymond Rutledge          Date        Mike Pearce, Chief Executive Officer  Date
                                      iEntertainment Network

-------------------------------
Cheri Shumate, Witness    Date


Attachment 1 - New ISO schedule for Raymond E. Rutledge
Attachment 2 - Consultant Agreement
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 395 Referred in House (RFH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 395

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 12, 2019

               Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
   To require each agency, in providing notice of a rule making, to 
  include a link to a 100 word plain language summary of the proposed 
                                 rule.

    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 ``Providing Accountability Through 
Transparency Act of 2019''.

SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT TO POST A 100 WORD SUMMARY TO REGULATIONS.GOV.

    Section 553(b) of title 5, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (2), by striking ``and'' at the end;
            (2) in paragraph (3), by striking the period at the end and 
        inserting ``; and''; and
            (3) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following:
            ``(4) the Internet address of a summary of not more than 
        100 words in length of the proposed rule, in plain language, 
        that shall be posted on the Internet website under section 
        206(d) of the E-Government Act of 2002 (44 U.S.C. 3501 note) 
        (commonly known as regulations.gov).''.

            Passed the Senate June 11, 2019.

            Attest:

                                                JULIE E. ADAMS,

                                                             Secretary.
```
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5.4. 

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-41603 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. VICTOR ALBERTO MARTINEZ-GASPAR, also known as Victor Alberto Gonzalez Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:06-CR-647-ALL Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Victor Alberto MartinezGaspar raises arguments that are “fully foreclosed” by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. U nited States v. Pineda-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir. 2007), petition for cert. filed (Aug. 28, 2007) (No. 07-6202). The appellant's motion for summary disposition is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D October 25, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk
§ 23.2165 Performance and flight characteristics requirements for flight in icing conditions. ( a ) An applicant who requests certification for flight in icing conditions defined in part 1 of appendix C to part 25 of this chapter, or an applicant who requests certification for flight in these icing conditions and any additional atmospheric icing conditions, must show the following in the icing conditions for which certification is requested under normal operation of the ice protection system(s): ( 1 ) Compliance with each requirement of this subpart, except those applicable to spins and any that must be demonstrated at speeds in excess of— ( i ) 250 KCAS;
( ii ) VMO/MMO or VNE; or
( iii ) A speed at which the applicant demonstrates the airframe will be free of ice accretion.
( 2 ) The means by which stall warning is provided to the pilot for flight in icing conditions and non-icing conditions is the same.
( b ) If an applicant requests certification for flight in icing conditions, the applicant must provide a means to detect any icing conditions for which certification is not requested and show the airplane's ability to avoid or exit those conditions.
( c ) The applicant must develop an operating limitation to prohibit intentional flight, including takeoff and landing, into icing conditions for which the airplane is not certified to operate.
[Doc. No. FAA-2015-1621, Amdt. 23-64, 81 FR 96689, Dec. 30, 2016, as amended by Doc. No. FAA-2022-1355, Amdt. 23-65, 87 FR 75710, Dec. 9, 2022]
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 Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report of SkyLynx Communications, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB/A-1 for the year ended June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report'), we, Gary L. Brown, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Daniel J. Sullivan, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                              
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

/s/ Gary L. Brown                               Gary L. Brown, President and Chief
Executive Officer
December 2, 2004

/s/ Daniel J. Sullivan                           Daniel J. Sullivan, Chief Financial 
Officer
December 2, 2004
#### § 152.9 Forms.

Any form needed to comply with this part may be obtained at any FAA Regional Office or Airports District Office.
#### GREEN V. THE STATE.

(Decided May 15, 1913.)

Appeal from Tallapoosa Circuit Court.

Heard before Hon. S. L. Brewer..

No counsel marked for appellant. B. C. Brickell, Attorney General, and W. L. Martin, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

Pelham, J. —

No error of record and the cause is affirmed.
§ 25.675 Stops. ( a ) Each control system must have stops that positively limit the range of motion of each movable aerodynamic surface controlled by the system.
( b ) Each stop must be located so that wear, slackness, or take-up adjustments will not adversely affect the control characteristics of the airplane because of a change in the range of surface travel.
( c ) Each stop must be able to withstand any loads corresponding to the design conditions for the control system.
[Doc. No. 5066, 29 FR 18291, Dec. 24, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 25-38, 41 FR 55466, Dec. 20, 1976]
§ 125.228 Flight data recorders: filtered data. ( a ) A flight data signal is filtered when an original sensor signal has been changed in any way, other than changes necessary to: ( 1 ) Accomplish analog to digital conversion of the signal;
( 2 ) Format a digital signal to be DFDR compatible; or
( 3 ) Eliminate a high frequency component of a signal that is outside the operational bandwidth of the sensor.
( b ) An original sensor signal for any flight recorder parameter required to be recorded under § 125.226 may be filtered only if the recorded signal value continues to meet the requirements of Appendix D or E of this part, as applicable.
( c ) For a parameter described in § 125.226(a) (12) through (17), (42), or (88), or the corresponding parameter in Appendix D of this part, if the recorded signal value is filtered and does not meet the requirements of Appendix D or E of this part, as applicable, the certificate holder must: ( 1 ) Remove the filtering and ensure that the recorded signal value meets the requirements of Appendix D or E of this part, as applicable; or
( 2 ) Demonstrate by test and analysis that the original sensor signal value can be reconstructed from the recorded data. This demonstration requires that: ( i ) The FAA determine that the procedure and the test results submitted by the certificate holder as its compliance with paragraph (c)(2) of this section are repeatable; and
( ii ) The certificate holder maintains documentation of the procedure required to reconstruct the original sensor signal value. This documentation is also subject to the requirements of § 125.226(i).
( d ) *Compliance.* Compliance is required as follows: ( 1 ) No later than October 20, 2011, each operator must determine, for each airplane it operates, whether the airplane's DFDR system is filtering any of the parameters listed in paragraph (c) of this section. The operator must create a record of this determination for each airplane it operates, and maintain it as part of the correlation documentation required by § 125.226(j)(3) of this part.
( 2 ) For airplanes that are not filtering any listed parameter, no further action is required unless the airplane's DFDR system is modified in a manner that would cause it to meet the definition of filtering on any listed parameter.
( 3 ) For airplanes found to be filtering a parameter listed in paragraph (c) of this section, the operator must either: ( i ) No later than April 21, 2014, remove the filtering; or
( ii ) No later than April 22, 2013, submit the necessary procedure and test results required by paragraph (c)(2) of this section.
( 4 ) After April 21, 2014, no aircraft flight data recording system may filter any parameter listed in paragraph (c) of this section that does not meet the requirements of Appendix D or E of this part, unless the certificate holder possesses test and analysis procedures and the test results that have been approved by the FAA. All records of tests, analysis and procedures used to comply with this section must be maintained as part of the correlation documentation required by § 125.226(j)(3) of this part.
[Doc. No. FAA-2006-26135, 75 FR 7356, Feb. 19, 2010]
#### STEPHENS v. THE STATE.

(Decided January 23rd, 1915.)

Appeal from Houston Circuit Court.

Heard before Hon. H. A. Pearce.

Lee & Tompkins, for appellant. Robert C. Brickell, Attorney General, for the State.

Per curiam.

Appeal dismissed.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 No. 333-84679 and No. 333-31298) of FutureLink Corp. pertaining to the
FutureLink Distribution Corp. Stock Option Plan and the FutureLink Corp. Stock
Option Plan of our report dated March 14, 2000, except for Note 13, as to which
the date is March 17, 2000, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements of FutureLink Corp. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the
year ended December 31, 1999.

                                          /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Orange County, California
March 28, 2000
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         396,232
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  491,501
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (5,697)
<INVENTORY>                                    230,718
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,207,962
<PP&E>                                       4,660,854
<DEPRECIATION>                             (1,864,918)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,304,419
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,030,557
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     17,130
<COMMON>                                        84,763
<OTHER-SE>                                   6,706,359
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,304,419
<SALES>                                      1,988,353
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,988,353
<CGS>                                          989,547
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,633,251
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              44,431
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                355,102
<INCOME-TAX>                                     9,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   346,102
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     .041
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .041
        

</TABLE>
§ 260.1 Purpose. The purpose of this part is to ensure that carriers promptly refund consumers for: ( a ) Fees for ancillary services related to air travel that consumers paid for but were not provided;
( b ) Fees to transport checked bags that are lost or significantly delayed; and
( c ) Airfare including nonrefundable airfare for a flight that is cancelled or significantly changed where the consumer does not accept the significantly changed flight or rebooking on an alternative flight, or accept any voucher, credit, or other compensation offered by the carrier.
[DOT-OST-2022-0089, 89 FR 65536, Aug. 12, 2024]
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:2888 Filed:04/10/18 Entered:04/11/18 17:02:07 Desc: Main

Document Page 1 of 2
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:2888 Filed:04/10/18 Entered:04/11/18 17:02:07 Desc: Main

Document Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 13.1

Certification

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

(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63
of title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of Fomento Económico Mexicano, S.A.B. de C.V. (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:

The Annual Report on form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2015 (the Form 20-F) of the Company fully complies with
the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results from operations of the Company.



|                     |  |  |  |     |  |                                                                   
|-------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: April 20, 2016 |  |  |  |     |  |                                                                   
|                     |  |  | 
|                     |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Carlos Salazar Lomelín                                        
|                     |  |  |  |     |  |                                                                   
|                     |  |  |  |     |  | Carlos Salazar Lomelín
Chief Executive Officer                    
|Date: April 20, 2016 |  |  |  |     |  |                                                                   
|                     |  |  | 
|                     |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Miguel Eduardo Padilla Silva                                  
|                     |  |  |  |     |  |                                                                   
|                     |  |  |  |     |  | Miguel Eduardo Padilla Silva
Chief Financial and Corporate Officer
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Coal deposits of the SantaClara district near Tonichi, Sonora, Mexico: a study undertaken to aidindustrial development of the region**
 
Report | Plates: 0102030405060708
 
SuDoc Number:I 19.3:962-A
Item Number:
CGP systemNumber:
 
September 27, 2018