alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>



                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

                          MEMORY PHARMACEUTICALS CORP.

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

   Each of the undersigned officers of Memory Pharmaceuticals Corp. (the
"Company") hereby certifies to his knowledge that the Company's Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2004 (the "Report"), as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.

/s/ Tony Scullion
----------------------------------------
TONY SCULLION
Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
March 31, 2005

/s/ Joseph M. Donabauer
----------------------------------------
JOSEPH M. DONABAUER
Vice President & Controller
(Principal Accounting and Financial Officer)
March 31, 2005

*A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to Memory Pharmaceuticals Corp. and
will be retained by Memory Pharmaceuticals Corp. and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. This written statement
accompanies the Form 10-K to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission, and will not be incorporated by reference
into any filing of Memory Pharmaceuticals Corp. under the Securities Act of 1933
or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, irrespective of any general
incorporation language contained in such filing.
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4449 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to convey to the State of Virginia 

and the District of Columbia certain National Park Service land for 

the construction of rail and other infrastructure, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

AUGUST 5, 2020 

Mr. WARNER (for himself and Mr. KAINE) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources 

A BILL 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to convey to the 

State of Virginia and the District of Columbia certain 

National Park Service land for the construction of rail 

and other infrastructure, 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 ‘‘Long Bridge Act of 

5 2020’’. 

6 SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

7 In this Act: 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4449 IS

1 (1) LONG BRIDGE PROJECT.—The term ‘‘Long 

2 Bridge Project’’ means the rail project, as identified 

3 by the Federal Railroad Administration, from 

4 Rosslyn (RO) Interlocking in Arlington, Virginia, to 

5 L’Enfant (LE) Interlocking in Washington, DC, 

6 which includes a bicycle and pedestrian bridge. 

7 (2) MAP.—The term ‘‘Map’’ means the map en8 titled ‘‘Long Bridge Construction Impacts to Na9 tional Park Service Land’’ and dated May 15, 2020. 

10 (3) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means 

11 the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Di12 rector of the National Park Service. 

13 (4) STATE.—The term ‘‘State’’ means the State 

14 of Virginia. 

15 SEC. 3. CONVEYANCE OF CERTAIN NATIONAL PARK SERV16 ICE LAND TO THE STATE OF VIRGINIA. 

17 (a) AUTHORIZATION OF CONVEYANCE.—On request 

18 by the State or the District of Columbia, for the construc19 tion of rail and other infrastructure relating to the Long 

20 Bridge Project, the Secretary may convey to the State or 

21 the District of Columbia, as applicable, all right, title, and 

22 interest of the United States in and to any portion of the 

23 approximately 4.4 acres of National Park Service land de24 picted as ‘‘Permanent Impact to NPS Land’’ on the Map 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 4449 IS

1 that is identified by the State or the District of Columbia 

2 for conveyance. 

3 (b) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—The conveyance of 

4 the National Park Service land under subsection (a) shall 

5 be subject to any terms and conditions that the Secretary 

6 may require. 

7 (c) CORRECTIONS.—The Secretary and the State or 

8 the District of Columbia, as applicable, by mutual agree9 ment, may— 

10 (1) make minor boundary adjustments to the 

11 National Park Service land to be conveyed to the 

12 State or the District of Columbia under subsection 

13 (a); and 

14 (2) correct any minor errors in the Map. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
**Exhibit 32.1**

**IDEAEDGE, INC.**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of IdeaEdge, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the period ending September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, James Collas, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, 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.
EXHIBIT 23.1

|Samson Bélair/Deloitte & Touche, S.E.N.C.Assurance
          and Advisory Services
          1 Place Ville-Marie
          Suite 3000
          Montreal QC H3B 4T9
          Canada

          Tel: (514) 393-7115
          Fax: (514) 390-4113
          www.deloitte.ca
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the
incorporation by reference in CGI Group Inc.s Registration Statements on
Form S-8 (Reg. Nos. 333-13350, 333-66044 and 333-74932) of our report dated
November 4, 2002, which is included in this Annual Report on Form 40-F.

(signed) Samson Bélair/Deloitte & Touche
               Chartered Accountants

Montreal, Canada
February 20, 2003
#### Progressive Clay Company, Appellant, *v.*Globe Indemnity Company, Respondent.

(Argued October 8, 1936;

decided October 23, 1936.)

*591
      *Abraham H. Sarasohn*and *Joseph L. Lefkowitz*for appellant.

*Thomas E. O’Brien*and *Thomas F. Conway*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hujbbs, Crouch, Loughran and Finch, JJ.
[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:****Final environmental assessment,Lytton residential development**
 
Volumes: One | Two | Three
 
SuDoc Number:I 20.2:L 98
Item Number:0627 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000931066
 
January 16, 2018
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                           1,347
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,734
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 4,081
<PP&E>                                           1,413
<DEPRECIATION>                                     266
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   5,259
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,797
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         66
<COMMON>                                           182
<OTHER-SE>                                       2,213
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     5,259
<SALES>                                          2,457
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,457
<CGS>                                            1,766
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,226
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,685
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (22)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,432)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,432)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,432)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.08)


</TABLE>
##### 



Exhibit
10.2
 FOC FINANCIAL LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
2025 S. AIRPORT BLVD.
CHANDLER, ARIZONA 85249
  
 Re:
    
    Amended and Restated $1,500,000 Factoring Line of Credit Loan to PROLINK
SOLUTIONS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company from FOC FINANCIAL LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP, an Arizona limited partnership




---



##### 








---



##### 








---



##### 



[Signatures appear on the following page]




---



##### 



LENDER:FOC FINANCIAL LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, anArizona limited partnershipBy:Name:Title:
 CONSENTED AND AGREED TO:
 BORROWER:
 
 By:Name:Title:
#### § 291.40 [Reserved]
#### §§ 415.28-415.30 [Reserved]
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Richard Raymond Dixon, II, Appellant

No. 06-19-00060-CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

Appeal from the 6th District Court of Lamar 

County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 25255). 

Memorandum Opinion delivered by Justice 

Burgess, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice 

Stevens participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find that the motion of the appellant to 

dismiss the appeal should be granted. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal.

We note that the appellant, Richard Raymond Dixon, II, has adequately indicated his 

inability to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED JUNE 11, 2019

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
#### § 38.11 Fuel efficiency metric.

For each airplane subject to this part, or to determine whether a modification makes an airplane subject to this part under the change criteria of [§ 38.19](/on/2024-09-19/title-14/section-38.19), a fuel efficiency metric value must be calculated, using the following equation, rounded to three decimal places:

[![](https://img.federalregister.gov/ER16FE24.041/ER16FE24.041_large.png)](https://img.federalregister.gov/ER16FE24.041/ER16FE24.041_original_size.png)

Where:

The SAR is determined in accordance with [§ 38.13](/on/2024-09-19/title-14/section-38.13), and the RGF is determined in accordance with [§ 38.15](/on/2024-09-19/title-14/section-38.15). The fuel efficiency metric value is expressed in units of kilograms of fuel consumed per kilometer.
§ 25.1438 Pressurization and pneumatic systems. ( a ) Pressurization system elements must be burst pressure tested to 2.0 times, and proof pressure tested to 1.5 times, the maximum normal operating pressure.
( b ) Pneumatic system elements must be burst pressure tested to 3.0 times, and proof pressure tested to 1.5 times, the maximum normal operating pressure.
( c ) An analysis, or a combination of analysis and test, may be substituted for any test required by paragraph (a) or (b) of this section if the Administrator finds it equivalent to the required test.
[Amdt. 25-41, 42 FR 36971, July 18, 1977]
[L. A. No. 446.

Department One.

September 15, 1898.]

#### HUGH TODD, Appellant, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES, Respondent.

action fob Value of Building Plans—Resolution of Boabd of Education—Statute of Limitations.—An action to recover the reasonable value of architectural plans and specifications for an addition to a school building, which had been merely adopted-by a resolution of the board of education, without further action on its part, is upon a contract not founded upon an instrument of writing, and is subject to the limitation of two years provided in section 339 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Id.—Resolution not Actionable as a Wbitten Instbument.—The resolution of the board of education, not having expressed any contract or obligation to pay the plaintiff any sum of money for the plans adopted, cannot, of itself, as a written instrument, be the foundation of an action to compel payment.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. J. W. McKinley, Judge.

The facts are stated in the opinion.

John W. Kemp, and Theodore Martin, for Appellant.

W. E. Dunn, and Albert Crutcher, for Respondent.

BRITT, C.

On November 21, 1892, plaintiff .submitted to the defendant board certain architectural plans and specifications for an addition to a school building in the city of Los Angeles. So far as appears, the only action taken by said board at any time in that behalf was evidenced by the following entry in its minutes made on the day aforesaid: “Dr. Barber [a member of the board] moved that the plans of H. Todd for the enlargement-of the Spring street building be adopted. Carried.” More than two years thereafter plaintiff commenced this action to recover the alleged reasonable value of said plans and specifications, stated at five hundred dollars. The court below held that his suit is barred by the provision of the statute of limitations requiring an action upon a contract, “not founded upon an instrument of writing” to be brought within two years after the cause of action accrues. (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 339.) Plaintiff contends, as we understand the argument, that said *107minute entry is an ‘instrument of writing/ so that his case is not within said section of the statute.

If said entry is in any legal sense an instrument of writing, it is yet one expressing no contract or obligation to pay plaintiff anything; therefore it cannot be of itself the foundation of an action to compel payment; we forbear discussion— which could hardly make the conclusion plainer. *(McCarthy v. Mt. Tecarte Land etc. Co.,*111 Cal. 340; *Thomas v. Pacific Beach Co.,*115 Cal. 136; *Foorman v. Wallace, 75*Cal. 555; *Hoag v. Howard, 55*Cal. 564.)

The judgment should be affirmed.

Chipman, C., and Belcher, C., concurred.

For the reasons given in the foregoing opinion the judgment is affirmed.

McFarland, *J.,*Temple, J., Henshaw, J.
#### § 305.5 Initiation of investigation.

An investigation may be initiated by order of the Department. Attorneys of the Office of the Assistant General Counsel for Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings shall conduct such investigations pursuant to the provisions of this part and they shall be designated Investigation Attorneys. Investigation Attorneys, administrative law judges and the DOT decisionmaker are hereby authorized to exercise and perform their duties and functions under this part in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the rules and regulations of the Department.
§ 26.37 Pending type certification projects: Fuel tank flammability. ( a ) *Applicability.* This section applies to any new type certificate for a transport category airplane, if the application was made before December 26, 2008, and if the certificate was not issued before December 26, 2008. This section applies only if the airplane would have— ( 1 ) A maximum type-certificated passenger capacity of 30 or more, or
( 2 ) A maximum payload capacity of 7,500 pounds or more.
( b ) If the application was made on or after June 6, 2001, the requirements of 14 CFR 25.981 in effect on December 26, 2008, apply.
[Doc. No. FAA-2005-22997, 73 FR 42499, July 21, 2008, as amended by Amdt. 26-3, 74 FR 31619, July 2, 2009]
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 18.1

     Advance Stores Company, Incorporated
     5637 Airport Road
     Roanoke, Virginia 24012


     Re: Form 10-K Report for the year ended December 29, 2001.


     This letter is written to meet the requirements of Regulation S-K calling
     for a letter from a registrant's independent accountants whenever there has
     been a change in accounting principle or practice.

     As of December 31, 2000, the Company began recognizing cooperative
     advertising funds received from vendors for which the vendor does not
     require proof of advertising as a reduction to the cost of inventory
     acquired from the vendor. The Company previously accounted for all
     cooperative advertising funds received from vendors as a reduction to
     selling, general and administrative expenses as advertising expenses were
     incurred. According to the management of the Company, this change was made
     to better align the reporting of these payments with the Company's and the
     vendors' use of these payments as reductions to the price of inventory
     acquired from the vendors.

     A complete coordinated set of financial and reporting standards for
     determining the preferability of accounting principles among acceptable
     alternative principles has not been established by the accounting
     profession. Thus, we cannot make an objective determination of whether the
     change in accounting described in the preceding paragraph is to a
     preferable method. However, we have reviewed the pertinent factors,
     including those related to financial reporting, in this particular case on
     a subjective basis, and our opinion stated below is based on our
     determination made in this manner.

     We are of the opinion that the Company's change in method of accounting is
     to an acceptable alternative method of accounting, which, based upon the
     reasons stated for the change and our discussions with you, is also
     preferable under the circumstances in this particular case. In arriving at
     this opinion, we have relied on the business judgment and business planning
     of your management.

Very truly yours,

/s/ Arthur Andersen LLP.
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








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), the undersigned
officer of ProLink Holdings Corp., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), does
hereby certify to his knowledge, that:





The
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008 (the “Form
10-Q”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the information
contained in the Form 10-Q fairly represents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the company.








Dated:
      December 12, 2008
                  By:
                  /s/
      Lawrence D. BainLawrence
      D. BainChief
      Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer(Principal
      Executive Officer and Principal Financial
  Officer)











A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
§ 29.1541 General. ( a ) The rotorcraft must contain— ( 1 ) The markings and placards specified in §§ 29.1545 through 29.1565; and
( 2 ) Any additional information, instrument markings, and placards required for the safe operation of the rotorcraft if it has unusual design, operating or handling characteristics.
( b ) Each marking and placard prescribed in paragraph (a) of this section— ( 1 ) Must be displayed in a conspicuous place; and
( 2 ) May not be easily erased, disfigured, or obscured.
§ 382.21 May carriers limit access to transportation on the basis that a passenger has a communicable disease or other medical condition? ( a ) You must not do any of the following things on the basis that a passenger has a communicable disease or infection, unless you determine that the passenger's condition poses a direct threat: ( 1 ) Refuse to provide transportation to the passenger;
( 2 ) Delay the passenger's transportation (e.g., require the passenger to take a later flight);
( 3 ) Impose on the passenger any condition, restriction, or requirement not imposed on other passengers; or
( 4 ) Require the passenger to provide a medical certificate.
( b ) In assessing whether the passenger's condition poses a direct threat, you must apply the provisions of § 382.19(c)(1)-(2) of this subpart. ( 1 ) In making this assessment, you may rely on directives issued by public health authorities (e.g., the U.S. Centers for Disease Control or Public Health Service; comparable agencies in other countries; the World Health Organization).
( 2 ) In making this assessment, you must consider the significance of the consequences of a communicable disease and the degree to which it can be readily transmitted by casual contact in an aircraft cabin environment. Example 1 to paragraph (b)(2): The common cold is readily transmissible in an aircraft cabin environment but does not have severe health consequences. Someone with a cold would not pose a direct threat.
Example 2 to paragraph (b)(2): AIDS has very severe health consequences but is not readily transmissible in an aircraft cabin environment. Someone would not pose a direct threat because he or she is HIV-positive or has AIDS.
Example 3 to paragraph (b)(2): SARS may be readily transmissible in an aircraft cabin environment and has severe health consequences. Someone with SARS probably poses a direct threat.
( c ) If a passenger with a communicable disease meeting the direct threat criteria of this section gives you a medical certificate of the kind outlined in § 382.23(c)(2) describing measures for preventing transmission of the disease during the normal course of the flight, you must provide transportation to the passenger, unless you are unable to carry out the measures.
( d ) If your action under this section results in the postponement of a passenger's travel, you must permit the passenger to travel at a later time (up to 90 days from the date of the postponed travel) at the fare that would have applied to the passenger's originally scheduled trip without penalty or, at the passenger's discretion, provide a refund for any unused flights, including return flights.
( e ) If you take any action under this section that restricts a passenger's travel, you must, on the passenger's request, provide a written explanation within 10 days of the request.