alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|   | **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**

 

In connection with the Annual Report of Eastgate Acquisitions Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, **Geoff Williams**, Chief Executive Officer Principal Accounting            Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 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/ | **GEOFFWILLIAMS** |
|-----|-------------------|

 

**Geoff Williams**

Chief Executive Officer

Principal Accounting Officer

March 25, 2009

 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement 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. The foregoing certifications are accompanying the Company's Form 10-K solely 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) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-K or as a separate disclosure document.
Editorial Note on Part 148
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 148 appear by USCG-2010-0351, 75 FR 36284, June 25, 2010.

§ 148.230 How is notice of a formal hearing given? ( a ) The Commandant (CG-5P) publishes a notice of the hearing in the Federal Register and sends a notice of the hearing to the applicant, to each adjacent coastal State, and to each person who requests such a notice.
( b ) The notice of the hearing includes the applicant's name, the name of the ALJ assigned to conduct the hearing, a list of the factual issues to be resolved, the address where documents are to be filed, and the address where a copy of the rules of practice, procedure, and evidence to be used at the hearing is available.
[USCG-1998-3884, 71 FR 57651, Sept. 29, 2006, as amended by USCG-2013-0397, 78 FR 39177, July 1, 2013]
## Washtenaw County Board Of Commissioners 220 NORTH MAIN STREET, P.O. BOX 8645

The Honorable Anthony R. Foxx Secretary ofTransportation US Department ofTransportation 1200 New Jersey Ave SE Washington, DC 20590

Dear Secretaries Foxx and Kerry: ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN 48107-8645 (734)996-3055 FAX (734)994-2592

April 21 , 2015 The Honorable John F. Kerry Secretary of State US Department of State 2201 C Street NW Washington, DC 20520

Thank you for your fine work on behalf of our nation and its citizens. As you know, U.S. Open Skies policy has been a great benefit to the health of the American airline industry and economy. These agreements have created and sustained millions ofjobs and helped spur commercial and economic growth across our country. That is why it was disappointing to learn that three airlines in the Gulf states-Qatar Airways, Etihad Airways and Emirates Airline-are**r~ceiving** billions of dollars in subsidies from the governments of Qatar and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), 

# aviolation of the Open Skies policy. Though we have yet to see the full trickle-down effect this will have on the industry and the cities · that are home to airports and businesses, the wiiting is on the wall. The massive subsidies the three Gulf carriers have**re~ived** from their governments have enabled them to expand:rapidiy, whereas U.S. carriers have experienced a decrease in market share because of their inability as a private entity to compete with carriers backed by their governments. This is highlY eoncernirig considering that every flight that is lost by a**u.s~** carrier results in an average neHoss·of821**U.S~** jobs. If the competitive imbalance in this situation continues, jobs will be lost and it will be detrimental to Washtenaw's local economy. I know that you are more than aware that America needs the strongest policies enforced for the country to remain competitive in a tenuous global economy. ·The Open Skies agreements have eliminated market distortions and provided a level playing field for carriers that 'operate within the United States for over 30 years. This must continue, which is why I ask that you to open · consultations · With Qatar and the ·UAE in regards to

.this·

_ matter.·



# . . . . . Let's u_phold Open**S~ies** and do what's right; for**Washt~naw** County and the**~untry.**

,·. 

# s 10-150501-007Washtenaw County Board of Commissioners 220 North Main Street, P.O. Box 8645 Ann Arbor, Ml 48107



### 510-150501-007 The Honorable Anthony R. Foxx US Department ofTransportation 1200 New Jersey AVE SE Washington, DC 20590



### i ii II i

# i ji 1

### 1 il

### ijlil

## ij l

### i

### iill 1

### i iiiii I

# "l'l iIi 'Ii , ,

### iijiltiiiIii

### d liii )
Administration for Community Living, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

http://transition.acf.hhs.gov/programs/aidd

Fact Sheet: Projects of National Significance 

Projects of National Significance (PNS) focus on the most pressing issues affecting people with 

developmental disabilities and their families, creating and enhancing opportunities for these 

individuals to contribute to, and participate in, all facets of community life. Through PNS, the 

Administration on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (AIDD) supports the development 

of national and state policy and awards grants and contracts that enhance the independence, 

productivity, inclusion, and integration of people with developmental disabilities.

Current PNS priorities include improving state employment 

policies and employment outcomes of individuals with 

developmental disabilities, collecting data on family 

support and service outcomes, and providing technical 

assistance and training for AIDD network entities. One 

project is currently collecting and analyzing data on 

individual and service outcomes and family services and 

supports. 

Short-Term Projects, Long-Term Differences

Projects are typically short term (1–5 years) and address 

critical issues. PNS funds have supported families, 

increased community living options, assisted with family 

leadership development, and increased opportunities for 

involving self-advocates in systems change initiatives.

Supporting Emerging Needs 

PNS projects enable more rapid response to emerging 

issues by targeting unserved or underserved areas, with 

the intent of eventually implementing programs on a broader, national level. Program activities 

include helping individuals develop self-advocacy and leadership skills, creating opportunities 

for economic development in communities, and developing initiatives to improve individuals’ 

employment outcomes. For example, the Autism NOW project collects and disseminates the most 

current information and resources on autism through its website to empower individuals and their 

families.

Ongoing Longitudinal Data Collection

PNS funds support national long-term data collection projects that help policymakers, service 

providers, and individuals with developmental disabilities and their families make the most 

informed policy and individual care decisions. These studies allow for an overarching, higher-level 

evaluation of the conditions of individuals with developmental disabilities in the United States. 

•	 In FY 2010, PNS

programs served 4,471

families; in FY 2011 they

served 1,498 families.

•	 In FY 2010, PNS

programs served 3,823

youth.

•	 AIDD currently funds 41

PNS grants.

•	 FY 2012 appropriations

provided $8.3 million to

support PNS activities.
July 20, 2017



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

DANIEL A. GRIFFING , Appellant
NO. 14

- 16

- 00516

- CR V. NO. 14

- 16

- 00517

- CR
THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

________________________________ This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED

. We further order this decision certified below for observance.
Nutrition Services Incentive Program (OANS) for the States/Territories

FY 2022 Annual Cash Allocation

5/9/2022

State/Territory

Nutrition Services 

Incentive Program

Alabama $3,192,227

Alaska $475,259

Arizona $1,892,496

Arkansas $2,347,032

California $13,221,281

Colorado $1,425,516

Connecticut $1,379,001

Delaware $494,012

District of Columbia $854,101

Florida $6,267,003

Georgia $3,030,216

Hawaii $492,736

Idaho $798,791

Illinois $7,318,875

Indiana $1,230,536

Iowa $1,383,242

Kansas $2,005,994

Kentucky $1,482,601

Louisiana $3,733,539

Maine $619,676

Maryland $1,632,099

Massachusetts $6,208,918

Michigan $7,775,655

Minnesota $1,730,485

Mississippi $1,476,283

Missouri $3,813,399

Montana $947,273

Nebraska $1,022,233

Nevada $1,596,298

New Hampshire $1,197,248

New Jersey $3,442,187

New Mexico $2,248,933

New York $16,130,917

North Carolina $3,348,189

North Dakota $797,913

Ohio $5,664,897

Oklahoma $1,775,321

Oregon $1,734,134

Pennsylvania $6,583,232

Rhode Island $414,771

South Carolina $1,756,756

South Dakota $943,224

Tennessee $1,682,810

Texas $10,839,963

Utah $1,304,703

Vermont $772,146

Virginia $1,897,671

Washington $2,321,763

West Virginia $1,525,229

Wisconsin $2,702,782

Wyoming $880,675

American Samoa $84,113

Guam $387,207

Northern Mariana Islands $68,000

Puerto Rico $2,684,723

Virgin Islands $105,629

TOTAL $153,141,913
# This monitoring template is not guidance nor legal advice provided by the Nutrition and Aging Resource Center or the Administration for Community Living.

# Production Kitchen Food Safety & Sanitation Monitoring Form

## This customizable form is intended for monitoring activities and self-inspections of production kitchens. 

**DATE:**

**KITCHEN LOCATION:**

**NAME OF MONITOR:**

**FOOD SERVICE DIRECTOR:**

**KITCHEN MANAGER OR PERSON IN CHARGE (PIC):**

**MEALS PREPARED DAILY:**

**TIME PRODUCTION STARTED:**

**TIME OF OBSERVATION:**

**TIME PANNING OF FOOD STARTED:**

**TIME FIRST TRUCK LEAVES:**

**Attach information on the number and length of meal routes.**

## DRY FOOD STORAGE

## PAPER/DISPOSABLE GOODS STORAGE

## REACH-IN COOLER/REFRIGERATOR

## REACH-IN FREEZER

## WALK-IN COOLER/REFRIGERATOR

## WALK-IN FREEZER

## FOOD PREPARATION AREA

## FOOD HANDLING PRACTICES

## HANDWASHING SINKS AND TOILETS

## DISHWASHING AREA

## MANUAL POT WASHING

## DISH MACHINE

## CHEMICAL STORAGE AREA

## TRANSPORTATION EQUIPMENT

## FACILITY

## MANAGEMENT

## QUALITY CONTROL

## SHELF-STABLE MEAL AUDIT

## FROZEN MEAL AUDIT

# 

# Production Kitchen Food Safety & Sanitation Monitoring Report

## Summary of Findings

[Describe findings in brief here]

## Best Practices

[Describe promising practices discovered]

## Technical Assistance Provided

[Describe assistance provided to the monitored entity here]

## Recommendations

[Describe suggestions for improvement or expansion here]

## Corrective Action or Required Follow-up

[Describe the next steps here]
NUMBER 13-09-00373-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG 

 

NORMA DE LA TORRE, Appellant,

v.

NOE FLORES SALINAS, Appellee.

 

On appeal from the 93rd District Court

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Longoria and Perkes

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Perkes

This cause is now before the Court on appellant’s motion to dismiss the appeal. 

This case was abated on July 15, 2010, due to ongoing litigation related to a settlement 

agreement.
2

The Court, having considered the documents on file and the motion to dismiss the 

appeal, hereby REINSTATES the case and GRANTS the motion. See TEX. R. APP. P. 

42.1(a). 

The appeal is hereby DISMISSED. Costs will be taxed against appellant. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 42.1(d) ("Absent agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs against the 

appellant."). All pending motions, specifically including Appellant’s Motion to Determine 

the Finality of the Judgment, are DISMISSED AS MOOT. 

Therefore, having dismissed the appeal at appellant’s request, no motion for 

rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith. 

GREG T. PERKES

Justice

Delivered and filed the

15th day of October, 2020.
Challenge to Constitutionality of a State Statute 

This form must be completed by a party filing a petition, motion or other pleading challenging the 

constitutionality of a state statute. The completed form must be filed with the court in which the cause is 

pending as required by Section 402.010 (a-1), Texas Government Code. 

Cause Number (For Clerk Use Only): Court (For Clerk Use Only): 

Styled: 

(e.g., John Smith v. All American Insurance Co.; in re Mary Ann Jones; In the Matter of the Estate of George Jackson) 

Contact information for party* challenging the constitutionality of a state statute. (*If party is not a person, provide 

contact information for party, party's representative or attorney.) 

Name: Telephone: 

Address: Fax: 

City/State/Zip: State Bar No. (if applicable): 

Email: 

Person completing this form is: Attorney for Party Unrepresented Party Other:

Identify the type of pleading you have filed challenging the constitutionality of a state statute. 

 Petition Answer Motion (Specify type): 

 Other: 

Is the Attorney General of the State of Texas a party to or counsel in this cause? 

 Yes No 

List the state statute(s) being challenged in your pleading and provide a summary of the basis for your 

challenge. (Additional pages may be attached if necessary.) 

9/5/13
###### Editorial Note on Part 117

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 117 appear by USCG-1998-3799, 63 FR 35529, June 30, 1998.

#### § 117.935 Rantowles Creek.

The draw of the Seaboard System Railroad bridge, 1.1 near Rantowles, need not be opened for the passage of vessels.
Argued and submitted September 30, 1992,

condition of probation vacated and remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed March 10, 1993

#### STATE OF OREGON, *Respondent, v.*ROBERT DEMPSIE SHEFLER, *Appellant.*

(CC90-1349, CC90-1350; CA A69916 (Control), A69917)

847 P2d 417

Peter Gartlan, Deputy Public Defender, Salem, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief was Sally L. Avera, Public Defender, Salem.

Thomas H. Denney, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Charles S. Crookham, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, Salem.

Before Warren, Presiding Judge, and Riggs and Edmonds, Judges.

PER CURIAM

*537PER CURIAM

Defendant was convicted of two counts of delivery of a controlled substance, ORS 475.992(l)(a), and two counts of possession of a controlled substance. ORS 475.992(4)(a). He appeals, making three assignments of error. We address only the third assignment.

Defendant contends that, the trial court erred by delegating its sentencing authority to a probation officer. In addition to 60 days in jail time imposed on each conviction for delivery of a controlled substance, the court ordered, as a special condition of probation, that “defendant shall receive an additional 60 custody units *to be utilized at the discretion of his probation officer”*
      *1*
      **(Emphasis supplied.) Defendant argues that nothing in the sentencing guidelines authorizes the court to make such a delegation. The state agrees. We accept the state’s concession. OAR 235-05-012(3)(b); *cf. State v. Stephens,*47 Or App 305, 312, 614 P2d 1180 (1980).

The condition of probation that 60 custody units are to be utilized at the discretion of a probation officer vacated and remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.

The additional 60 custody units are those remaining after 60 custody units are deducted, for the jail time ordered, from the 120 custody units authorized by OAR 253-05-011(2)(b).
Community Inclusion as a Goal in Transitions out of 

Institutions

Disability, Health and Housing Partnerships in North Carolina

Alliance of Disability Advocates (ADANC) is a center for independent living in Raleigh, 

North Carolina. Alliance Health Partnership is a managed care organization that has 

been working to integrate health and housing for about a decade. (The organizations 

have “alliance” in their names but are separate organizations). These two agencies 

have worked collaboratively to develop community inclusion and integration in their 

Transitions to Community Living Initiative (TCLI).

Program

The TCLI program began as a part of a settlement agreement, following an Olmstead

investigation, in which the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) found that many individuals 

with serious mental illness (SMI) in North Carolina were living in adult care homes and 

state psychiatric facilities. Alliance Health and ADANC together recognized that 

individuals should have the right to choose where to live and how to be involved in their 

communities. The Transition to Community Living Voucher (TCLV) provides an 

ongoing rental subsidy so Alliance Health members can access affordable apartments 

and live full and equitable lives in communities of their choosing. Alliance Health is the

administrator of the program, working with the North Carolina Department of Health and 

Human Services and the NC Housing Finance Agency.
2

Partnership Best Practices

• Partners must be organizations that understand that meeting complex community 

needs requires creative solutions and blending and braiding of various resources.

• An ongoing Transition to Community Living Local Barriers Committee identifies

areas of need for individuals moving back to the community and solutions to 

address barriers.

• One early goal was to address any waiting list and figure out sustainability.

• A team of community inclusion specialists work to incorporate community 

inclusion goals into the framework of future funding.

• The partners seek to utilize the funding source that allows the freedom and 

flexibility to serve individuals and promote community inclusion.

Lessons Learned

• Focus on not only connecting wraparound services, but inclusion for all persons 

with institutional-care histories.

• Be creative in how you use one-time funds, from grants, private investments, 

CARES/COVID-relief funds, etc. You will need to find a way to sustain services 

with other funding sources in the long term.

• Find the opportunities, and then pace your agencies so you can get it done.

Additional Vital Partners

In the goal of community inclusion as an effort to increase housing stability, people with 

lived experience are vital partners during development and throughout the program.

For More Information

Working Together to Empower Community Inclusion with Health/Housing/IndependentLiving Partnerships (webinar), 

https://acl.gov/HousingAndServices/HealthHousingILPartnerships

Vicki Smith, Executive Director, Alliance of Disability Advocates, vicki@adanc.org
###### Editorial Note on Part 148

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 148 appear by USCG-2010-0351, 75 FR 36284, June 25, 2010.

#### § 148.256 What happens at the conclusion of a formal hearing?

After closing the record of a formal hearing, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) prepares a recommended finding on the issues that were the subject of the hearing. The ALJ submits that finding to the Commandant (CG-5P).

[USCG-1998-3884, 71 FR 57651, Sept. 29, 2006, as amended by USCG-2013-0397, 78 FR 39177, July 1, 2013]
```

[House Report 111-15]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

111th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                     111-15

======================================================================

 
   WAIVING A REQUIREMENT OF CLAUSE 6(A) OF RULE XIII WITH RESPECT TO 
  CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN RESOLUTIONS REPORTED FROM THE COMMITTEE ON 
                                 RULES.

                                _______
                                

  February 11, 2009.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______
                                

  Ms. Slaughter, from the Committee on Rules, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                       [To accompany H. Res. 158]

    The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration 
House Resolution 158, by a record vote of 7-3, report the same 
to the House with the recommendation that the resolution be 
adopted.

                SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

    The resolution waives clause 6(a) of rule XIII (requiring a 
two-thirds vote to consider a rule on the same day it is 
reported from the Rules Committee) against certain resolutions 
reported from the Rules Committee. The resolution applies the 
waiver to any resolution reported through the legislative day 
of February 13, 2009, providing for consideration or 
disposition of any measure relating to H.R. 1, the American 
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.

                            COMMITTEE VOTES

    The results of each record vote on an amendment or motion 
to report, together with the names of those voting for and 
against, are printed below:

Rules Committee record vote No. 26

    Date: February 11, 2009.
    Measure: H. Res. 158, waiving a requirement of clause 6(a) 
of rule XIII with respect to consideration of certain 
resolutions reported from the Committee on Rules.
    Motion by: Ms. Matsui.
    Summary of motion: To report the rule.
    Results: Adopted 7-3.
    Vote by Members: McGovern--Yea; Matsui--Yea; Cardoza--Yea; 
Arcuri--Yea; Perlmutter--Yea; Pingree--Yea; Polis--Yea; 
Dreier--Nay; Sessions--Nay; Foxx--Nay.

                                  

```
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

CONSENTOF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

 

We consent to theincorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (No. 000-30495)on Form S-8 of First Ottawa Bancshares, Inc. of our report dated January 17, 2003 relating to theconsolidated statements of income, changes in shareholders’ equity, and cashflows of First Ottawa Bancshares, Inc. and subsidiaries for the year endedDecember 31, 2002, which report isincorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of First OttawaBancshares, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2004.

 

 
|                | /s/ Crowe Chizek and Company LLC |   |
|---------------------|----------------------------------|--------|
|                |                             |
|                | Crowe Chizek and Company LLC     |
|                |                             |
|                |                             |
| Oak Brook, Illinois |                             |
| March 25, 2005      |                             |

 

----
§ 127.017 Alternatives. ( a ) The COTP may allow alternative procedures, methods, or equipment standards, including alternatives to standards listed in § 127.003, to be used by an operator instead of any requirements in this part if— ( 1 ) The operator submits a written request for the alternative at least 30 days before facility operations under the alternative would begin, unless the COTP authorizes a shorter time; and
( 2 ) The alternative provides at least the same degree of safety provided by the regulations in this part.
( b ) The COTP approves or disapproves any alternative requested under paragraph (a) of this section— ( 1 ) In writing; or
( 2 ) Orally, with subsequent written confirmation.
[CGD 78-038, 53 FR 3376, Feb. 7, 1988, as amended by USCG-2019-0444, 87 FR 5690, Feb. 2, 2022]