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 on Form 10-K of Quotemedia, Inc. (the Company) for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, R. Keith Guelpa, Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, certify, to my best knowledge and belief, 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 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|    |  |                        
|--- |  | -----------------------
|By: |  | /s/ R. Keith Guelpa    
|    |  | R. Keith Guelpa        
|    |  | Chief Executive Officer
|    |  | March 30, 2010
Honorable George S. Hawkins District of Columbia Department of the Environment 

5 1 N Street, NE 6th Floor 

Washington, D.C. 20002 

Dear Mr. Hawkins: 

On March 12,2008, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) revised the 

national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for ozone to provide increased protection of 

public health and welfare fiom ozone pollution. The new primary ozone standard was lowered 

fiom 0.08 parts per million (ppm) to 0.075 ppm based on numerous epidemiological studies 

conducted during the past decade in which many of the health effects associated with ozone 

exposure have been demonstrated at and below the level of the 0.08 ppm standard, which was 

promulgated in 1997. These include a range of serious respiratory effects and increased 

premature mortality. EPA also strengthened the secondary 8-hour ozone standard, making it 

identical to the revised primary standard, to protect against welfare effects such as impacts on vegetation and forested ecosystems. 

Within one year of promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, section 107(d)(l)(A) of 

the Clean Air Act requires the Governor of each state to submit to EPA a list of all areas in the 

state, recommending designations for each as "attainment," "nonattainment," or "unclassifiable" 

with respect to the new or revised standard. Therefore, EPA asks that you provide your 

designation recommendations, including appropriate area boundaries, to EPA by March 12,2009 

with respect to the revised ozone NAAQS. Establishing area designations is a key step in the 

process of providing the health protections that the Clean Air Act mandates. Areas that are 

designated as not attaining the air quality standards will be required to adopt plans to reduce 

ambient concentrations of ozone. 

The enclosed memorandum provides guidance to state and local air pollution control 

agencies and Tribes on the process for designating areas under the 2008 revised ozone standard. 

EPA plans to announce our intended designations as early as possible after receipt of your 

recommendations, but no later than 120 days prior to promulgating final designations. Following the announcement of intended designations, states and Tribes will have the 

opportunity to comment on any modifications EPA proposes to their recommendations. In 

accordance with section 107(d)(l)(B) of the Clean Air Act, we intend to issue final designations 

by March 12,201 0 (although that deadline may be extended up to one additional year if EPA 

determines that insufficient information is available to establish designations by that date). Our 

designations will be based on the most recent three years of certified, quality assured monitoring 

data available. Ozone nonattainment areas will be classified at the time of designation. The 

approach EPA will use to classify nonattainment areas under the 2008 revised ozone NAAQS 

will be established through a separate notice-and-comment rulemaking. 
Is/ 

Donald S. Welsh 

Regional Administrator 

cc: Ms. Cecily M. Beall, Associate Director for Air Quality Division 

District of Columbia Department of the Environment
Editorial Note on Subpart 101-6.21 of Part 101-6
Editorial Note: For additional information, see related documents published at 47 FR 57369, Dec. 23, 1982, 48 FR 17101, Apr. 21, 1983, and 48 FR 29096, June 24, 1983.

§ 101-6.2109 How does the Administrator receive and respond to comments? ( a ) The Administrator follows the procedures in § 101-6.2110 if: ( 1 ) A State office or official is designated to act as a single point of contact between a State process and all Federal agencies, and
( 2 ) That office or official transmits a State process recommendation for a program selected under § 101-6.2106.
( b ) ( 1 ) The single point of contact is not obligated to transmit comments from State, areawide, regional or local officials and entities where there is no State process recommendation.
( 2 ) If a State process recommendation is transmitted by a single point of contact, all comments from State, areawide, regional, and local officials and entities that differ from it must also be transmitted.
( c ) If a State has not established a process, or is unable to submit a State process recommendation, State, areawide, regional and local officials and entities may submit comments to GSA.
( d ) If a program or activity is not selected for a State process, State, areawide, regional and local officials and entities may submit comments to GSA. In addition, if a State process recommendation for a nonselected program or activity is transmitted to GSA by the single point of contact, the Administrator follows the procedures of § 101-6.2110 of this part.
( e ) The Administrator considers comments which do not constitute a State process recommendation submitted under these regulations, and for which the Administrator is not required to apply the procedures of § 101-6.2110 of this part, when such comments are provided by a single point of contact, or directly to GSA by a commenting party.
Exhibit 32.2

Certificate of the Principal Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

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 World Color Press Inc. (the "Company") on Form 40-F for the year ended
December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Andrew P. Hines, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial 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:

Date:
March 1st 2010



/s/Andrew P. HinesAndrew P. Hines
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


---



QuickLinks
§ 102-36.285 May we charge for personal property transferred to another federal agency? ( a ) When any one of the following conditions applies, you may require and retain reimbursement for the excess personal property from the recipient: ( 1 ) Your agency has the statutory authority to require and retain reimbursement for the property.
( 2 ) You are transferring the property under the exchange/sale authority.
( 3 ) You had originally acquired the property with funds not appropriated from the general fund of the Treasury or appropriated therefrom but by law reimbursable from assessment, tax, or other revenue. It is current executive branch policy that working capital fund property shall be transferred without reimbursement.
( 4 ) You or the recipient is the U.S. Postal Service.
( 5 ) You or the recipient is the DC Government.
( 6 ) You or the recipient is a wholly owned or mixed-ownership government corporation.
( b ) You may charge for direct costs you incurred incident to the transfer, such as packing, loading and shipping of the property. The recipient is responsible for such charges unless you waive the amount involved.
( c ) You may not charge for overhead or administrative expenses or the costs for care and handling of the property pending disposition.
§ 101-4.505 Employment criteria. A recipient shall not administer or operate any test or other criterion for any employment opportunity that has a disproportionately adverse effect on persons on the basis of sex unless: ( a ) Use of such test or other criterion is shown to predict validly successful performance in the position in question; and
( b ) Alternative tests or criteria for such purpose, which do not have such disproportionately adverse effect, are shown to be unavailable.
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 State

          - [Public Notice #3328] 

The Working Group on Stability and Load Lines and on Fishing Vessels Safety of the Subcommittee on Safety of Life at Sea will conduct an open meeting at 9 a.m. on Monday, June 26, 2000, in Room 6303, at U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, 2100 Second Street, SW, Washington, DC 20593-0001. This meeting will discuss the upcoming 43RD Session of the Subcommittee on Stability and Load Lines and on Fishing Vessels Safety (SLF) and associated bodies of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) which will be held on September 11-15, 2000, at the IMO Headquarters in London, England. 

Items of discussion will include the following: 

a. Review of results from SLF 42, 

b. Harmonization of damage stability provisions in the IMO instruments, 

c. Revision of technical regulations of the 1966 International Load Line Convention, 

d. Development of the damage consequence diagrams for inclusion in damage control plan guidelines, and 

e. Revisions to the Fishing Vessel Safety Code and Voluntary Guidelines 

Members of the public may attend this meeting up to the seating capacity of the room. Interested persons may seek information by writing: Mr. Paul Cojeen, U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, Commandant (G-MSE-2), Room 1308, 2100 Second Street, SW, Washington, DC 20593-0001 or by calling (202) 267-2988. 

Dated: June 9, 2000.

Stephen M. Miller, 

Executive Secretary, Shipping Coordinating Committee. 

[FR Doc. 00-15314 Filed 6-15-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710-07-P
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7356

EDDIE L. HALL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; HENRY MCMASTER, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge. (CA-03-2960-8) Submitted: November 19, 2004 Decided: December 9, 2004 Before WILKINSON and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Eddie L. Hall, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Eddie L. Hall seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the report of a magistrate judge, granting the respondents’ motion for summary judgment and dismissing his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue for claims addressed by a district court absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Hall has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
§ 230.31 Definitions. The following definitions apply to this subpart: ( a ) *Apparent.* That which is clear, plain, and evident.
( b ) *Owner.* The person recognized by the law as having ultimate control over and the right to use property.
( c ) *Claimant.* A person who submits a claim for abandoned or other unclaimed property.
( d ) *Ruling official.* The official who has the authority to grant or deny a claim for abandoned or other unclaimed property, typically the Executive Special Agent in Charge of the Area Field Office where the property is located, or a designee.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 22-CR-20540-ALTONAGA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

DELVIS LARA-FUENTES, et.al.,

Defendant.

___________________________/

UNOPPOSED JOINT MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL

Comes now, the Defendant, Delvis Lara-Fuentes, by and through undersigned counsel and 

files this Unopposed Joint Motion to Continue Trial and in support thereof states:

1. This matter is schedule for a Calendar Call on December 16, 2022 at 8am.

2. The government has provided counsel with two discovery productions and has indicated 

that a third discovery production will be provided shortly.

3. All of last week and until yesterday, counsel was in in trial before The Honorable Rodney 

Smith. As a result, he has been unable to review the discovery with the Defendant.

4. Counsel spoke to the two attorneys representing the other two co-defendants in this case. 

All counsels need additional time to meet with the Defendants in order to review the 

discovery. 

5. Lastly, counsel spoke to Assistant United States Attorney, Maria Catala, who indicated 

that she will be out of town December 22, 2022 through 30, 2022, and January 12, 2023 

through January 16, 2023. Therefore, AUSA Catala does not object to this motion.

6. Counsel and AUSA Catala proposed setting this matter for a trial date in late February.

Case 1:22-cr-20540-CMA Document 40 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/13/2022 Page 1 of 2
WHEREFORE, undersigned counsel prays this Honorable Court enter its Order granting this 

motion.

Respectfully submitted, 

OMAR A. LOPEZ, P.A.

848 Brickell Avenue, Suite 602

Miami, FL 33131

T:305.789.4430

F:305.503.9521

Email: omar@omarlopezlaw.com

By: Omar A. Lopez 

 Omar A. Lopez, Esquire

 Florida Bar No. 017870 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was on this 13th day 

of December 2022, furnished to all interested parties via the CF/ECF filing system.

Omar A. Lopez, Esquire

Omar A. Lopez, Esquire

Case 1:22-cr-20540-CMA Document 40 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/13/2022 Page 2 of 2
Former SUNY Player Pleads Guilty in 2008 Brawl - The New York Times Page 1 of 2

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/28/nyregion/28serb.html 12/4/2022

Case 1:22-cr-20340-KMW Document 14-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/06/2022 Page 1 of 2
Former SUNY Player Pleads Guilty in 2008 Brawl - The New York Times Page 2 of 2

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/28/nyregion/28serb.html 12/4/2022

Case 1:22-cr-20340-KMW Document 14-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/06/2022 Page 2 of 2
### U' 

# UNITED TACONITE FLOW SHEET No. 4: Rev 1 EXCO CONCENTRATOR (L" 3 4 & 

# 5) FINE ORE SURGE 

## 1nes ' ' 

# • TAILS icOBBER MAGNETIC SEPARATOR:· LINE #3 ROD MILLI CONC. 2000 HP SPIRAL CLASSIFIER I BALL MILL O'FLOW' 5000 HP 

# f

COARSE TAILS :ROUGHER MAGNETIC SEPARATOR! TAILS CONC

# f
U'FLOW' TAILINGS I CYCLONES

- HYDROSEPARATOR O'FLOW'

# ff H 20 FLOW' O'FLOW' DE'w'ATERING O'FLOW' I CONCENTRATE 

### I TAILS MAGNETIC IHYDROSEPARATORI SEPARATOR CONC • TO REGRIND O'SIZE CYCLONES I FINE SCREENS <SEE SHEET 3) U'SIZE

# f ALTERNATIVE TAILS

### IFINISHER MAGNETIC SEPARATOR I O'SIZE 300 FT

- ALTERNATE.- DERRICK**SCREENS~** THICKENER CONC IFINAL CONCENTRATE U'SIZE I U'FLOW' SUMP 

# • LINE #4 CONCENTRAT LINE #5 CONCENTRAT O'FLOW' THICKENER! ETCO CONCENTRATE TAILINGS 1PELLET PLANT SEE SHEET 3 POND O'FLOW' TO 

# ' PROCESS 'dATER U'FLOW' TO FILTERS E E
§ 958.18 Appeal of initial decision to Judicial Officer. ( a ) *Notice of appeal and supporting brief.* A party may appeal an adverse Initial Decision by filing, within 30 days after the Presiding Officer issues the Initial Decision, a Notice of Appeal with the Recorder. The Judicial Officer may extend the filing period but only if the party files a request for an extension within the initial 30-day period and demonstrates good cause for such extension. ( 1 ) The Notice of Appeal must be accompanied by a written brief specifying the party's exceptions, and any reasons for such exceptions, to the Presiding Officer's Initial Decision.
( 2 ) Within 30 days of receiving the party's brief, the opposing party may file with the Judicial Officer a response to the specified exceptions to the Presiding Officer's Initial Decision.
( b ) *Form of review.* Review by the Judicial Officer will be based entirely on the record and written submissions. ( 1 ) The Judicial Officer may affirm, reduce, reverse, or remand any determination about a penalty or assessment by the Presiding Officer.
( 2 ) The Judicial Officer shall not consider any argument or objection that was not raised in the hearing unless the interested party demonstrates that the failure to raise the argument or objection before the Presiding Officer was caused by extraordinary circumstances.
( 3 ) If any party demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Judicial Officer that additional evidence not presented at the hearing is material and that there were reasonable grounds for the failure to present such evidence, the Judicial Officer may remand the matter to the Presiding Officer for consideration of such additional evidence.
( c ) *Decision of Judicial Officer.* The Judicial Officer shall promptly serve each party to the appeal with a copy of his or her decision. The decision of the Judicial Officer constitutes final agency action and becomes final and binding on the parties.
**Exhibit 21.1****Subsidiaries of Tri-Isthmus Group, Inc. (f/k/a Vsource, Inc.)**   **Name** **Jurisdiction of Incorporation**Del Mar Acquisition, Inc. Nevada   Del Mar GenPar, Inc. Nevada   Point Loma Acquisition, Inc. Nevada   Point Loma Acquisition, Inc. Nevada   Surgical Center Acquisition Holdings, Inc. Nevada   Surgical Center Management, Inc. Nevada   Virtual Source, Inc. Nevada   Vsource (USA) Inc. Delaware   Vsource (California) Inc. California   Vsource (CI) Ltd Cayman Islands   Vsource (Asia) Ltd Hong Kong   Vsource (BVI) Ltd British Virgin Islands   Vsource (Singapore) Pte Ltd Singapore
#### § 55.5 Who is eligible for child development services?

Coast Guard members and civilian Coast Guard employees are eligible for the child developmental services described in this subpart. As space is available, members of the other Armed Forces and other Federal civilian employees are also eligible.
#### § 158.167 Reporting inadequate reception facilities.

Any person may report to the local Coast Guard COTP that reception facilities required by these regulations or MARPOL 73/78 are inadequate. Reports of inadequate reception facilities may be made orally, in writing or by telephone.

[CGD 88-002, 54 FR 18409, Apr. 28, 1989]
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22-1278

JAMES ADEYEMI,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL FOR BOOTH POLICE OFFICERS, 

NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY,

 Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. 

Stephanie A. Gallagher, District Judge. (1:21-cv-02060-SAG)

Submitted: October 13, 2022 Decided: October 17, 2022

Before NIEMEYER and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James Adeyemi, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 22-1278 Doc: 9 Filed: 10/17/2022 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

James Adeyemi appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his civil complaint and 

denying his subsequent motions for recusal and to alter or amend the judgment. We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s 

orders. Adeyemi v. Off. of Gen. Couns. for Booth Police Officers, No. 1:21-cv-02060-SAG 

(D. Md. filed Dec. 20, 2021 & entered Dec. 21, 2021; Mar. 8, 2022). We dispense with 

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 22-1278 Doc: 9 Filed: 10/17/2022 Pg: 2 of 2
**IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVA NIA** 

IN RE: DESIGNATION OF CHAIR AND VICE
- CHAIR OF THE DOMESTIC RELATIONS PROCEDURAL RULES COMMITTEE : : : : : : : No. 624 CIVIL PROCEDURAL RULES DOCKET

**O R D E R PER CURIA** **M:**

AND NOW , this 11 th day of June , 20 1 5 , David J. Slesnick , Esquire , is hereby design ated as Chair and Ellen M. Sweeney , Esquire as Vice
- Chair of the Domestic Relations Procedural Rules Committee commencing June 25 , 2015

.
###### Editorial Note on Subpart 101-6.2 of Part 101-6

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 101-6 appear at 68 FR 51373, Aug. 26, 2003.

#### § 101-6.211-4 Other means authorized by law.

No action to effect compliance by an other means authorized by law shall be taken until (a) the responsible GSA official has determined that compliance cannot be secured by voluntary means, (b) the recipient or other person has been notified of his failure to comply and of the action to be taken to effect compliance, and (c) the expiration of at least 10 days from the mailing of such notice to the recipient or other person. During this period of at least 10 days, additional efforts shall be made to persuade the recipient or other person to comply with this subpart and to take such corrective action as may be appropriate.

[38 FR 17974, July 5, 1973]
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

BAYVIEW LOAN SERVICING, LLC,

Petitioner

v.

CHINA L.B. RUTLEDGE,

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 19 EM 2017

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 23rd day of March , 2017, the Petition for Leave to File Petition

for Allowance of Appeal Nunc Pro Tunc is DENIED

.
#### § 102-34.145 How are U.S. Government license plates coded?

U.S. Government license plate numbers will be preceded by a letter code that designates the owning agency for the motor vehicle. The agency letter codes are listed in GSA Bulletin FMR Bulletin B-11. (FMR bulletins are located at *http://www.gsa.gov/bulletin.*)
#### §§ 101-30.603-3-101-30.603-4 [Reserved]