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 Quarterly Report of Palomar Enterprises Inc., a Nevada
      corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31,
      2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
      (the "Report"), I, Steve Bonenberger, President, Chief Executive Officer and
      Director 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.











Dated: May15,
      2007 /s/
      Steve
      Bonenberger




By:
      Steve
      Bonenberger, President, Chief Executive Officer
      and Director
<TABLE> <S> <C>

        <S> <C>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                             280,907
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        6,690
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                         18,901
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   323,268
<PP&E>                                                   0
<DEPRECIATION>                                           0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     323,268
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              208,208
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                            16,948
<OTHER-SE>                                          98,112
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       323,268
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                         0
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                            0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   445,865
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (445,865)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (445,865)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (445,865)
<EPS-BASIC>                                           (.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         (.03)
Exhibit 10.28


 


 


 


 






    	 	1	 



    	 



    

 


 






    	 	2	 



    	 



    

 


 






    	 	3	 



    	 



    

 


 


 






    	 	4	 



    	 



    

 


 


 






    	 	5	 



    	 



    

 


 


 






    	 	6	 



    	 



    

 


 


 






    	 	7
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 Quarterly Report of Satelinx International Inc.(the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Sam Grinfeld, Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer, 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.







Date: March 3, 2006

By:/s/ Sam Grinfeld

Name:  Sam Grinfeld

Title:    CEO (Principal Executive Officer and Principal

Accounting Officer)
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-7704
GUY T. LEGRANDE, Petitioner - Appellant, versus NORTH CAROLINA ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Salisbury. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CA-96-940) Submitted: April 29, 1998 Decided: May 6, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Guy T. LeGrande, Appellant Pro Se. William Norris Farrell, Jr., Special Deputy Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find noreversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny in forma pauperis status, and dismiss the appeal on thereasoning of the district court. LeGrande v. North Carolina Attorney General , No. CA-96-940 (M.D.N.C. Nov. 17, 1997). We also deny Appellant's motion for judicial notice, his motion for stay of execution, and his motion for dismissal of all charges. We dispensewith 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
i OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS

AUSTIN

**&enorable 8.**  **3. tssaitks,**  **ohrrtrrapn camdttee**  **cn sodlcisry**  **end** Austin,. Texss**mnoruble 8.**  **J. Isancks**  **- fpso**  **3**

**‘ The**  **Constftutian is**  **supr(3s0, o.nd**  **no statutory**  **83~ actmat,**  

### irhethcr

on ori;rtnsl

or 

### an ammdatory oat, in contra~entionthOroafis valid. The language of 

### theConstitution is murmMl;p1oos~am 

### Its prohibit%5 is dthimt qunllFiCattGll~ If -nc current 8agef.eshall mm' be 

### subjectto SW

### nlshm0nt,

### It teaeeaaril~follone thnt neither fiSteon per 

### mat, nor ttm p6r oat, nor any other per 

### cat of suab rmge8 

### may bo made subfeetta garmfshmcnt.

It can naks no U.lYerenca that the bill authorlzos the **orerlftcr** to reach by la8 the uages of his debtor *aam and uxocpt garxllshraent.~ In That othe? **method** coald it be 

### roachedthanby 

### gcrnlshn0att ?ho 

### hill .20er

### aot undmt&xi to prwids snot&r method to acooxuplipb this cad, hot it It were to it030, 

### oat 3bould~prwlzla 3 rncdy 

### zuxl

call it 

## l

lqmurling‘
, *QLstraint* 

### ) or **what** not, sach a bill 8ould 

### nwerthe1~86violato the tery spirit and purpo~o of the Constitution. 1sspacial4 numtioxd~ ‘~shment* in the Coamtltutiea is 00 lA&.totion vhntaocver upon the obvLou6 purpose to esezpt a1 currant wages icr peraonrrlsemLos from the exnctiea Of oroditors, and would rorbid lcrgslrtire ensatrmts 

### setting up a prccoodlag under unother name. tha ofreef of which 80ad be 

### to subject%ha.currentrace6 or personalsarrioe to aa impauodi~ for debt. Ilouse8111 380 is, therefore, in riol~tion oP the Cuaotltution.
#### § 301-75.201 May we allow the interviewee to use individual Government contractor-issued charge cards for pre-employment interview travel?

No.
§ 27.210 Definitions. ( a ) *Scope.* The definitions in this section apply to § 27.209, unless otherwise specified in those sections.
( b ) *Small and very small business.* ( 1 ) A *small business* is an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling interests, has average annual gross revenues that are not more than $40 million for the preceding three years.
( 2 ) *A very small business* is an entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling interests, has average annual gross revenues that are not more than $15 million for the preceding three years.
[67 FR 45373, July 9, 2002, as amended at 68 FR 43000, July 21, 2003]
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"Mediation - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"thiHFoFjFP\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/home\/case-information\/mediation\/\">Mediation<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/home\/case-information\/mediation\/embed\/#?secret=thiHFoFjFP\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Mediation” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"thiHFoFjFP\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"On October 3, 2005, the Federal Circuit established an appellate mediation program pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 33.  Pursuant to Federal Circuit Rule 47.6, the court has adopted Appellate Mediation Program Guidelines (pdf). The program is administered by the Circuit Executive, with the Office of General Counsel conducting case screening to identify eligible cases.  [...]"}
§ 27.58 Interference to BRS/EBS receivers. ( a ) WCS licensees shall bear full financial obligation to remedy interference to BRS/EBS block downconverters if all of the following conditions are met: ( 1 ) The complaint is received by the WCS licensee prior to February 20, 2002;
( 2 ) The BRS/EBS downconverter was installed prior to August 20, 1998;
( 3 ) The WCS fixed or land station transmits at 50 or more watts peak EIRP;
( 4 ) The BRS/EBS downconverter is located within a WCS transmitter's free space power flux density contour of −34 dBW/m2; and
( 5 ) The BRS/EBS customer or licensee has informed the WCS licensee of the interference within one year from the initial operation of the WCS transmitter or within one year from any subsequent power increases at the WCS station.
( b ) Resolution of the complaint shall be at no cost to the complainant.
( c ) Two or more WCS licensees collocating their antennas on the same tower shall assume shared responsibility for remedying interference complaints within the area determined by paragraph (a)(4) of this section unless an offending station can be readily determined and then that station shall assume full financial responsibility.
( d ) If the WCS licensee cannot otherwise eliminate interference caused to BRS/EBS reception, then that licensee must cease operations from the offending WCS facility.
( e ) At least 30 days prior to commencing operations from any new WCS transmission site or with increased power from any existing WCS transmission site, a WCS licensee shall notify all BRS/EBS licensees in or through whose licensed service areas they intend to operate of the technical parameters of the WCS transmission facility. WCS and BRS/EBS licensees are expected to coordinate voluntarily and in good faith to avoid interference problems and to allow the greatest operational flexibility in each other's operations.
[62 FR 16498, Apr. 7, 1997, as amended at 69 FR 72034, Dec. 10, 2004]
<PAGE> 33


 EXHIBIT 99.2      CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                   AS ADDED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002







<PAGE>  34


                                  EXHIBIT 99.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                                   AS ADDED BY
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


    In connection with the Quarterly Report of Greater Atlantic Financial Corp.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, David E. Ritter Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss. 1350, as added by ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

A.   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

B.   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
     respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company
     as of and for the period covered by the Report.





                                               By: /s/ David E. Ritter
                                               -----------------------
                                               David E. Ritter
                                               Senior Vice President and
                                               Chief Financial Officer


                                               Date:  May 13, 2003
69–008

106TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 106–95

PROVIDING FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1376, TAX RELIEF FOR PERSONNEL IN THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF YUGOSLAVIA (SERBIA/MONTENEGRO) AND CERTAIN OTHER AREAS

APRIL 14, 1999.—Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

Mrs. MYRICK, from the Committee on Rules,

submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany H. Res. 140]

The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration House

Resolution 140, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to the House

with the recommendation that the resolution be adopted.

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF RESOLUTION

The resolution provides for the consideration of H.R. 1376, Tax

Relief for Personnel in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia/

Montenegro) and certain other areas, under a closed rule. The rule

provides one hour of debate divided equally between the chairman

and ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and

Means.

The rule further waives all points of order against consideration

of the bill and provides that the bill be considered as read. The rule

also provides that the amendment recommended by the Committee

on Ways and Means and printed in the bill be considered as adopted. Finally, the rule provides for one motion to recommit, with or

without instructions.

The waiver of all points of order includes the following points of

order which would lie against consideration of the bill. First, the

bill violates clause 4(a) of Rule XIII (requiring a three-day layover

of the committee report). The report was filed on Tuesday, April 13,

and the bill is scheduled for consideration on the floor as early as

Thursday, April 15. Second, the bill violates Section 311(a) of the

Congressional Budget Act (prohibiting consideration of legislation

or an amendment that would cause the total level of new budget

authority or outlays in the most recent budget resolution to be exceeded or would cause revenues to be less). According to the Con-
2

gressional Budget Office and based on a cost estimate from the

Joint Committee on Taxation, the bill, if enacted, would result in

a revenue loss of $123 million over five years and $125 million over

ten years. However, the President signed an executive order on

Tuesday, April 13, implementing some aspects of the tax relief provided by the bill. This exempts the revenue lost as a result of that

signature from the calculations under section 311(a). The remaining loss of revenue is under $500,000 and therefore constitutes a

technical de minimus loss of revenue. Nevertheless, revenue levels

would still be below those assumed in the budget process for FY

1999.

Æ
**EXHIBIT 32.01**

** **

**SECTION 1350CERTIFICATION**

** **

**In connection with this annualreport of ML Trend-Following Futures Fund L.P. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Kfor the year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (this “Report”), I, Paul Morton, Chief ExecutiveOfficer, President and Manager of Merrill Lynch Alternative Investments LLC,the manager of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:**

** **

1. This Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2. The informationcontained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date: March 31, 2008                       |            |       |
|-------------------------------------------------|-----------------|------------|
|                                            |            |       |
| By                                              | /s/ PAUL MORTON |       |   |
| Paul Morton                                     |            |       |
| Chief Executive  Officer, President and Manager |            |       |
| **(Principal Executive Officer)**               | ** **      | ** ** |
|                                                 |                 |            |  |

 

----
CONSENT OF COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.,
                            INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement of 
ArthroCare Corporation on Form S-8 (file No. 333-06297) of our report dated 
January 27, 1998, except for Note 11 for which the date is March 25, 1998, on
our  audits of the financial statements and financial statement schedule of
ArthroCare  Corporation as of January 3, 1998 and December 28, 1996, and for
each of the  three years in the period ended January 3, 1998, which reports are
included in this  Annual Report on Form 10-K

COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.

San Jose, California
April 2, 1998
04

. N/A Does not exist. Air drilled.
In The 

Court of Appeals 

Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07-15-00422-CV 

IN THE MATTER OF THE MARRIAGE OF 

JAY STANTON AND RITA R. STANTON 

 

On Appeal from the 242nd District Court 

Castro County, Texas 

Trial Court No. B9837-1408, Honorable Kregg Hukill, Presiding 

 

May 3, 2016 

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

 

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ. 

Through his attorney, cross-appellant Jay Stanton has filed a motion to 

voluntarily dismiss his appeal. The motion is unopposed. Without passing on the 

merits of the case, we grant the motion and dismiss cross-appellant’s appeal. TEX. R.

APP. P. 42.1(a)(1). Having dismissed the appeal at cross-appellant’s request, and 

having previously dismissed the appeal of appellant Rita R. Stanton, no motion for 

rehearing will be entertained.

Per Curiam
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4598 Reference Change Senate (RCS)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4598

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                July 14 (legislative day, July 11), 1994

    Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, 
                      Science, and Transportation

                             July 20, 1994

  Committee discharged; referred to the Committee on Environment and 
                              Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To direct the Secretary of the Interior to make technical corrections 
   to maps relating to the Coastal Barrier Resources System, and to 
  authorize appropriations to carry out the Coastal Barrier Resources 
                                  Act.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. CORRECTIONS TO MAPS.

    (a) In General.--The Secretary of the Interior shall, before the 
end of the 30-day period beginning on the date of the enactment of this 
Act, make such corrections to the maps described in subsection (b) as 
are necessary to ensure that--
            (1) depictions of areas on those maps are consistent with 
        the depictions of areas appearing on the maps entitled Coastal 
        Barrier Resources System, dated June 29, 1994, and on file with 
        the Secretary of the Interior; and
            (2) the Coastal Barrier Resources System does not include 
        any area that, on the day before the date of the enactment of 
        this Act, was part of unit FL-05P of that System.
    (b) Maps Described.--The maps described in this subsection are maps 
that--
            (1) are included in a set of maps entitled ``Coastal 
        Barrier Resources System'', dated October 24, 1990; and
            (2) relate to the following units of the Coastal Barrier 
        Resources System: FL-05P, P11A, P17, P17A, P18P, P19P, FL-15, 
        FL-95P, FL36P, P31P, FL-72P, MI21, NY75, and VA62P.
    (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 12 of the Coastal 
Barrier Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 3510) is amended to read as follows:

``SEC. 12. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    ``There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary for 
carrying out this Act $2,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1994, 1995, 
1996, and 1997.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 12, 1994.

            Attest:

                                           DONNALD K. ANDERSON,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

September 4, 2012

d0827

Order 

September 4, 2012

145024

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 145024

COA: 301559

Wayne CC: 10-007618-FC

HOWARD LEVAR SMITH,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 13, 2012 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.