alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**HEARTLAND, INC.**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUNT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Heartland, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 301, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Trent Sommerville, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board 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:

 

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 as of and for the period covered by the Report.

 

By: /s/ Trent Sommerville

Trent Sommerville

Chief Executive Officer, and

Chairman of the Board

 

August 22, 2005

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 ("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 required by Section 906, has been provided to Heartland, Inc., and will be retained by Heartland, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
SENATE OF THE UNITED ST ATES 

ONE HUNDRED SECOND CONGRESS 

Convened January 3, 1991 FIRST SESSION { 

SECOND SESSION { 

EXECUTIVE CALENDAR 

Wednesday, May 22, 1991 

PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF WALTER J. STEWART, 

SECRETARY OF THE SENATE 

By Gerald A. Hackett, Executive Clerk 
-

calendar Ex. Res. 

No. No. 

1 104 

Calendar Treaty 

No. Doc. No. 

1 EX. B., 

95-1 

Calendar Message 

No. No. 

* 80 139 

1 

RESOLUTIONS 

Subject 

Resolution (executive) relating to the 

return to the President of certain treaty 

amendments. 

TREATIES 

Subject 

Two Related Protocols to the Convention for 

the Unification of Certain Rules Relating 

to International Carriage by Air, as 

Amended (Montreal Aviation Protocols No. 3 

and 4). 

NOMINATIONS 

Nominee, Office, And Predecessor 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

David Floyd Lambertson, of Kansas, a Career 

Member of the Senior Foreign Service, 

Class of Minister-Counselor, to be 

Ambassador Extraordinary and 

Plenipotentiary of the United States of 

America to the Kinedom of Thailand. 

Reported 

Bv 

Apr 18 91 Reported by Mr. 

Pell, Committee on Foreign 

Relations. 

Apr 23 91 Printed report 

filed (Exec. Reot. 102-3). 

Reported 

Bv 

Feb 5 91 Reported favorably 

by Mr. Pell, Committee on 

Foreign Relations, with a 

resolution of advice and 

consent to ratification 

with provisos. (Printed 

report--Ex. Rept 102-1 

together with minority 

views). 

Reported 

Bv 

May 7, 91 Mr. Pell, 

Committee on Foreign 

Relations, without printed 

report 

.. *S1gmf1es nominee's commitment to respond to requests to appear and testify before any duly 

constituted committee of the Senate.
EXHIBIT 32.2



Certification of Chief Financial Officer



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of
ACLARA BioSciences, Inc. (the Company) hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:



(i) the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2004 (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and



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



|                        |  |                                                    
|----------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------
|Dated: November 9, 2004 |  | /s/ Alfred G. Merriweather                         
|                        |  | Alfred G. Merriweather                             
|                        |  | Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer



The foregoing
certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into
any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y A lton Thomas Davis,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk September 27, 2010

p0920 

# Order

September 27, 2010

140672(30)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 140672 COA: 293121 Wayne CC: 01-004225-FC KELLY NOBLES, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion for rec onsideration of this Court’s June 28, 2010 order is considered, and it is DENIED, becau se it does not appear that the order was entered erroneously.
Memo to File

From: Kathryn Kelley

Date: 9/20/12

On September 20, 2012 EPA attended a listening session with a representative from the 

Canadian Ship Owners Association (CSA). 

Attendees are the following:

Name Affiliation

Robert Lewis-Manning CSA

Debbie Murray CSA

Ryan Albert EPA

Kathryn Kelley EPA 

The representatives from CSA raised concerns about the availability of technology and type 

approval process for ballast water treatment and coordination between EPA and the U.S. Coast 

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

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-51426 Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee
v. DANIEL HERNANDEZ-HERNANDEZ Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:07-CR-1591-ALL Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Daniel HernandezHernandez raises arguments that are foreclosed by United Statesv. Slaughter, 238 F.3d 580, 582-84 (5th Cir. 2000), which held that Apprendi v. NewJersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), did not render 21 U.S.C. § 960(b) unconstitutional on its face. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D June 4, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk
§ 1150.7 What interest, penalty charges, and administrative costs will I have to pay on a debt owed to the Endowment? ( a ) *Interest.* ( 1 ) The Endowment will assess interest on all delinquent debts unless prohibited by statute, regulation, or contract.
( 2 ) Interest begins to accrue on all debts from the date that the debt becomes delinquent. The Endowment will not recover interest if you pay the debt within 30 days of the date on which interest begins to accrue. The Endowment shall assess interest at the rate established annually by the Secretary of the Treasury under 31 U.S.C. 3717, unless a different rate is either necessary to protect the interests of the Endowment or established by a contract, repayment agreement, or statute. The Endowment will notify you of the basis for its finding when a different rate is necessary to protect the interests of the Endowment.
( 3 ) The Chairperson may extend the 30-day period for payment without interest where he or she determines that such action is in the best interest of the Endowment. A decision to extend or not to extend the payment period is final and is not subject to further review.
( b ) *Penalty.* The Endowment will assess a penalty charge, not to exceed 6 percent a year, on any portion of a debt that is delinquent for more than 90 days.
( c ) *Administrative costs.* The Endowment will assess charges to cover administrative costs incurred as a result of your failure to pay a debt before it becomes delinquent. Administrative costs include the additional costs incurred in processing and handling the debt because it became delinquent, such as costs incurred in obtaining a credit report or in using a private collection contractor, or service fees charged by a Federal agency for collection activities undertaken on behalf of the Endowment.
( d ) *Allocation of payments.* A partial or installment payment by a debtor will be applied first to outstanding penalty assessments, second to administrative costs, third to accrued interest, and fourth to the outstanding debt principal.
( e ) *Additional authority.* The Endowment may assess interest, penalty charges, and administrative costs on debts that are not subject to 31 U.S.C. 3717 to the extent authorized under common law or other applicable statutory authority.
( f ) *Waiver.* ( 1 ) The Chairperson may (without regard to the amount of the debt) waive collection of all or part of accrued interest, penalty charges, or administrative costs, if he or she determines that collection of these charges would be against equity and good conscience or not in the best interest of the Endowment.
( 2 ) A decision to waive interest, penalty charges, or administrative costs may be made at any time before a debt is paid. However, where these charges have been collected before the waiver decision, they will not be refunded. The Chairperson's decision to waive or not waive collection of these charges is final and is not subject to further review.
BEFORE THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

In the Matter of 

Audit Division Recommendation 

Memorandum on the Mississippi 

Republican Party 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

A17-15 

Agenda Document No. 21-01-A 

CERTIFICATION 

I, Vicktoria J. Allen, recording secretary of the Federal Election Commission open meeting 

on January 28, 2021, do hereby certify that the Commission took the following actions in the 

above-captioned matter: 

1. Failed by a vote of 3-3 to: 

a. Approve the Audit Division’s recommendations in Audit Division 

Recommendation Memorandum on the Mississippi Republican Party, as 

set forth in Agenda Document 21-01-A. 

b. Add mailer 8 to Finding 3 (Reporting of Apparent Independent 

Expenditures) and adjust the amount in violation accordingly. 

c. Add a new finding that the Mississippi Republican Party violated the joint 

fundraising regulations at 11 C.F.R. § 102.17(c) when it received 

$1,587,962 in net proceeds from the Trump Victory Joint Fundraising 

Committee and, on the same day, transferred $1,587,842 to the Republican 

National Committee. 

d. Add a new finding that the Mississippi Republican Party failed to maintain 

any monthly payroll logs to document the percentage of time each 

employee spent in connection with a federal election totaling $42, 415. 
Federal Election Commission 

Certification for Audit Division Recommendation A17-15 

January 28, 2021 

Page 2 

Commissioners Broussard, Walther, and Weintraub voted affirmatively for the motion. 

Commissioners Cooksey, Dickerson, and Trainor dissented. 

2. Decided by a vote of 6-0 to: 

Accept Findings 1 and 2 in the Audit Division Recommendation 

Memorandum on the Mississippi Republican Party, as set forth in Agenda 

Document 21-01-A. 

Commissioners Broussard, Cooksey, Dickerson, Trainor, Walther, and Weintraub voted 

affirmatively for the decision. 

February 11, 2021 

Date 

Attest: 

Vicktoria Allen Digitally signed by Vicktoria Allen 

Date: 2021.02.11 17:28:46 -05'00' 

Vicktoria J. Allen 

Acting Deputy Secretary of the 

Commission
#### Augustus S. Fitch et al., Respondents, *v.*Tina B. Fraser, Appellant.

(Argued April 16, 1907;

decided April 30, 1907.)

*Fitch*v. *Fraser,*109 App. Div. 440, affirmed.

Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered December!, 1905, reversing a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court at a Trial Term and granting a new trial in an action to compel contribution in payment of a promissory note of which all the parties to the action were signers.

*Fdwin D. Wagner*and *Robert A. Fraser*for appellant.

*Alexander Weish*for respondents.

Order affirmed and judgment absolute ordered against appellant on the stipulation, with costs in all courts; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Oh. J., Gbay, Edwabd T. Babtlett, Haight, Webneb, Willabd Babtlett and Hiscook, JJ.
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20463

 

MEMORANDUM

TO: Patricia C. Orrock

 Chief Compliance Officer

 Dayna Brown

 Acting Assistant Staff Director

 Audit Division 

FROM: Neven F. Stipanovic 

 Associate General Counsel 

Policy Division 

 Lorenzo Holloway 

 Assistant General Counsel

 Compliance Advice

 Jennifer Waldman

 Attorney

 

SUBJECT: Interim Audit Report on Van Drew for Congress (LRA 1126) 

 The Office of the General Counsel has reviewed the proposed Interim Audit Report 

(“IAR”) for Van Drew for Congress committee. The IAR contains two findings: Receipt of 

Contributions in Excess of the Limit (Finding 1) and Receipt of Apparent Prohibited 

Contributions (Finding 2). We concur with the findings. If you have any questions, please 

contact Jennifer Waldman, the attorney assigned to this audit.
| 1.   | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2.   | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the consolidated financial condition of the Company as of the dates presented and the consolidated result of operations of the Company for the periods presented. |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   By: |   /s/ S. Clayton Wood      |
|-----------------|--------------------------------------|
|  Name:     |  S. Clayton Wood                |
|  Title:    |  Principal Executive Officer    |
|  Date:     |  July 8, 2010                   |
|            |                            |
| By:             | /s/ Steven Shum                      |
|            |                                 |
| Name:           | Steven Shum                          |
|            |                                 |
| Title:          | Chief Financial Officer and Director |
|            |                                 |
| Date:           | July 8, 2010                         |
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

KLAUS DUELL,

Appellant,

v.

SUN COAST ROOFING SERVICES, INC.,

Appellee.

No. 2D22-3337

January 31, 2024

Appeal from the County Court for Manatee County; Renee L. Inman, 

Judge.

Greg Horowitz, Sarasota, for Appellant.

Gavin D. Magaziner of Magaziner Law, P.A., Safety Harbor, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

NORTHCUTT, MORRIS, and LABRIT, JJ., Concur. 

Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
§ 1201.4 Service of subpoenas, court orders, and other demands or requests for official information or action. ( a ) Except in cases in which the Corporation is represented by legal counsel who have entered an appearance or otherwise given notice of their representation, only the General Counsel is authorized to receive and accept subpoenas, or other demands or requests directed to any component of the Corporation or Corporation Employees, whether civil or criminal in nature, for: ( 1 ) Material, including documents, contained in the files of the Corporation;
( 2 ) Information, including testimony, affidavits, declarations, admissions, response to interrogatories, or informal statements, relating to material contained in the files of the Corporation or which any Corporation employee acquired in the course and scope of the performance of official duties;
( 3 ) Garnishment or attachment of compensation of Corporation Employees; or
( 4 ) The performance or non-performance of any official Corporation duty.
( b ) In the event that any subpoena, demand, or request is sought to be delivered to a Corporation Employee other than in the manner prescribed in paragraph (a) of this section, such attempted service shall be ineffective. Such Corporation Employee shall, after consultation with the General Counsel, decline to accept the subpoena, and demand or request the return of it under cover of a written communication referring to the procedures prescribed in this part.
( c ) Except as otherwise provided in this part, the Corporation is not an agent for service or otherwise authorized to accept on behalf of Corporation Employees any subpoenas, show-cause orders, or similar compulsory process of federal or state courts, or requests from private individuals or attorneys, which are not related to the employees' official duties except upon the express, written authorization of the individual Corporation Employee to whom such demand or request is directed.
( d ) Acceptance of such documents by the General Counsel does not constitute a waiver of any defenses that might otherwise exist with respect to service under the Federal Rules of Civil or Criminal Procedure at 28 U.S.C. Appendix, Rules 4-6 or 18 USC Appendix or other applicable rules.
§ 902.53 Records exempted from disclosure by statute. ( a ) Records relating to matters that are specifically exempted by statute from disclosure may not be made available for public inspection. For example: section 1905 of title 18 U.S.C., protecting trade secrets, processes, and certain economic and other data obtained by examination or investigation, or from reports.
( b ) The purpose of this section is to preserve the effectiveness of statutes of the kind cited as an example, in accordance with their terms.
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 216 (Wednesday, November 8, 2006)]
[Presidential Documents]
[Page 65369]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-9158]




                        Presidential Documents 



Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 8, 2006 / 
Presidential Documents

___________________________________________________________________

Title 3--
The President

[[Page 65369]]

                Presidential Determination No. 2007-3 of October 16, 
                2006

                
Provision of U.S. Drug Interdiction Assistance to 
                the Government of Brazil

                Memorandum for the Secretary of State [and the] 
                Secretary of Defense

                Pursuant to the authority vested in me by section 1012 
                of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
                Year 1995, as amended (22 U.S.C 2291-4), I hereby 
                certify, with respect to Brazil, that (1) interdiction 
                of aircraft reasonably suspected to be primarily 
                engaged in illicit drug trafficking in that country's 
                airspace is necessary because of the extraordinary 
                threat posed by illicit drug trafficking to the 
                national security of that country; and (2) that country 
                has appropriate procedures in place to protect against 
                innocent loss of life in the air and on the ground in 
                connection with such interdiction, which shall at a 
                minimum include effective means to identify and warn an 
                aircraft before the use of force is directed against 
                the aircraft.

                The Secretary of State is authorized and directed to 
                publish this determination in the Federal Register and 
                to notify the Congress of this determination.
                <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
                
                    (Presidential Sig.)

                THE WHITE HOUSE,

                    Washington, October 16, 2006.

[FR Doc. 06-9158
Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am]
Billing code 4710-10-P
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-00086 Conference Calendar

IN RE: MICHAEL ALLEN KENNEDY, Movant.

- - - - - - - - - - Motion to Reduce Sanctions

- - - - - - - - - - April 9, 1998 Before JOLLY, JONES, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Michael Allen Kennedy, # 433834, has filed a miscellaneous motion, unconnected with any district court proceedings, asking this court to reduce his sanctions. He asserts that because he has been unable to pay the sanctions over the past five years, it is obvious that he will never be able to pay and will be forever barred from filing any pleadings in the courts. He does not seek to file any particular pleadings either in the district court or in this court. He swears once again that he has learned his lesson regarding his propensity to file frivolous litigation. In 1995, Kennedy satisfied a $100 fine imposed in Kennedy v. Little , No. 93-8221 (5th Cir. Sept. 22, 1993). Thus, he hasNo. 98-00086 -2- demonstrated some ability to pay his sanctions. The last time he

swore that he had learned his lesson, he had submitted false documents to the district court. Further, his request is premature because he does not seek to file any specific pleadings at this time. Kennedy’s motion to reduce sanctions is DENIED.
§ 1302.63 Coordination and collaboration with the local agency responsible for implementing IDEA. ( a ) A program must coordinate with the local agency responsible for implementing IDEA to identify children enrolled or who intend to enroll in a program that may be eligible for services under IDEA, including through the process described in § 1302.33(a)(3) and through participation in the local agency Child Find efforts.
( b ) A program must work to develop interagency agreements with the local agency responsible for implementing IDEA to improve service delivery to children eligible for services under IDEA, including the referral and evaluation process, service coordination, promotion of service provision in the least restrictive appropriate community-based setting and reduction in dual enrollment which causes reduced time in a less restrictive setting, and transition services as children move from services provided under Part C of IDEA to services provided under Part B of IDEA and from preschool to kindergarten.
( c ) A program must participate in the development of the IFSP or IEP if requested by the child's parents, and the implementation of the IFSP or IEP. At a minimum, the program must offer: ( 1 ) To provide relevant information from its screenings, assessments, and observations to the team developing a child's IFSP or IEP; and,
( 2 ) To participate in meetings with the local agency responsible for implementing IDEA to develop or review an IEP or IFSP for a child being considered for Head Start enrollment, a currently enrolled child, or a child transitioning from a program.
( d ) A program must retain a copy of the IEP or IFSP for any child enrolled in Head Start for the time the child is in the program, consistent with the IDEA requirements in 34 CFR parts 300 and 303.