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

Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the filing of the
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 (the Report) by First California Financial Group, Inc. (Registrant), each of the undersigned hereby certifies that:



| | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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

Date: March 28, 2008



/s/ C. G. KumC. G. Kum President and Chief Executive
Officer/s/ Romolo SantarosaRomolo Santarosa Executive Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer
U.S. DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

)

GREAT AMERICA PAC, ) No. 1:23-cv-01027-CRC

)

Plaintiff, ) Judge Christopher R. Cooper

)

v. )

)

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, )

)

Defendant. )

_______________________________________)

PLAINTIFF GREAT AMERICA PAC’S 

NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL

Having received the two Statements of Reasons underlying Defendant Federal Election 

Commission’s (“Commission”) dismissal of Plaintiff Great America PAC’s (“GAP”) 

administrative complaint in Matter Under Review 7722, GAP hereby provides its notice of 

dismissal in this case pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A) and this Court’s Order of June 21, 

2023. The Commission has not yet served an answer or motion for summary judgment. 

Respectfully submitted, 

July 31, 2023 /s/ Dan Backer

Dan Backer, Esq. (D.C. Bar No. 996641)

Chalmers, Adams, Backer & Kaufman LLC

441 N. Lee Street, Suite 300

Alexandria, VA 22314

(202) 210-5431

dbacker@ChalmersAdams.com

Attorney for Plaintiff Great America PAC

Case 1:23-cv-01027-CRC Document 11 Filed 07/31/23 Page 1 of 1
#### The First National Bank of Sing Sing, Appellant, *v.*The Sing Sing Gas Manufacturing Company et al., Respondents.

*First Nat. Bank of Sing Sing*v. *Sing Sing Gas Mfg. Go.,*120 App. Div. 542, affirmed.

(Argued January 27, 1909;

decided February 9, 1909.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered July 5, 1907, affirming a judgment in favor of defendants entered upon the report of a referee in an action to recover upon a promissory note.

*Charles F. Brown*and *Samuel Watson*for appellant.

*Henry A.*Prince, *George H. Fletcher*and *John Larkin*for respondents.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Haight, Werner,Willard Bartlett, Hisoook and Chase, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 244 (Wednesday, December 20, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Page 76279]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-9798]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Notice of Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: 11 a.m., Friday, January 26, 2007.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission 
Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Surveillance Matters.

Contact Person for More Information: Eileen A. Donovan, 202-418-5100.

Catherine D. Daniels,
Assistant Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 06-9798 Filed 12-18-06; 11:32 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
FEDERAL ELEGTIQN COMMISSION 

WASHINCTONj'.0.'C. 20463 

November 6, 2013 

MEMORANDUM 

TO: 

FROM: 

Patricia C. Orrock 

Chief Compliance Officer 

Thomas Hintermister 

Assistant Staff Director 

Audit Division 

Lisa J. Stevenson 

Deputy General Counsel - Law 

SUBJECT: 

Lorenzo Holloway 

Assistant General Counsel 

Compliance Advice 

Danita C. Alberico 

Attorney 

Preliminary Audit Report on the Committee on Arrangements for the 2012 

Republican National Convention (LRA 947) 

The Office of the General Counsel has reviewed the Preliminary Audit Report ("PAR") on 

the Committee on Arrangements for the 2012 Republican National Convention. The PAR 

contains two findings: (1) Net Outstanding Convention Expenses; and (2) Failure to Itemize 

Debts.' We concur with the findings. If you have any questions, please contact Danita C. 

Alberico, the attorney assigned to this audit. 

We recommend that the Commission consider this document in Executive Session because the Commission 

may eventually decide to pursue an investigation of matters contained in the proposed Report. 11 C.F.R. §§ 2.4(a) and 

(b)(6).
## State of N ew York Su p reme C ou rt, A p p ellate Division Third J u dicial Dep artment Decided and Entered: May 21, 2015 519554

________________________________ In the Matter of SHELDON CLARK, Petitioner, v MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT ANTHONY J. ANNUCCI, as Acting Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision, Respondent.

________________________________ Calendar Date: March 31, 2015 Before: Lahtinen, J.P., McCarthy, Rose and Devine, JJ.

__________ Sheldon Clark, Brocton, petitioner pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Peter H. Schiff of counsel), for respondent.

__________ Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule. A correction officer received information from a confidential source who observed petitioner in possession of a weapon and saw him secrete it in a pair of state issued pants that were hanging in the dorm bathroom. The weapon, which was described in detail by the confidential source, was later found in a different location, but the confidential source positively identified it as the weapon belonging to petitioner. Petitioner was subsequently charged in a misbehavior report with possessing a weapon. He was found guilty of the charge following a tier III disciplinary hearing and the determination was later affirmed on-2- 519554

administrative appeal. This CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued. We confirm. The misbehavior report, together with the testimony of the investigating officer who prepared it and the confidential information considered by the Hearing Officer in camera, provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt (see Matter of White v Fischer, 121 AD3d 1478, 1478-1479 [2014]; Matter of Best v Larkin, 116 AD3d 1306, 1307 [2014]). Contrary to petitioner's claim, the credibility of the confidential information was sufficiently established by the details given by the confidential source, which included a precise description of the weapon as corroborated by a photograph of the weapon later recovered, as well as the investigating officer's testimony that the source had provided reliable information in the past (see Matter of Grate v Annucci, 122 AD3d 1053, 1054 [2014]; Matter of White v Fischer, 121 AD3d at 1479). Moreover, petitioner's challenge to the adequacy of the hearing audiotape is not substantiated by the transcript and, given that it does not disclose any significant gaps or deficiencies, meaningful review is not precluded (see Matter of Possert v Fischer, 106 AD3d 1350, 1350 [2013]; compare Matter of Farrell v New York State Off. of the Attorney Gen., 108 AD3d 801, 801 [2013]). We have considered petitioner's remaining contentions and find them to be unpersuasive. Lahtinen, J.P., McCarthy, Rose and Devine, JJ., concur.

ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger Clerk of the Court
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 236 (Friday, December 8, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 71051]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-9598]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army

32 CFR Parts 626 and 627


The Biological Defense Safety Program and Technical Safety 
Requirements

AGENCY: Department of the Army, DOD.

ACTION: Final rule; removals.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of the Army is removing its regulations 
concerning the biological Defense Safety Program and its requirements 
because it is now superseded through consolidation with other Army 
safety regulations into Army Regulation (AR) 385-10, Army Safety 
Program and does not affect the general public.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 8, 2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Kenneth W. Proper, (703) 601-2408.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office of the Director of Army Safety 
(DACS-SF), is the proponent for the regulation represented by 32 CFR 
Part 626 and the DA PAM represented by 32 CFR 627. The Office of the 
Director of Army Safety has consolidated the Army regulation, 
represented by 32 CFR Part 626 into AR 385-10, Army Safety Program. 
This regulation was extensively revised during the consolidation 
process, and the new consolidated regulation does not affect the 
general public.
    The Office of the Director of Army Safety has extensively revised 
the DA PAM, represented by 32 CFR 627 to reflect the consolidation 
effect and to update it to address new biological safety techniques and 
requirements and determined that the revised DA PAM does not affect the 
general public.

List of Subjects in 32 CFR Parts 626 and 627

    Biologics, Government contracts, Hazardous substances, National 
defense, Occupational safety and health, Research.

PART 626 AND 627--[REMOVED]

0
Accordingly, for reasons stated in the preamble, under the authority of 
5 U.S.C. 102, 10 U.S.C. 21, 111, 151-158, 42 U.S.C. 216; sec. 361, 50 
U.S.C. 1431, Pub. L. 101-510, 104 Stat. 1516, 58 Stat. 703 and 264; 49 
U.S.C. App 1803, 1804, 1807, and 1808, 29 CFR 1910. 1450(e), 32 CFR 
Part 626, Biological Defense Safety Program and 32 CFR Part 627, The 
Biological Defense Safety Program, Technical Safety Requirements (DA 
Pamphlet 385-69), are removed in their entirety.

Brenda S. Bowen,
Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 06-9598 Filed 12-7-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710-08-M
IMPLANT
SCIENCES CORPORATION




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 Implant Sciences Corporation (the
"Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending December 31, 2007, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Diane
J. Ryan, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that to my knowledge:




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/ 
Diane J. Ryan


Diane J.
Ryan


Chief
Financial Officer


February
19, 2008
EX-35 (c)
(logo) WELLS FARGO

Corporate Trust Services
MAC N2702-011
9062 Old Annapolis Road
Columbia, MD 21045
410 884-2000
410 715-2380 Fax

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

March 13, 2007

Nomura Home Equity Loan, Inc.

RE: Annual Statement As To Compliance for Nomura Home Equity Loan, Inc., Home
Equity Loan Trust, Series 2006-HE3

Per Section 3.13a of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, dated as of 8/1/2006,
the undersigned Officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., (Securities Administrator),
hereby certifies the following for the 2006 calendar year or portion thereof:

(A)  a review of such party's activities during the preceding calendar year or
     portion thereof and of such party's performance under this Agreement has
     been made under such officer's supervision and

(B)  to the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, such party
     has fulfilled all its obligations under this Agreement in all material
     respects throughout such year or portion thereof, or, if there has been a
     failure to fulfill any such obligation in any material respect, specifying
     each such failure known to such officer and the nature and status thereof.


Certified By:
/s/ Reid Denny
Reid Denny, Vice President

Certified By:
/s/ Gordon Johnson
Gordon Johnson, Assistant Secretary
#### § 263.20 What definitions apply to Individual Development Accounts (IDAs)?

The following definitions apply with respect to IDAs:

*Date of acquisition* means the date on which a binding contract to obtain, construct, or reconstruct the new principal residence is entered into.

*Eligible educational institution* means an institution described in section 481(a)(1) or section 1201(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1088(a)(1) or 1141(a)), as such sections were in effect on August 21, 1996. Also, an area vocational education school (as defined in subparagraph (C) or (D) of section 521(4) of the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Education Act (20 U.S.C. 2471(4)) that is in any State (as defined in section 521(33) of such Act), as such sections were in effect on August 21, 1996.

*Individual Development Account (IDA)* means an account established by, or for, an individual who is eligible for assistance under the TANF program, to allow the individual to accumulate funds for specific purposes. Notwithstanding any other provision of law (other than the Internal Revenue Code of 1986), the funds in an IDA account must be disregarded in determining eligibility for, or the amount of, assistance in any Federal means-tested programs.

*Post-secondary educational expenses* means a student's tuition and fees required for the enrollment or attendance at an eligible educational institution, and required course fees, books, supplies, and equipment required at an eligible educational institution.

*Qualified acquisition costs means* the cost of obtaining, constructing, or reconstructing a residence. The term includes any usual or reasonable settlement, financing, or other closing costs.

*Qualified business* means any business that does not contravene State law or public policy.

*Qualified business capitalization expenses means* business expenses pursuant to a qualified plan.

*Qualified entity* means a nonprofit, tax-exempt organization, or a State or local government agency that works cooperatively with a nonprofit, tax-exempt organization.

*Qualified expenditures* means expenses entailed in a qualified plan, including capital, plant equipment, working capital, and inventory expenses.

*Qualified first-time home buyer* means a taxpayer (and, if married, the taxpayer's spouse) who has not owned a principal residence during the three-year period ending on the date of acquisition of the new principal residence.

*Qualified plan* means a business plan that is approved by a financial institution, or by a nonprofit loan fund having demonstrated fiduciary integrity. It includes a description of services or goods to be sold, a marketing plan, and projected financial statements, and it may require the eligible recipient to obtain the assistance of an experienced entrepreneurial advisor.

*Qualified principal residence* means the place a qualified first-time home buyer will reside in accordance with the meaning of section 1034 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 1034). The qualified acquisition cost of the residence cannot exceed the average purchase price of similar residences in the area.
Exhibit 31.1


RULE 13a-14(d) Certification





I, In-Young Chase, certify that:





1.           I have reviewed this report on Form 10–K and all reports on Form 10–D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10–K of SATURNS Trust No. 2006-2 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);





2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;





3.Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10–D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;





4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement(s) required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports,the servicers, U.S. Bank National Association (“U.S. Bank”) as successor-in-interest to Bank of America, National Association (“BANA”), and BANA as successor by merger to LaSalle Bank National Association (collectively, the “trustees” or the “servicers”), of SATURNS Trust No. 2006-2,have fulfilled their respective obligations under the servicing agreement, which is the Trust Agreement relating to SATURNS Trust No. 2006-2; and





5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a–18 and 15d–18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10–K.





In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: (i) U.S. Bank as successor-in-interest to BANA and its officers and agents and (ii) BANA as successor by merger to LaSalle Bank National Association and its officers and agents.





By: /s/In-Young ChaseName:        In-Young ChaseTitle:          Vice PresidentDate:          March 29, 2012
Q

)('(5$/(/(&7,21&200,66,21

:$6+,1*721'&

MEMORANDUM -XQH

72 3DWULFLD&2UURFN

&KLHI&RPSOLDQFH2IILFHU

'D\QD%URZQ

$VVLVWDQW6WDII'LUHFWRU

$XGLW'LYLVLRQ

)520 1HYHQ)6WLSDQRYLF

$VVRFLDWH*HQHUDO&RXQVHO RXQVHO

3ROLF\'LYLVLRQ

-HVVLFD6HOLQNRII

$FWLQJ$VVLVWDQW*HQHUDO&RXQVHO

&RPSOLDQFH$GYLFH

-HQQLIHU:DOGPDQ

$WWRUQH\



68%-(&7 'UDIW)LQDO$XGLW5HSRUWRQ:HEHUIRU&RQJUHVV/5$

7KH2IILFHRIWKH*HQHUDO&RXQVHOKDVUHYLHZHGWKHSURSRVHG'UDIW)LQDO$XGLW5HSRUW

3')$5 ́IRUWKH:HEHUIRU&RQJUHVVFRPPLWWHH7KH')$5 FRQWDLQVWKUHHILQGLQJV

0LVVWDWHPHQWRI)LQDQFLDO$FWLYLW\)LQGLQJ5HFHLSWRI&RQWULEXWLRQVLQ([FHVVRIWKH/LPLW

)LQGLQJDQG)DLOXUHWR)LOH+RXU1RWLFHV)LQGLQJ:HFRQFXUZLWKWKHILQGLQJV,I

\RXKDYHDQ\TXHVWLRQVSOHDVHFRQWDFW-HQQLIHU:DOGPDQWKHDWWRUQH\DVVLJQHGWRWKLVDXGLW
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

WASHINCTON 0 C 20463

,....

A83-75

REPORT OF THE AUDIT DIVISION

ON THE w~ST VIRGINIA REPUBLICAN STATE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

I . Background

A. Overview

This report is based on an audit of the West Virginia

Republican State Executive Committee (ftthe Committee"),

undertaken by the Audit Division of the Federal Election

Commission in accordance with the Commission's audit policy to

determine whether there has been compliance with the provisions

of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 19i1, as amended ("the

Act"). The audit was conducted pursu~nt to Section 438(b) of

Title 2 of the United States Code which states, in part, that the

Commission, may conduct audits and field investigations of any political committee required to file a report under Section 434

of this title. Prior to conducting any audit under this section,

the Commission shall perform an internal review of reports filed

by selected committees to determine if the reports filed by a

oarticular committee meet the threshold reauirements for

substantial compliance with the Act. •

The Committee registered with the Federal Election Co~~ission on October 25, 1977. The Committee maintains its

headquarters in Charleston, West Virginia.

The audit covered the period January 1, 1981 through

December 31, 1982. The Committee reported a cash balance at

January 1, 1981 of $1,683.85; total receipts for the period of

$190,244.38; total disbursements for the period of $188,755.21;

and a cash balance on December 31, 1982 of $3,173.02.

This audit report is based on documents and work papers

which support each of its factual statements. They form part of

the record uoon which the Commission based its decisions on the

rnatte:s in the report and were available to the COffimissioners and

appro?riate staff for review.
'"'.

-2-

B. Rev Personnel

The Treasurer of the Committee during the period

covered by the audit was Mr. Ronald G. Pearson.

c. Scooe

The audit included such tests as verification of total

reported receipts and disbursements and individual transactions;

review of required supporting documentation: analysis of

Committee debts and obligations; and such other audit procedures

as deemed necessary under the circumstances.

II. Audit Findings and Recommendations

Based on an examination of the reports, statements, and the

records provided by the Committee, no material problems in

complying with the Federal Election Campaign Act were discovered

during the course of the audit.
____________ 

USCA Case #22-5323 Document #2000866 Filed: 05/25/2023 Page 1 of 1 

United States Court of Appeals 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT 

No. 22-5323 September Term, 2022 

1:22-cv-02176-RC 

Filed On: May 25, 2023 

John Anthony Castro, 

Appellant 

v. 

Federal Election Commission, 

Appellee 

BEFORE: Srinivasan, Chief Judge, and Henderson, Millett, Pillard, Wilkins, 

Katsas, Rao, Walker, Childs, Pan, and Garcia*, Circuit Judges 

O R D E R 

Upon consideration of the petition for rehearing en banc, and the absence of a 

request by any member of the court for a vote, it is 

ORDERED that the petition be denied. 

Per Curiam 

FOR THE COURT: 

Mark J. Langer, Clerk 

BY: /s/ 

Daniel J. Reidy 

Deputy Clerk 

* Circuit Judge Garcia did not participate in this matter.
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access to publicationsin the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging and locatorservices, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications (CGP). Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event that publicationsare no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Independent review of the U.S.Customs and Border Protection�s reporting of FY ... drug control obligations**
 
SuDoc Number:HS 1.22/2-2:

Item Number:0520-B-34 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000847350
 
2007 | 2008 | 2009| 2010 | 2011 | 2012
 
September 2, 2020