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

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. §1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

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

In connection with the report on Form 10-K, as amended, of EnteroMedicsInc. (the “Company”) for the period ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Mark B. Knudson, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

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

2. Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

 

December 2, 2008
§ 501.2 Subpoenas. ( a ) *Issuance.* A member of the Commission or a designated employee may, on the member or employee's own volition or upon written application by any party and upon a showing of general relevance and reasonable scope of the evidence sought, issue subpoenas requiring persons to appear and testify or to appear and produce documents. Applications for issuance of subpoenas for production of documents shall specify the books, records, correspondence, or other documents sought. The subpoena will show on its face the name and address of the party at whose request the subpoena was issued.
( b ) *Deposit for costs.* The Commission or designated employee, before issuing any subpoena in response to any application by an interested party, may require a deposit in an amount adequate to cover fees and mileage involved.
( c ) *Motion to quash.* If any person subpoenaed does not intend to comply with the subpoena, that person must, within 15 days after the date of service of the subpoena, petition in writing to quash the subpoena. The basis for the motion must be stated in detail. Any party desiring to file an answer to a motion to quash must file the answer not later than 15 days after the filing of the motion. The Commission will rule on the motion to quash, duly recognizing any answer thereto filed. The motion, answer, and any ruling thereon will become part of the official record.
( d ) *Appeal from interlocutory order.* An appeal may be taken to the Commission by the interested parties from the denial of a motion to quash or from the refusal to issue a subpoena for the production of documentary evidence.
( e ) *Order of court upon failure to comply.* Upon the failure or refusal of any person to comply with a subpoena, the Commission may invoke the aid of the United States District Court within the jurisdiction of which the hearing, examination or investigation is being conducted, or wherein that person resides or transacts business, as provided in 22 U.S.C. 1623(c).
#### Flora L. Thomas, appellant, v. Michael Shonsey, appellee.

Filed May 29, 1914.

No. 17,739.

Specific Performance: Discretion of Court. A court of equity is entitled to exercise a sound judicial discretion in disposing of a case involving the specific performance of a contract.

Appeal from the district court for Merrick county: Conrad Hollenbeck, Judge.

*Affirmed.*

*Elmer E. Boss,*for appellant.

*Martin & Boches, contra.*

*319Fawcett, J.

From a decree of the district court for Merrick county, awarding defendant specific performance of ■ a contract for the sale to him by plaintiff of the northwest quarter of section 1, township 15, range 5 west, in said county, plaintiff appeals.

The errors assigned by plaintiff are that the findings and judgment of the court are not supported by the evidence, but are contrary to the facts and contrary to law. We do not think a discussion of the theories upon which plaintiff bases these assignments would be of benefit to the parties or to the profession at large. The only question for our determination- is: Did the district court err in granting defendant a specific performance of the contract involved? We have carefully examined the record and cannot say that the judgment of the trial court is wrong. On the contrary, we think it is right.

Affirmed.

Barnes, Rose and Sedgwick, JJ., not sitting.
FILED: October 6, 2009

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

___________________

No. 08-1977

(3:08-cv-00483-JRS)

___________________

THE REAL TRUTH ABOUT OBAMA, INC., 

 Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF 

JUSTICE, 

 Defendants - Appellees

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

CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER; DEMOCRACY 21, 

 Amici Supporting Appellee

___________________

O R D E R

___________________

The petition for rehearing en banc was circulated to the 

full Court. No judge requested a poll under Fed. R. App. P. 35. 

The Court denies the petition for rehearing en banc. 

For the Court

/s/ Patricia S. Connor, Clerk

Case: 08-1977 Document: 76 Date Filed: 10/06/2009 Page: 1
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 07-906 

________________________________________________________________________ 

EMPLOYMENT 

 Agreement between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and TANZANIA 

Effected by Exchange of Notes at 

Dar es Salaam May 9 and September 6, 2007 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
TANZANIA 

Employment 

Agreement effected by exchange of notes at 

 Dar es Salaam May 9 and September 6, 2007; 

 Entered into force September 6, 2007.
cc: Lanalsikov Lowe 

Clark County Public Defender 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 2 

(0) 1947A •■v,_ 

ET
#### In the Matter of Harriet A. Walter.

Motion for reargument denied, without costs. Opinion by

Davis, P. J.
IIB 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1746 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 28, 2009 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT 

To amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to reauthorize the pre-disaster mitigation program of the Federal Emergency Management 

Agency. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
2 

HR 1746 RFS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Pre-Disaster Mitiga3 tion Act of 2009’’. 

4 SEC. 2. PRE-DISASTER HAZARD MITIGATION. 

5 (a) ALLOCATION OF FUNDS.—Section 203(f) of the 

6 Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assist7 ance Act (42 U.S.C. 5133(f)) is amended to read as fol8 lows: 

9 ‘‘(f) ALLOCATION OF FUNDS.— 

10 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The President shall award 

11 financial assistance under this section on a competi12 tive basis and in accordance with the criteria in sub13 section (g). 

14 ‘‘(2) MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM AMOUNTS.—In 

15 providing financial assistance under this section, the 

16 President shall ensure that the amount of financial 

17 assistance made available to a State (including 

18 amounts made available to local governments of the 

19 State) for a fiscal year— 

20 ‘‘(A) is not less than the lesser of— 

21 ‘‘(i) $575,000; or 

22 ‘‘(ii) the amount that is equal to one 

23 percent of the total funds appropriated to 

24 carry out this section for the fiscal year; 

25 and 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
3 

HR 1746 RFS

1 ‘‘(B) does not exceed the amount that is 

2 equal to 15 percent of the total funds appro3 priated to carry out this section for the fiscal 

4 year.’’. 

5 (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Section 

6 203(m) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 5133(m)) is amended to 

7 read as follows: 

8 ‘‘(m) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There 

9 is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section 

10 $250,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2010, 2011, and 

11 2012.’’. 

12 (c) REFERENCES.—Section 203 of such Act (42 

13 U.S.C. 5133) is amended— 

14 (1) in the section heading by striking 

15 ‘‘PREDISASTER’’ and inserting ‘‘PRE-DISASTER’’; 

16 (2) in the heading for subsection (i) by striking 

17 ‘‘PREDISASTER’’ and inserting ‘‘PRE-DISASTER’’; 

18 (3) by striking ‘‘Predisaster’’ each place it ap19 pears and inserting ‘‘Pre-Disaster’’; and 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
4 

HR 1746 RFS

1 (4) by striking ‘‘predisaster’’ each place it ap2 pears and inserting ‘‘pre-disaster’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives April 27, 2009. 

Attest: LORRAINE C. MILLER, 

Clerk. 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
MARK W ILLI AMS CO MMI SS IONE R October 15, 2012 Mr. James D. Giattina, Director 

## .. A



# _( **1~** t-c ( 

# GEORGIA

- l A

DEP A

RTMENT OF N A TURA L REsOURCES COASTAL RESOURCES DIVIS ION

US EPA Region 4 Water Protection Division Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street Atlanta , Georgia 30303-8960 RE : National Consistency Determination for NPDES VGP and sVGP Dear Mr. Gi att i na: A.G. 'S PUD' WOODWA R D DI RECTO R

Staff of the Georgia Coastal Management Program has reviewed your letters, e-mails, and supporting documents dated between December 12, 2011 and June 25 , 2012 regarding the proposed Nat ional Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Vessel General Permit (VGP) and Small Vessel General Permit (s VGP). The se proposed VGP will regulate di scharge s incidental to the normal operation of commercial vessels and non-recreational vessels greater than or equal to 79 feet in length . The proposed sVGP will regulate discharges on vessels less than 79 feet in length. Except for ocean going vessel s of 20 tons displacement or more, the Rules implementing the Georgia Water Quality Control Act (391-3 -6 - .04) require graywater to be discharged through a marine sanitation device that is in compliance with the federal standards of performance . Additionally , Georgia Department of Natural Resources (DNR) or Environmental Protection Divis i on (EPD) personnel , or other duly authorize d agents, must be allowed access to any vessel at reasonable times for the purpo s es of determin ing compliance with the se rule s. The Program concurs with your consistency determinat i on with the condition that the requirements of Georgia Rule 391-3-6-.04 are incorporated into the VGP and sVGP for vessels that may enter State of Georgia waters. You must notify us immediate ly if thi s condition is not acceptable . Should you fail to amend the VGP and sVGP to incorporate this condition, all parties will treat this conditional concurrence as an objection. Please feel free to contact Kelie Moore or me if we can be of further ass istance. Sincerely,

Brad Gane Sect i on Ch ief, Ecological Service s Section BG/km Cc : Gigi Steele, GaDNR/EPD Ref: Ol092012_0238 . 1015 12_FC ONE C ONSERVATION WAY 

## I BRUN S W I C K , GEORGIA 

### 3 1 520-8686 9 1 2.264. 7218 

## I FAX 912 .262 .3143 

## I WWW.COAS TALGAONR.ORG
Exhibit 31.2
CERTIFICATION
I, Kevin M. Frain, Chief Financial Officer, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A ofbarnesandnoble.com inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary tomake the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered bythis quarterly report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this quarterly report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cashflows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisquarterly report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand have:
 a. designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known tous by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this quarterly report is being prepared;  b. evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, asof the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  c. disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in thecase of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s boardof directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
 a. all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.     Date:April 27, 2004          By: /s/ Kevin M. Frain       Kevin M. FrainChief Financial Officer and Vice President,Operations(Principal Accounting and Financial Officer)barnesandnoble.com inc.
FROM: THE BOEING COMPANY TO: Delta Air Lines (DAL) [MESSAGE NUMBER:DAL

- DAL

- 13

- 0578

- 03B] Boeing Response MESSAGE DATE: 18 Mar 2013 1125 US PACIFIC TIME / 18 Mar 2013 1825 GMT

The following message is distributed to the following people at Delta Air Lines: Kendra Johnson

Message Due Date: No Action Required

Field Service Base: BFSATL

Service Category: Service Bulletin Model: 747 Series/Product: SB

- Airplane Service Bulletin ATA: 2500

- 00

SUBJECT: 747

- 25

- 3428 Compliance Time

REFERENCES: /A/ DAL

- DAL

- 13

- 0578

- 02B /B/ SB 747

- 25

- 3428 /C/ DAL

- DAL

- 13

- 0578

- 01F

DESCRIPTION:

The following is a follow

- on message to Ref /A/ concerning the 48 month compliance time recommendation for accomplishment of Ref /B/.

DAL has indicated that they are accomplishing 747

- 400 door mounted slide overhauls under an extension to 60 months intervals, and would like to accomplish Ref /B/ within this same interval.

Boeing has no technical objection to accomplishing Ref /B/ slide latch changes within a 60 month interval to align with the DAL slide overhaul interval, provided that DAL s ervice experience has been favorable for the potential adverse condition of the latch becoming loose resulting the slide detaching from the door. The existing recommendation of 48 months was intended to align with the slide overhaul interval, and was not specifically risk based.

Please advise if additional information is needed.

REQUIRED ACTION:

NoneIf attachments are referred to, and are not present, please access them by logging into MyBoeingFleet Service Requests application or contact your Boei ng Field Service Representative. https://myboeingfleet.boeing.com/servicerequests/index.html?entityId=2

- 13SGUGX&entityType=Commun icationMessage Suppliers, please access attachments by logging into Boeing Partner Network Supplier Service Requests application.

M. Dunican Everett

- Payloads Michael Tangen Commercial Aviation Services The Boeing Company
### SERVED: March 21,2016

: f:. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
. ,,, , OFFICE OF HEARINGS .·**~** l**~-e"-** ,, ·'

WASHINGTON, DC

- r-:,**-------------~_:·.~'.~:; ~-~.~.:·** ..._._ IN THE MATTER OF PETER JOHN ROSSICK, II1

. DOCKET NO. FAA-2011-0065 (Civil Penalty Action)

ORDER REASSIGNING PROCEEDJNG Administrative Law Judge Richard C. Goodwin has transferred to the Food and Drug Administration. Accordingly, this proceeding is hereby reassigned from Judge Goodwin to Administrative LawJudge Douglas M. Rawald. Any dates set for hearing orprehearing conference are suspended until further notice. All other orders remain in ful1 force and effect absent further order. SO ORDERED.

Attachment-Service List onnie A. Yoder/// ChiefAdministrative w Ju eSERVICE LIST- BY U.S. MAIL ORIGINAL & ONE COPY Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite2W1 000 1

Peter John Rossick, HI, Respondent 2415 Western Avenue, Apt. 402 Seattle, WA 98121 ONE COPY

YolandaAyala Bernal, Complainant's Counsel Federal Aviation Administration Southwest Region, ASW-7E3, YAB Office oftheRegional Counsel. 260I Meacham Blvd., Room 663 Fort Worth, TX 76137 TEL: 817-222-5070 FAX: 817-222-5945/5092 The Honorable Douglas M. Rawald, Administrative LawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-5121 StaffAssistant FAX: 202-366-7536 Docket No. FAA-2011-0065 (Civil Penalty Action)

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2WJOOO, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 

### -2-
§ 800.115 Level playing field. An MSP issuer must, with respect to each of its MSP options, meet the following requirements in order to ensure a level playing field, subject to § 800.114: ( a ) *Guaranteed renewal.* Guarantee that an enrollee can renew enrollment in an MSP option in compliance with sections 2703 and 2742 of the PHS Act;
( b ) *Rating.* In proposing premiums for OPM approval, use only the rating factors permitted under section 2701 of the PHS Act and State law;
( c ) *Preexisting conditions.* Not impose any preexisting condition exclusion and comply with section 2704 of the PHS Act;
( d ) *Non-discrimination.* Comply with section 2705 of the PHS Act;
( e ) *Quality improvement and reporting.* Comply with all Federal and State quality improvement and reporting requirements. Quality improvement and reporting means quality improvement as defined in section 1311(h) of the Affordable Care Act and quality improvement plans or strategies required under State law, and quality reporting as defined in section 2717 of the PHS Act and section 1311(g) of the Affordable Care Act. Quality improvement also includes activities such as, but not limited to, implementation of a quality improvement strategy, disclosure of quality measures to enrollees and prospective enrollees, and reporting of pediatric quality measures, which will be similar to standards under section 1311(c)(1)(E), (H), and (I) of the Affordable Care Act;
( f ) *Fraud and abuse.* Comply with all Federal and State fraud and abuse laws;
( g ) *Licensure.* Be licensed in every State in which it offers an MSP option;
( h ) *Solvency and financial requirements.* Comply with the solvency standards set by each State in which it offers an MSP option;
( i ) *Market conduct.* Comply with the market conduct standards of each State in which it offers an MSP option;
( j ) *Prompt payment.* Comply with applicable State law in negotiating the terms of payment in contracts with its providers and in making payments to claimants and providers;
( k ) *Appeals and grievances.* Comply with Federal standards under section 2719 of the PHS Act for appeals and grievances relating to adverse benefit determinations, as described in subpart F of this part;
( l ) *Privacy and confidentiality.* Comply with all Federal and State privacy and security laws and requirements, including any standards required by OPM in guidance or contract, which will be similar to the standards contained in 45 CFR part 164 and applicable State law; and
( m ) *Benefit plan material or information.* Comply with Federal and State law, including § 800.113 of this part.
Exhibit 32

    Certifications of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
                     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  on  Form  10-QSB  of  Integrated
 Performance Systems, Inc. (the "Company")  for  the period  ended  April 30,
 2006, as  filed with  the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on  the  date
 hereof (the "Report"), we the undersigned  officers 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) 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.

 Date: June 12, 2006             /s/ BRAD JACOBY
                                 -------------------------------------
                                 Brad Jacoby
                                 President and Chief Executive Officer



 Date: June 12, 2006             /s/ BRAD J. PETERS
                                 -------------------------------------
                                 Brad J. Peters
                                 Chief Financial Officer
§ 617.15 Exhaustion of administrative remedies. ( a ) A complainant may file a civil action after exhausting administrative remedies under the Act. Administrative remedies are exhausted if: ( 1 ) 180 days have elapsed since the complainant filed a sufficient complaint and NSF has made no finding with regard to the complaint; or
( 2 ) NSF issues any finding in favor of the recipient.
( b ) If NSF fails to make a finding within 180 days or issues a finding in favor of the recipient, NSF will: ( 1 ) Promptly advise the complainant of this fact; and
( 2 ) Advise the complainant of his or her right to bring a civil action for injunctive relief under 42 U.S.C. 6104; and
( 3 ) Inform the complainant that under 42 U.S.C. 6104: ( i ) The complainant may bring a civil action only in a United States District court for the district in which the recipient is located or transacts business;
( ii ) A complainant prevailing in a civil action has the right to be awarded the costs of the action, including reasonable attorney's fees, but that the complainant must demand these costs in the complaint;
( iii ) Before commencing the action the complainant shall give 30 days notice by registered mail to the Director, the Attorney General of the United States, and the recipient;
( iv ) The notice must state the alleged violation of the Act; the relief requested; the court in which the complainant is bringing the action; and whether or not attorney's fees are demanded in the event the complainant prevails; and
( v ) The complainant may not bring an action if the same alleged violation of the Act by the same recipient is the subject of a pending action in any court of the United States.