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 Princeton National Bancorp, Inc. (PNBC) on Form 10-Q for the period
ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), I Tony J. Sorcic, President & Chief Executive Officer
of PNBC, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of 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 represents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and result of operations of PNBC.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

21

---
###### Editorial Note on Part 387

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 387 appear at 66 FR 49872, Oct. 1, 2001.

#### § 387.321 Operations in foreign commerce.

No motor carrier may operate in the United States in the course of transportation between places in a foreign country or between a place in one foreign country and a place in another foreign country unless and until there shall have been filed with and accepted by the FMCSA a certificate of insurance, surety bond, proof of qualifications as a self-insurer, or other securities or agreements in the amount prescribed in § 387.303(b), conditioned to pay any final judgment recovered against such motor carrier for bodily injuries to or the death of any person resulting from the negligent operation, maintenance, or use of motor vehicles in transportation between places in a foreign country or between a place in one foreign country and a place in another foreign country, insofar as such transportation takes place in the United States, or for loss of or damage to property of others. The security for the protection of the public required by this section shall be maintained in effect at all times and shall be subject to the provisions of §§ 387.309 through 387.319. The requirements of § 387.315(a) shall be satisfied if the insurance or surety company, in addition to having been approved by the FMCSA, is legally authorized to issue policies or surety bonds in at least one of the States in the United States, or one of the Provinces in Canada, and has filed with the FMCSA the name and address of a person upon whom legal process may be served in each State in or through which the motor carrier operates. Such designation may from time to time be changed by like designation similarly filed, but shall be maintained during the effectiveness of any certificate of insurance or surety bond issued by the company, and thereafter with respect to any claims arising during the effectiveness of such certificate or bond. The term “motor carrier” as used in this section shall not include private carriers or carriers operating under the partial exemption from regulation in 49 U.S.C. 13503 and 13506.

[47 FR 55945, Dec. 14, 1982, as amended at 62 FR 49942, Sept. 24, 1997]
From: Nolan Rossi [mailto:nolanrossi@gmail.com] 

Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 3:40 PM 

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA 

Subject: lifetime income options

Hello, 

My name is Nolan Rossi. The government is talking about some form of "lifetime 

income distribution" and "lifetime stream of income." (Isn't this what Social 

Security was supposed to do?). The ridiculous, irresponsible deficit spending the 

that U.S. government has been involved with in the past two decades is no 

reasons to tax private retirement investments. Stay away from the American 

peoples investments.

Sincerely,

Nolan
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

Nos. 97-60216 & 97-60719 Conference Calendar

NICHOLE NICHOLS; JIMMY D. NICHOLS, Plaintiffs-Appellants,

versus FARMERS AND MERCHANTS BANK, Defendant-Appellee. * * * * * * * * * * * * * JIMMIE D. NICHOLS; LINDA F. NICHOLS, Plaintiffs-Appellants,

versus FARMERS AND MERCHANTS BANK, ITS BOARD OF DIRECTORS, ET AL., Defendants-Appellees. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * JIMMIE D. NICHOLS; LINDA F. NICHOLS, Plaintiffs-Appellants,

versus FARMERS AND MERCHANTS BANK AND ITS BOARD OF DIRECTORS, Defendant-Appellee. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * IN THE MATTER OF: JIMMIE D. NICHOLS; LINDA F. NICHOLS, Debtors,No. 97-60216 & 97-60719 - 2 -

* This matter is being decided by a quorum. 28 U.S.C. § 46(d).

** 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. JIMMIE D. NICHOLS; LINDA F. NICHOLS, Appellants,

versus FARMERS HOME ADMINISTRATION, Appellee.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * JIMMIE D. NICHOLS; LINDA F. NICHOLS, Appellants, versus FARMERS AND MERCHANTS BANK, Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi USDC Nos. 3:95-CV-252 WS, 253 WS, 332 & USDC No. 3:95-CV-167WS, 168 WS, 169WS

- - - - - - - - - - February 9, 1999 Before BARKSDALE and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. * PER CURIAM: ** Because both of these appeals may be determined on the same ground, they are CONSOLIDATED. F ED . R. A PP . P. 3(b)(2). The Appellants have filed several unauthorized briefs that are STRICKEN. F ED . R. A PP . P. 28(a), (c), (j); 5 TH C IR . R. 28.4. Only the initial appellate briefs and the initial reply briefs areNo. 97-60216 & 97-60719 - 3 - properly before us. In these filings, the Appellants purport to challenge the district court's summary judgment in favor of the Appellees (97-60216) and the dismissal of their three bankruptcy cases (97-60719); nevertheless, they have, through their failure to brief adequately any appellate issue, failed to prosecute their appeals. Yohey v. Collins , 985 F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir. 1993); Grant v. Cuellar , 59 F.3d 523, 524 (5th Cir. 1995). The appeals are frivolous, and they are DISMISSED. 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2. The Appellants' motions are DENIED, as they are moot. The Appellees' F ED . R. A PP . P. 38 motion for the imposition of costs is GRANTED. The Appellees are awarded double costs. The matter is REMANDED to the district court for the determination of the amount of attorneys' fees due the defendants for responding to these frivolous appeals and motions. APPEALS CONSOLIDATED; BRIEFS STRICKEN; APPEALS DISMISSED; APPELLANTS' MOTIONS DENIED; APPELLEES' MOTION FOR DOUBLE COSTS GRANTED; REMANDED.
----

ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

3 February 2004

in Case T-422/03 R: Enviro Tech Europe Ltd and Enviro Tech International Inc v Commission of the European Communities

(Interim measures - Directive 67/548 - Urgency)

(2004/C 106/134)

Language of the case: English

In Case T-422/03 R, Enviro Tech Europe Ltd, established in Surrey (United Kingdom), and Enviro Tech International Inc, established in Chicago (United States of America), represented by C. Mereu and K. Van Maldegem, lawyers, v Commission of the European Communities (Agents: X. Lewis and F. Simonetti); APPLICATION for suspension of two acts of the Commission of 3 November 2003 and an order requiring the Commission not to propose the reclassification of nPB under the 29th adaptation to technical progress of Directive 67/548/EEC on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging, and labelling of dangerous substances (OJ, English Special Edition 1967, p. 234), the President of the Court of First Instance, has given an order on 3 February 2004, in which it:

----
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

CERTIFICATION

 

I, Geoffrey F. Feidelberg,certify that:

 

1.                                       Ihave reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of CompuDyne Corporation;

 

2.                                       Basedon my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.                                       Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.                                       Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:

 

(a)                                  Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

(b)                                 Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

(c)                                  Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.                                       Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board ofdirectors;

 

(a)                                  Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

 

(b)                                 Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls over financialreporting.

 

 
| Date:  December 29, 2003 |  /s/ Geoffrey F. Feidelberg |   |
|-------------------------------|----------------------------------|--------|

 

----
Exhibit 32



Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer

of

Berger Holdings, Ltd. (the
Company)



We, Joseph F. Weiderman and Francis E. Wellock, Jr.,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2003 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
|- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | the information contained in the Report presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|Date: November 14, 2003 |  | By:                     |  | /s/ Joseph F. Weiderman    
|----------------------- |  | ----------------------- |  | ---------------------------
|                        |  | Joseph F. Weiderman    
|                        |  | Chief Executive Officer
|                        |  |                        
|                        |  | By:                     |  | /s/ Francis E. Wellock, Jr.
|                        |  | Francis E. Wellock, Jr.
|                        |  | Chief Financial Officer
Order entered July 2 4 , 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas** No. 05 - 12 - 01143 - CV LAKEITH AMIR - SHARIF, Appellant V. QUICK TRIP CORPORATI ON, ET AL . , Appellee s

On Appeal from the 101st Judicial District Court Dallas County, Te xas Trial Court Cause No. DC - 09 - 13818 - E 

### O RDER The Court has before it appellant’s July 2, 2013 letter complaining that the Court has not ruled on his motions for extension of time or filed his reply brief. The reply brief was filed on June 17, 2013. To the extent relator’s letter can be construed as a motion, we DENY it as moot.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE
From: Hideki Osone [mailto:hideki7@yahoo.com] 

Sent: Friday, February 12, 2010 9:23 PM 

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA 

Subject: Response to RFI (Annuity)

It is very good idea for Americans to be allowed to convert 401K, 409A, IRA money 

(pre-tax money) into annuity. 

At some age, we can stop playing with volatile stock market, and have a piece of mind at 

golden age. 

 

It is very difficult to predict how long we live, so annuity gives us a lot of relief. 

Relatively some people have pension plan in US, so government-aided annuity can 

substitute it. It won't give US government much financial burden because the death rate 

as a whole is very predictable although we as an individual cannot predict when we die. 

 

Please provide tax incentive to those who convert convert 401K, 409A, IRA money (pretax money) into annuity. 

 

Regards, 

Hideki Osone 

15942 Barry Lane 

Monte Sereno, CA 95030 

Cell: 408-489-2345
##### 



Exhibit 32.1
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Dated: May 3, 2007
    /s/ Ben M. BrighamBen M. BrighamChief Executive Officer, President and
Chairman of the Board
PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: 9/19/15 

Received: September 19, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8l7s-9t3f

Comments Due: September 24, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; 

Notice of proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0204

Definition of the Term Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule- Retirement Investment Advice

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-5299

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-08831

Submitter Information

Name: Nelson Anonymous

General Comment

Dear Sir or Madam:

Of the proposed rule, (t)he Options Industry Council advises:

"Did you know that that U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has issued a proposed rule that would 

take away the current ability of self-directed individual investors to use listed-options in their 

IRAs?"

Both my wife and I are retired after decades of work. In this no/low interest rate environment, we 

use covered call options to help us manage our retirement funds. It is my understanding that the 

proposed rule would, among other things:

"....mak(e) my brokerage firm a fiduciary for my IRA - responsible for

looking out for my best interests - if it provides any research, tools or education that the rule 

views as "advice."

My account in its current state would likely be considered an "advised IRA," and as I understand 

the rule,

options trading would be prohibited in it."
By no means do my wife and I want the proposed rule to limit our ability to freely trade options 

in our IRA as we are able to do now. Please do not adopt a regulation that will so limit us and the 

many others who are in the same fix. Thank you for your consideration. 

__________
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 195 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                         July 17, 2001.
Whereas at 11:09 p.m., eastern daylight time on July 14, 2001, the United States 
        successfully tested an interceptor missile against a target Minuteman 
        intercontinental ballistic missile in flight;
Whereas the target missile was launched from Vandenburg Air Force Base, 
        California, and was traveling at approximately 140 miles above the Earth 
        at a speed of greater than 11,000 feet per second, which is more than 
        three times faster than a high-powered rifle bullet, when struck by the 
        interceptor missile;
Whereas the interceptor missile was also traveling at a speed greater than 
        11,000 feet per second at the time of impact;
Whereas more than 35,000 Americans contributed to the successful test, including 
        the Air Force team which launched the target missile from Vandenburg Air 
        Force Base and the Army team which developed the radar and kill vehicle, 
        the Navy and Coast Guard team which provided security for the test, the 
        Ballistic Missile Defense Organization team which supervised the testing 
        program, and the contractor team consisting of thousands of American 
        scientists, engineers, and blue collar workers employed by the prime 
        contractors and hundreds of small businesses; and
Whereas the House of Representatives understands that testing of ballistic 
        missile defenses will involve many failures as well as successes in the 
        future, the House of Representatives nonetheless commends the effort and 
        ingenuity of those who worked so hard to make the test a success: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives thanks and commends the 
thousands of United States military and Government personnel, contractors, 
engineers, scientists, and workers who worked diligently to make the July 14, 
2001, missile defense intercept test a success.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
#### § 840.1 Applicability.

This part contains the Safety Board's accident notification requirements, and its authority for inspection, examination, and testing of physical evidence, and describes the exercise of the Safety Board's priority accorded to its activities when investigating railroad accidents.

[47 FR 49408, Nov. 1, 1982]
EXHIBIT 10.4


                     AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


         THIS AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO EMPLOYMENT  AGREEMENT (the "Amendment") is made
as of October 31, 2001,  by and among  CATEGORY 5  TECHNOLOGIES,  INC., a Nevada
corporation (the "Company"), and MITCHELL EDWARDS, an individual ("Executive").

                                    RECITALS:

         WHEREAS,  on June 1, 2000,  Company  and  Executive  entered  into that
certain Employment Agreement, a copy of which is attached hereto as Annex I (the
"Employment Agreement"); and

         WHEREAS, Company and Executive desire to amend the Employment Agreement
as provided in this Amendment to correct a  typographical  error in Section 2 of
the Employment Agreement.

         NOW,  THEREFORE,  for good and valuable  consideration,  the receipt of
which is hereby acknowledged, Company and Executive agree as follows:


         1.   Term.  All  References to December 31, 2003, in Section 2 shall be
              deleted and replaced with December 31, 2004.

         2.   No Other Amendment.  Except as expressly  amended pursuant to this
              Amendment,  the terms of the Employment  Agreement shall remain in
              full force and effect.

         3.   Counterparts.  This  Amendment  may be  executed  in  one or  more
              counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of
              which together shall constitute one and the same document.

         IN WITNESS  WHEREOF,  the  Company  and  Executive  have  executed  and
delivered this Amendment as of the day and year first above written.

                                                 CATEGORY 5 TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
                                                 a Nevada corporation



                                                 /s/ William C. Gibbs
                                                 ------------------------------
                                                 Name:  William C. Gibbs
                                                 Title: Chief Executive Officer


                                                 MITCHELL EDWARDS
                                                 an individual


                                                 /s/ Mitchell Edwards
                                                 ------------------------------
                                                 Mitchell Edwards



<PAGE>

                                     ANNEX I
                                     -------

                              Employment Agreement



<PAGE>
EXHIBIT 32.1


























Certification of Chief Executive Officer


Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350


(Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)








In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2011, of Britton & Koontz Capital Corporation (the “Company”), as filed with the Securities Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Quarterly Report”), I, W. Page Ogden, 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 Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




















Date: May 5, 2011                                                              /s/ W. Page Ogden


W. Page Ogden


Chief Executive Officer
From: David Selko [mailto:david@selkofamily.com] 

Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 5:42 PM 

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA 

Subject: RIN 1210-AB33

13. Should some form of lifetime income distribution option be required for defined 

contribution plans (in addition to money purchase pension plans)? If so, should that 

option be the default distribution option, and should it apply to the entire 

account balance? To what extent would such a requirement encourage or discourage 

plan sponsorship? 

Regarding the above referenced item:

I would be opposed to  a measure such as this.  If we are required to place some of our IRAs,

401k, or 403b in an annuity or treasury related purchases, employers and employees would

likely terminate their participation in such plans.  I would not contribute one penny to a plan

which I could not invest myself.

David Selko