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 Annual Report of AE Biofuels, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the  Report ), I, Eric A. McAfee, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and 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.



By: /s/ Eric A. McAfee

Eric A. McAfee

Chief Executive Officer



Date: May 15, 2009
To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:36:47 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Joyce Stevenson

Magnolia, TX 77354
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 1502 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                    September 26, 2008.
    Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to 
consider in the House the bill (H.R. 7060) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986 to provide incentives for energy production and conservation, to extend 
certain expiring provisions, to provide individual income tax relief, and for 
other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived 
except those arising under clause 10 of rule XXI. The bill shall be considered 
as read. All points of order against the bill are waived. The previous question 
shall be considered as ordered on the bill to final passage without intervening 
motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the 
chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means; and (2) 
one motion to recommit.
    Sec. 2.  During consideration of H.R. 7060 pursuant to this resolution, 
notwithstanding the operation of the previous question, the Chair may postpone 
further consideration of the bill to such time as may be designated by the 
Speaker.
    Sec. 3.  House Resolutions 1489 and 1501 are laid on the table.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
#### The Citizens’ National Bank of Hornellsville, Respondent, v. Isaac Allison, Appellant.

Order modified as indicated in the opinion, and as modified affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Opinion by

Haight, J. ;

Bradley, J., taking no part.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

ROBERT MURDY,

Defendant Below,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF DELAWARE,

Plaintiff Below,

Appellee.

§

§ No. 97, 2018

§

§

§

§ Court Below—Superior Court

§ of the State of Delaware

§ 

§ Cr. ID 1102005997 (S)

§ 

§

Submitted: March 19, 2018

 Decided: March 28, 2018

Before STRINE, Chief Justice; VALIHURA and VAUGHN, Justices.

O R D E R

This 28th day of March 2018, it appears that:

(1) On February 22, 2018, the Court received the appellant’s notice of 

appeal from a violation of probation (VOP) sentence imposed by the Superior Court

on January 19, 2018. Under Supreme Court Rule 6(a)(iii), a timely notice of appeal 

should have been filed on or before February 19, 2018.

(2) The Senior Court Clerk issued a notice directing the appellant to show 

cause why the appeal should not be dismissed as untimely.1 The appellant filed a 

response to the notice to show cause on March 19, 2018. The appellant’s response 

 

1Del. Supr. Ct. R. 29(b).
2

states that he placed his notice of appeal in the prison mail in sufficient time for it to 

reach the Court before the expiration of the 30-day deadline. He asserts that it did 

not reach the Court in time because the prison does not process mail on the weekends 

and because of the President’s Day federal holiday. He argues that he should not be 

held responsible for the delay.

(3) Time is a jurisdictional requirement,2and this Court has never adopted 

a prisoner mailbox rule.3 A notice of appeal must be received by the Office of the 

Clerk of this Court within the applicable time period to be effective.4 An appellant’s 

pro se status does not excuse a failure to comply strictly with the jurisdictional 

requirements of Supreme Court Rule 6.5 Unless an appellant can demonstrate that 

the failure to file a timely notice of appeal is attributable to court-related personnel, 

an untimely appeal cannot be considered.6 Prison personnel are not court-related 

personnel. Thus, the untimely appeal must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, under Supreme Court Rule 29(b), 

that the within appeal is DISMISSED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Karen L. Valihura

Justice

 

2Carr v. State, 554 A.2d 778, 779 (Del.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 829 (1989).

3

Smith v. State, 47 A.3d 481, 486-87 (Del. 2012).

4Del. Supr. Ct. R. 10(a) (emphasis added).

5

Smith v. State, 47 A.3d 481, 486-87 (Del. 2012).

6Bey v. State, 402 A.2d 362, 363 (Del. 1979).
From: pkjmn@suddenlink.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:21:34 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Pete Nelms

Whitehouse, TX 75791
No. 381, Misc.

#### Jeronis *v.*Bannan, Warden.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### SWEETSER, PEMBROOK & CO. v. ABBOTT.

(Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

September 7, 1903.)

No. 1,939.

Appeal from the District ■Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Missouri. Nathan Frank, for appellants. M. N. Sale, for appellee. Dismissed, pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, at the costs of appellee.
Before the First Division,

September 12, 1960

No. 64488.

#### Teigh, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 69/28637, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of beads the same in all material respects as those the subject of *United States*v. *S. 3. Kress & Go.*(46 C.C.P.A. 135, C.A.D. 716), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
From: bobhuenefeld2000@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:56:00 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Robert Huenefeld

Westerville, OH 43081
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

EGAN PAYNE, SR.,

Petitioner

v.

AMERICOLD LOGISTICS LLC (WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEAL BOARD),

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 271 EAL 2022

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the

Commonwealth Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 25th day of April, 2023

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
From: Higgins, Cortney [mailto:Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov]

Sent: Friday, May 02, 2014 9:12 AM

To: Wayland, Robertj

Subject: FW: E.O. 12866 Meeting on Carbon Pollution Guidelines for Existing Power Plants: Emission Guidelines for Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units

Hi,

Attached are the handouts from this meeting.

Regards, Cortney

<< 2060AR33_2014_04_29_GHGExisitng_NRDC_Handout1.pdf >> << 2060AR33_2014_04_29_GHGExisitng_NRDC_Handout2.pdf >> << 2060AR33_2014_04_29_GHGExisitng_NRDC_Handout3.pdf >> << 2060AR33_2014_04_29_GHGExisitng_NRDC_Handout4.pdf >>

-----Original Appointment-----

From: Echols, Mabel E. Subject: E.O. 12866 Meeting on Carbon Pollution Guide lines for Existing Power Plants: Emission Guidelines for Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units

When: Tuesday, April 29, 2014 4:00 PM-4:30 PM (U TC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada).

Where: Room 10103 New Executive Office Building

This meeting was requested by Benjamin Longstreth, Natural Resources Defense Council.
|   | (1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods indicated. |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Date: May 11, 2017 | /s/ Michael G. Magnusson    |
|--------------------|---------------------------------------|
|               | Michael G. Magnusson                  |
|               | President and Chief Executive Officer |
|               |                                  |
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

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

I, Gregory L. Weaver, Chief Financial Officer of Nastech Pharmaceutical Company
Inc. ("Nastech"), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual
Report of Nastech Pharmaceutical Company Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that information
contained in the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A fairly presents in all material
respects the financial condition and results of operations of Nastech.

Date: April 29, 2005

                                    By:    /s/ Gregory L. Weaver
                                           ---------------------------------
                                    Name:  Gregory L. Weaver
                                    Title: Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Nastech and will be retained by Nastech and furnished to the
Securities Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

This certification accompanies each periodic report pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by Nastech for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
##### 



Exhibit 32.1
 CERTIFICATION 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
  Date:
    
    August 11, 2006
    
    
    
    By:
    
    /s/R. Scott MurrayName: R. Scott MurrayTitle: President and ChiefExecutive Officer
  Date:
    
    August 11, 2006
    
    
    
    By:
    
    /s/Donald M. Halsted, IIIName: Donald M. Halsted, IIITitle: Executive Vice President,Finance and Chief FinancialOfficer
EXHIBIT 99.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Lance K. Gordon, Chief Executive Officer of VaxGen, Inc. (the "Registrant"),
do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      (1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Registrant, to which this
      certification is attached as an exhibit (the "Report"), fully complies
      with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
      1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and

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

Dated: August 14, 2002                             /s/  Lance K. Gordon
                                                   -----------------------
                                                   Lance K. Gordon
                                                   Chief Executive Officer


                                       25
From: flats5@juno.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:53:45 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Nels Flatebo

Buffalo Grove, IL 60089
# 

# CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES CORPORATION

POWERNOTES (SM)

With Maturities of 9 months or more from Date of Issue

Registration No.  333-97047

Filed Pursuant to Rule 424 (b) (3)

PRICING SUPPLEMENT NO.  363                                                               Trade Date:  11/17/03

(To Prospectus Supplement dated August 15, 2002 &

  Prospectus dated August  8, 2002)                                                                     Issue Date:   11/20/03

The Date of this Pricing SupplementNovember 17, 2003

SUBJECT TO REDEMPTION OR REPAYMENT

  CUSIP                                                                                                                                Date and terms of redemption or

     or        Stated                                                                  Interest                                    repayment (including any

Common  Interest                      Price to  Discounts &        Payment  Survivors                  applicable regular or special

  Code      Rate (1)               Maturity                Public (2)                Commissions      Frequency      Option     Yes/No                record dates)

14911QRC7   5.00%                        11/15/12          100%                    1.1%                   Quarterly           YES            YES               Callable at 100% beginning 11/15/05

                                                                                                                                                                                                                    and quarterly thereafter.          

                          

Principal                                                                                1st Payment Day         

Amount                   Proceeds                 Dealer                            Date                  Count

$9,988,000.00                $9,878,132.00         ABN AMROInc.                 02/15/04                 30/360    

Original Issue Discount Note:                                                                   Total Amount of OID:

____  Yes                X   No                                                                                   N/A

The interest rates on the PowerNotes (SM) may be changed by Caterpillar Financial Services Corporation from time to time, but any such change will not affect the interest rate on any PowerNotes (SM) offered prior to the effective date of the change.  Prior to the date of this Pricing Supplement, $348.856 mm principal amount of the PowerNotes (SM) were sold at interest rates then in effect.  Subsequent offerings of PowerNotes (SM) will be made under the Prospectus Supplement and Prospectus dated August 8,2002.

Expressed as a percentage of aggregate principal amount.  Actual Price to Public may be less, and will be determined by prevailing market prices at the time of purchase as set forth in the confirmation sheet.