alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit
32.2

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

In  connection
with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Sunrise Energy Resources,  Inc. (the Company)
for the period ended March 31, 2005 as  filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the  Report), I, Konstantin Tsirulnikov, Vice President
and Chief Financial 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 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 the Company.
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: May 10,
2005

| | By:
 /s/ Konstantin Tsirulnikov
      Konstantin Tsirulnikov
      Chief Financial Officer
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---
No. P67/248.

#### Starlite Merchandise Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States, protests 61/16115, etc. (New York).

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items of merchandise marked “A” covered by the foregoing protests consist of.earphones similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Motorola, Inc., and International Expediters, Inc.*v. *United States*(54 Cust. Ct. 303, Abstract 69019), and that the items of merchandise marked “B” consist of earphones which are not suitable for controlling, distributing, modifying, producing, or rectifying electrical energy and that said merchandise, in fact, consists of articles having as an essential feature an electrical element or device, wholly or in chief value of metal, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
From: peeps_1@msn.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 6:13:13 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,

Robin Johnson

Shawnee, OK 74804
RESIGNATION LETTER


 


January 22, 2013


 


To the Shareholders and Board of Directors of


Gold Bullion Acquisition, Inc.,


 


Gentlemen:


 


This letter serves as notice that as of the
date hereof, I hereby resign from my position as President, Director, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Executive Officer of Gold
Bullion Acquisition, Inc. (the “Corporation”). My resignation is not the result of any disagreement with the Corporation
on any matter relating to its operation, policies (including accounting or financial policies) or practices.


 


Sincerely,


                                                                /s/
Jeffrey DeNunzio


Jeffrey
DeNunzio
From: dkrawoec1611@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:38:56 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,

Darius Krawiec

La Vergne, TN 37086
From: zjm@comporium.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:59:48 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,

Suzzanne Brakefield

Rock Hill, SC 29732
| Exhibit                  32.1 |
|-------------------------------|

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

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

| /s/                  FREDERICK M. DANZIGER             |
|--------------------------------------------------------|
| Frederick                  M. Danziger                 |
| President                  and Chief Executive Officer |
| July                  12, 2007                         |
From: jam1228@verizon.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:41:02 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,

Judith Moschella

Bethlehem, PA 18017
From: choc.junkie@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 7:14:33 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,

Donna Maxey

Corona, CA 92882
Case No. 6,449a.

#### HIATT v. MUTUAL LIFE INS. CO.

[2 Dill. 572, note.] 1

Circuit Court, D. Iowa.

May Term, 1873.

Life Insurance — Suicide—Insanity—Burden of Proof — Challenge to Juror.

[This was an action at law by Hiatt,1 administrator, etc., against the Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York.] The defense was suicide, to which the plaintiff replied, insanity.

[Cited in Houston & T. C. Ry. Co. v. Terrell (Tex. Sup.) 7 S. W. 672, to the point as stated above in paragraph 1.]

[In 2 Dill. 572, this case is published as a note to Wilkinson v. Union Mut. Life Ins. Co., Case No. 17,676.]

I.N. Kidder and Gatch & Wright, for plaintiff.

Holmes & Reynolds and Polk, Hubbell & Goode, for defendant.

1

 [Reported by Hon. John F. Dillon, Circuit Judge, and here reprinted by permission.)

THE COURT

ruled: •

1. That it was good cause of challenge to a juror that he considered the fact of suicide as conclusive evidence of insanity.

2. That the burden of proof to establish the insanity was upon the plaintiff. See Swick v. Home Ins. Co. [Case No. 13,692], and cases cited.

3. As to the kind and degree of insanity necessary to be shown to entitle the plaintiff to recover where the assured took his own life, the court followed Terry v. Insurance Co. [Id. 13,839], affirmed in 15 Wall. [82 U. S.] 580.

There was a verdict and judgment for the defendant
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 Aquilex Holdings LLC (the Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), each of L.W. Varner, Jr., Principal Executive Officer of the Company, and Jay W. Ferguson, Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certifies,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:



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



|                                                 
|-------------------------------------------------
|/s/ L.W. Varner, Jr.                             
|L.W. Varner, Jr.                                 
|Chief Executive Officer and President            
|March 31, 2011                                   
|                                                 
|/s/ Jay W. Ferguson                              
|Jay W. Ferguson                                  
|Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|March 31, 2011                                   

The foregoing certification will not be deemed
filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or otherwise subject to the liability of that Section. The foregoing certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the
Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-7049
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JIMMY LAWRENCE NANCE, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at R oanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CR-92-135-R, CA-97-473-R) Submitted: September 25, 1997 Decided: October 10, 1997 Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.Jimmy Lawrence Nance, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Linn Eckert, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying without prejudice his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Appellant's motions for appointment of counsel, for preparation ofa transcript at government expense, for general relief, and to preclude the Assistant United States Attorney from these proceedings, deny a certificate of appealability, and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Nance , Nos. CR92-135-R; CA-97-473-R (W.D. Va. July 9, 1997). We dispense withoral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
From: jeannievlock@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 7:12:09 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,

Jeanne Vlock

Omaha, NE 68130
From: claudettejoseph21@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:51:41 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,

Claudette Joseph

Boston, MA 02125