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

                                  CERTIFICATION
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                                (18 U.S.C. 1350)

Pursuant  to Section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of (18 U.S.C.  1350),  the
undersigned  officer of Sky Harvest  Windpower Corp., a Nevada  corporation (the
"Company"),  does hereby  certify,  to the best of such officer's  knowledge and
belief, that:

     1.   The Annual  Report on Form 10-K for the year  ended May 31,  2011 (the
          "Form 10-K") of the Company 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 Form 10-K fairly  presents,  in all
          materials respects,  the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Company.


Date: September 12, 2011                     /s/ William Iny
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             William Iny
                                             Chief Executive Officer and Chief
                                             Financial Officer Principal
                                             Executive Officer, Principal
                                             Accounting Officer and Principal
                                             Financial Officer

This certification shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the
Securities  Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section.
Such  certification  will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any
filing under the Securities Act or the Securities Exchange Act.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER>   1000
       
<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                          JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                            SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         651 
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                14054 
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (1088)
<INVENTORY>                                  17241 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             31212 
<PP&E>                                       35833 
<DEPRECIATION>                              (18935)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               76464 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         9503 
<BONDS>                                      16777 
<COMMON>                                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                    101 
<OTHER-SE>                                   50657 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 76464 
<SALES>                                      17859 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             17859 
<CGS>                                       (13452)
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               (13452)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (5869)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               (44)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (534)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (1996)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (717)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (1279)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (1279)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 (.16)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0
        

</TABLE>
106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 277

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for the

Greater Washington Soap Box Derby.
106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 277

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring),
2

•HCON 277 EH

1 SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF SOAP BOX DERBY RACES

2 ON CAPITOL GROUNDS.

3 The Greater Washington Soap Box Derby Associa4 tion (in this resolution referred to as the ‘‘Association’’)

5 shall be permitted to sponsor a public event, soap box

6 derby races, on the Capitol Grounds on June 24, 2000,

7 or on such other date as the Speaker of the House of Rep8 resentatives and the Committee on Rules and Administra9 tion of the Senate may jointly designate.

10 SEC. 2. CONDITIONS.

11 The event to be carried out under this resolution shall

12 be free of admission charge to the public and arranged

13 not to interfere with the needs of Congress, under condi14 tions to be prescribed by the Architect of the Capitol and

15 the Capitol Police Board; except that the Association shall

16 assume full responsibility for all expenses and liabilities

17 incident to all activities associated with the event.

18 SEC. 3. STRUCTURES AND EQUIPMENT.

19 For the purposes of this resolution, the Association

20 is authorized to erect upon the Capitol Grounds, subject

21 to the approval of the Architect of the Capitol, such stage,

22 sound amplification devices, and other related structures

23 and equipment as may be required for the event to be car24 ried out under this resolution.
3

•HCON 277 EH

1 SEC. 4. ADDITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS.

2 The Architect of the Capitol and the Capitol Police

3 Board are authorized to make any such additional ar4 rangements that may be required to carry out the event

5 under this resolution.

6 SEC. 5. ENFORCEMENT OF RESTRICTIONS.

7 The Capitol Police Board shall provide for enforce8 ment of the restrictions contained in section 4 of the Act

9 of July 31, 1946 (40 U.S.C. 193d; 60 Stat. 718), con10 cerning sales, displays, and solicitations on the Capitol

11 Grounds, as well as other restrictions applicable to the

12 Capitol Grounds, with respect to the event to be carried

13 out under this resolution.

Passed the House of Representatives April 10, 2000.

Attest:

Clerk.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 

REQUEST FOR MEDIATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

_______________________________________)

BARDY NGUYEN, )

) No. C06-0951RSL

Plaintiff, ) 

v. ) ORDER DENYING

) PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR 

COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER, ) MEDIATION

)

Defendant. )

_______________________________________)

This matter comes before the Court on plaintiff’s letter to the Court regarding mediation. 

Dkt. #16. In her letter, plaintiff requests that the Court “set up” and mediate this action in

exchange for ten-percent of any amount plaintiff recovers at the mediation. For the reasons set

forth below, the Court respectfully denies plaintiff’s request in its entirety.

First, the method of alternative dispute resolution (“ADR”) suitable for this case (e.g.,

mediation, arbitration, or other ADR procedure) should initially be agreed upon by the parties. 

Although plaintiff requested mediation in her letter, the selection of the ADR method, if any,

must be contained in the combined Joint Status Report and Discovery Plan (the “Report”)

required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) and Local Rule 16. See Dkt. #5. This Report must be filed

with the Court by November 6, 2006. See Dkt. #13 (Order granting plaintiff’s motion for

extension of time and renoting the Report deadline to November 6, 2006). Therefore, plaintiff’s

request for the Court to “set up mediation” is premature because the Report has not been

Case 2:06-cv-00951-RSL Document 20 Filed 10/30/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 

REQUEST FOR MEDIATION -2-

submitted.

Second, the Court cannot act as mediator in this case in exchange for any part of a

settlement because it would violate the Code of Judicial Conduct. The Code of Judicial Conduct

for United States Judges requires judges to disqualify themselves in proceedings in which they

have financial interests. See Code of Conduct for United States Judges, Canon 3C(1)(c) (stating

that a judge must disqualify himself where the judge “has a financial interest in the subject

matter in controversy”); 28 U.S.C. § 455(b)(4); see also Cannon 6 (stating that a judge shall not

accept compensation where it gives the appearance of impropriety). 

In the alternative, in the event the Court cannot mediate this action, plaintiff has

requested a list of mediators from the Court. A list of Local Rule 39.1 qualified neutrals is

available on the Court’s website at:

http://www.wawd.uscourts.gov/CourtServices/AlternativeDisputeResolution.htm. 

This list may also be obtained directly from the Clerk’s office. See Local Rule 39.1(b)(1). 

For all the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES all of plaintiff’s requests in her letter

received by the Court on October 23, 2006 (Dkt. #16).

DATED this 30th day of October, 2006.

A

Robert S. Lasnik

United States District Judge 

Case 2:06-cv-00951-RSL Document 20 Filed 10/30/06 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                      11,521,092
<SECURITIES>                                   700,000
<RECEIVABLES>                               15,433,453
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (195,326)
<INVENTORY>                                    334,870
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            33,647,877
<PP&E>                                       9,849,122
<DEPRECIATION>                              (3,828,899)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              46,652,755
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       31,958,445
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0 
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        34,040 
<OTHER-SE>                                  10,253,270
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                46,652,755
<SALES>                                    115,406,879
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           115,406,879
<CGS>                                      109,504,972
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              120,331,291<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              40,914
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (4,679,398)
<INCOME-TAX>                                (1,873,980)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (2,805,418)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (3,617,616)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (1.16)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (1.16)
<FN>
<F1>TOTAL COSTS INCLUDES $2,354,000 IN NON-CASH, NON-RECURRING COMPENSATION CHARGE.
NET LOSS INCLUDES AN ADJUSTMENT OF $812,198 RELATING TO CERTAIN REDEEMABLE
COMMON SHARES AS DEFINED WITHIN THE AGREEMENT.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
BEFORE Judge Dostlon,

September 14, 1966

No. R66/25.

No. R66/26.

No. R66/27.

No. R66/28.

No. R66/29.

No. R66/30.

No. R66/31.

#### The Tupman Thurlow Co., Inc. *v.*United States, reappraisements R60/17030, etc. (New York). The Tupman Thurlow Co., Inc. *v.*United States, reappraisements R60/17376, etc. (Norfolk). The Tupman Thurlow Co., Inc. v. United States, reappraisements R60/17718, R60/17719, and R60/17720 (Jacksonville). The Tupman Thurlow Co., Inc. *v.*United States, reappraisements R60/18140, etc. (Houston). Tupman Thurlow Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States, reappraisements R60/18210, etc. (Philadelphia). Tupman Thurlow Co., Inc., and The Tupman Thurlow Co. *v.*United States, reappraisements R60/19013 and R61/12085 (Seattle). The Tupman Thurlow Co., Inc. *v.*United States, reappraisements R60/19554, etc. (Los Angeles).

Donlou, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *International Packers, Limited v. United States*(56 Cust. Ct. 636, Reap. Dec. 11147) and *International Packers, Limited*v. *United States*(52 Cust. Ct. 472, Reap. Dec. 10696), the court found and held that export value, as defined in section 402(b), Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, T.D. 54165, is the proper basis for the determination of the value of the canned meat exported from Argentina, during the period January 1, 1959, through December 31, 1959, described on the invoices of the entries covered by the appeals for reappraisement recited in schedule “A,” and that such values per dozen tins, net packed, are the respective values shown as plaintiffs’ claimed values on schedule “B,” for, the respective products and sizes of container described on the invoices and as stated in each entry and recited in said schedule “B,” during those periods which correspond to the time of exportation of the canned meat covered by the appeals for reappraisement recited in schedule “A,” which with schedule “B,” was attached to and made a part of the decisions.
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-4 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 1 of 17
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-4 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 2 of 17
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-4 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 3 of 17
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-4 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 4 of 17
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-4 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 5 of 17
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-4 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 6 of 17
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-4 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 7 of 17
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-4 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 8 of 17
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-4 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 9 of 17
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-4 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 10 of 17
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-4 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 11 of 17
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-4 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 12 of 17
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-4 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 13 of 17
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-4 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 14 of 17
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-4 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 15 of 17
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-4 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 16 of 17
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-4 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 17 of 17
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 201 (Thursday, October 19, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 72212]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-23090]


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

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

[OMB Control No. 2900-0706]


Agency Information Collection Activity: Application for 
Reimbursement of National Exam Fee; Withdrawn

AGENCY:  Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans 
Affairs.

ACTION: Notice; withdrawal.

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

SUMMARY: On Thurdsay October, 13, 2023 the Veterans Benefits 
Administration (VA), published a notice in the Federal Register 
announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection 
Application for Reimbursement of National Exam Fee VA Form 22-0810. 
This notice was published in error; therefore, this document corrects 
that error by withdrawing this FR notice, document number 2023-19049.

DATES: As of Thurdsay October, 13, 2023, the FR notice published at 88 
FR 19049 on Thurdsay October, 13, 2023, is withdrawn.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maribel Aponte, Office of Enterprise 
and Integration, Data Governance Analytics (008), 810 Vermont Ave. NW, 
Washington, DC 20006, (202) 266-4688 or email <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#94f9f5e6fdf6f1f8baf5e4fbfae0f1d4e2f5baf3fbe2"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5c313d2e353e3930723d2c333228391c2a3d723b332a">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FR Doc. 2023-19049, published on Thurdsay 
October, 13, 2023 88 FR 19049, is withdrawn by this notice.

    By direction of the Secretary.
Maribel Aponte,
VA PRA Clearance Officer, Office of Enterprise and Integration/Data 
Governance Analytics, Department of Veterans Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2023-23090 Filed 10-18-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         340,727
<SECURITIES>                                   111,200
<RECEIVABLES>                                  302,945
<ALLOWANCES>                                     8,741
<INVENTORY>                                    214,736
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,101,139
<PP&E>                                         447,937
<DEPRECIATION>                                 216,694
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,532,708
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          330,213
<BONDS>                                        110,080
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,885
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,090,530
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,532,708
<SALES>                                        522,654
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               522,654
<CGS>                                          249,915
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  249,915
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                54,954
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,510
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 33,372
<INCOME-TAX>                                    27,747
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              5,625
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,625
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.03
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2
 
                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
 
   
     We hereby consent to the use in the Prospectus constituting part of
Amendment No. 2 to this Registration Statement on Form S-1 of SpinCycle, Inc. of
our report dated March 13, 1998 relating to the financial statements of
SpinCycle, Inc., which appears in such Prospectus. We also consent to the
reference to us under the heading "Experts" in such Prospectus.
    
 
Price Waterhouse LLP
Phoenix, Arizona
   
October 20, 1998
EXHIBIT 99.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF 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-Q of Artisoft, Inc. (the
"Company") for the period ended September 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned,
Duncan G. Perry, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

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

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

                                        /s/ Duncan G. Perry
                                        ----------------------------------------
Dated: May 15, 2003                     Duncan G. Perry
                                        Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Artisoft, Inc. and will be retained by Artisoft, Inc. and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

) CR05-5886FDB

Plaintiff, )

) ORDER TO EXTEND MOTION

v ) CUT-OFF DATE AND TO

) CONTINUE TRIAL DATE

)

ADBENASSER ENNASSIME, )

TONYA ENNASSIME, )

)

Defendants. )

________________________________ ___)

ORDER

In consideration of the parties’ joint motion for continuance of the Pretrial Motion

cutoff date and Trial, the Court finds and rules as follows:

This Court finds as facts those facts set forth in the above motion to extend the pretrial

motion cut-off and trial date. For the reasons set forth, the motion is GRANTED. 

Further, the Court finds that given the need by defense counsel to fully review the evidence and

to conduct adequate investigation, the failure to grant the requested continuance would

unreasonably deny the defendants effective assistance of counsel and, despite due diligence by

all parties, result in a miscarriage of justice.

Further, the Court finds that given the large number of potential witnesses and the

relative complexity of the case, it is unreasonable to expect either the Government or defense

counsel to be prepared to submit motions or prepare for trial within the time allotted.

Further, the Court finds that counsel’s (Robert S. Huff) family emergency, and all

counsels’ scheduling conflicts, require additional time be allowed for case preparation and trial.

Case 3:05-cr-05886-RJB Document 32 Filed 05/24/06 Page 1 of 2
The Court further finds, for the reasons set forth above, that the ends of justice served

by granting the requested continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the

defendants in a speedy trial.

The new motion cut-off date shall be July 17, 2006 and the new trial date shall be

September 18, 2006. The period of delay resulting from this continuance from the current trial

date of June 12, 2006, up to and including the new trial date of September 18, 2006, is hereby

excluded for speedy trial purposes under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A) and (B) for the purpose of

computing the time limitations imposed by the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161-3174.

DATED this 24th day of May, 2006. 

A

FRANKLIN D. BURGESS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Tonya Ennassime, represented by:

ROBERT S HUFF

 /s/ Robert S Huff 

Adbennasser Ennassime, represented by:

DAVID H GEHRKE

 /s/ David H Gehrke 

Plaintiff USA represented by:

YEE-TING WOO

 /s/ Yee-Ting Woo 

Plaintiff USA represented by:

JILL OTAKE

 /s/ Jill Otake 

Case 3:05-cr-05886-RJB Document 32 Filed 05/24/06 Page 2 of 2
No. 52775.

#### Willard Hawes & Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 126983-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.