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 The Dewey Electronics Corporation (the "Corporation") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John H. D. Dewey, Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,
as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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 presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Corporation.






/s/ John H.D. Dewey


John H. D. Dewey, Chief Executive Officer


Date:  September 25, 2009





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to The Dewey Electronics Corporation and will be retained by The Dewey Electronics Corporation and furnished to the Securities and exchange commission or its staff upon request.
### Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA

- 

### 2015

- 0077 Directorate Identifier: 

### 2013

- NM

- 254

- AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If

they do not, click (or Tab) into a nd then out of the changed cell

.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection,

replacement)

Do not include on

condition costs here Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine,

propeller, appliance)

Work

- hours

(include

access, testing,

and close

- up) Labor

c ost

(@$8 5 /h

our) Parts Cost Total Costs

(labor +

parts) Number of

U.S.

Registered

Products Total Cost

for U.S. Fleet



### Service Bulletin

Inspection 1.0 $ 85.00 $0 $ 85.00 

### 4 $ 340.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0 .00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00



### The known number of products in compliance:

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $ 340



### Costs covered under warranty ( if known ) $

On

- Condition Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection,

replacement) Work

- hours

(include access,

testing, and close

up) Labor cost

(@$8 5/hour) Parts Cost Cost per Product



### SB modification 1.0 $ 85.00 $0 $ 85.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00



### Special considerations for Economic A nalysis ( Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs) 

### : 

### All airplanes

will be covered under warranty with no charge for labor h ours

.

### Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES * NO

* Explanation:

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES * NO

* Explanation:

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact o n a substantial number of small entities? E xplain for

either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO

Explanation:

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for

aircraft operated in Ala ska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES * NO



### * Explanation 

### :
Document

Exhibit 10.81



December 16, 2020


CHUBB INA HOLDINGS, INC.




AMENDMENT TO THE CHUBB US SUPPLEMENTAL EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT PLAN


Section 4.11 of the SERP is amended and restated as follows:


4.11 Permitted Delays. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any payment to a Participant under the Plan (including payments made under the Defined Contribution Excess Benefit Plan of the Chubb Corporation) must be delayed upon the Committee’s reasonable anticipation of one or more of the following events (in the Committee’s sole discretion):


(a) The making of the payment would violate Federal securities laws or other applicable law; but, 


(b) may be delayed, where the Company’s deduction with respect to such payment would be eliminated by application of Code section 162(m);


provided, that any payment delayed pursuant to this subsection 4.11 shall be paid in accordance with Code section 409A.


    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *


AMENDMENT TO THE CHUBB US DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN


Section 4.8 of the Deferred Compensation Plan is amended and restated as follows:


4.8    Permitted Delays. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any payment to a Participant under the Plan must be delayed upon the Committee’s reasonable anticipation of one or more of the following events (in the Committee’s sole discretion):


(a) The making of the payment would violate Federal securities laws or other applicable law; but, 


(b) may be delayed, where the Company’s deduction with respect to such payment would be eliminated by application of Code section 162(m);


provided, that any payment subject to this Section 4.8 shall be paid in accordance with Code section 409A.


    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *


1








AMENDMENT TO THE PENSION EXCESS BENEFIT PLAN OF THE CHUBB CORPORATION


Section 5.7 of the Excess Pension Plan is, amended and restated as follows:


5.7    Permitted Delays. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any payment of Post-2004 Excess Benefits to a Participant under the Plan must be delayed upon the Committee’s reasonable anticipation of one or more of the following events (in the Committee’s sole discretion):


(a) The making of the payment would violate Federal securities laws or other applicable law; but, 


(b) may be delayed, where the Company’s deduction with respect to such payment would be eliminated by application of Code section 162(m);


provided, that any payment subject to this Section 5.7 shall be paid in accordance with Code section 409A.


    
2
No. 67745.

#### Williams, Clarke Company and Felix Glatz Import Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 62/7453 (Los Angeles).

*310Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *Falcon Sales Company*and *J. J. Murphy & Co.*v. *United States*(47 Cust. Ct. 129, C.D. 2292), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

ALBERT DIXON,

Respondent

v.

CARMEN WALLACE,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 1 WAL 2024

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 8th day of July, 2024

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
### 395

**OFFICE OF**  **THE ATTORNEY**  **GENERAL OF**  **TEXAS**

**Eon. Homrr**  **D. lFOk**  **County Auditor**  **Fapetto County**  **La Grange,**  **Texas**

a in addition a*ed the shsritf

ion .whloh 1s **as** follows t whether or not an

saoh oi thr foregoi~ two questions $a

The only aosts whioh imy **be** taxed in delinquent t*i: sulto ore those speolr1oall.y ~rotidsd POT**by statute.**  There ia no statute whloh authorizer a dollnquclnt tax attorqey whoa& contraot has exglred to 

## taxas aoits a See for prspariaga tQXdeed for tho sheriff,

### 399

**non. Ronor**  **I?. Sok,**  **paga 2** 

Llkewlse them ir m rtatuto ln 

# exfotenoe rhlsh authorlztm -the ehorlff **to hire**  **an attorney**  **to prepare**  **the** tax deed iOr bin and @howthla 88 M sqpanae OrOrflQ@in addition to the $2.00 allowed tho sharlti for his mm~otm.

Your attention la oalled to Art1010 

### 7328, Vernon’8 Rwired Civil **Statute8 of**  **Taxa+** whioh provide8 **that In**  **aaao** tDa QrDQeFty ia 

### soldby the 

### rhor~frto **the** State the

## 8hirr e&all m&e a deed to the **3tateg** wing iormr ta ?m preoorlbed and **furnhlwd br**  the 

## Oomptrolhsrhowlng in eaoh oare the amount of 

## taxos,interest, pudy fmd aoats for whloh @old, and the olork*# oortm 

### 1or reoord~n& tIm **doe&.** Ho18 irrrthor required **by** raid rtatub to aausa swh do& to br reoorded in thmroaord of deed8 by the 0ou.M.~olerk of the oounty and w&en60 reoorded aha2.Xiorrrard the aam to the Corpptreller. In lnatanoee where the **land i8**  rold **by thr**  8horirt to t&e 

## State in8iXnlOh

as a form for tha drrd 

## $8Mod whioh 

### 1s propared **by** tho CoPsgtroller, it ir ‘mldent that there would be no mason why the sherUT would be rorood to amployan attorney to fillin t&isblankfo?& In theeventtba 

## i3lsarifr**00tid** not 

## riil ia auohrormandhit 

## ioroodto employ an attorney to fill tkr ton in for him, the expense or same uould h&v. to oome out **or** hla pinto purlbe* m&her**mre, the**  **atatutoe** orTexas oontwuplgto that the aounty and/or dlstrlot atbornep mhall be the legaladrla0.r ot the rhrrirr aa well aa the other ooun8y oiflcer8) and as al1 oftioero are **prmwmed to**  **perform** their **duty it**  **woulb** appear that in the l ~ont the sherifr had airrioulty in 

### l xeoutfiag a tax dead he Oould go ror legal adrioo to the poblio orriow whom duty it is to adtlso him in reganl to Buohmatters.

TxusQing that we hare answorsdyour questioh8 fully, **and**assuring you that any **th** wo ofm **be** 0r turther asalatanoe to you you hare bu6 to OR11won UII~we are
# 		Sorry, something went wrong

An unexpected error has occurred.Web Parts Maintenance Page: If you have permission, you can use this page to temporarily close Web Parts or remove personal settings. For more information, contact your site administrator.

Technical Details

Troubleshoot issues with Microsoft SharePoint Foundation.

Correlation ID: 3ca523a1-c4fc-a055-6128-0b05521de39b

Date and Time: 4/29/2024 12:39:53 AM

----

Go back to site
Exhibit 8.1**LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OF VIVENDI**     As of December 31, 2005, 399 entities were consolidated or accounted for using the equitymethod. Set forth below are the names of certain of the subsidiaries which carry on a substantialportion of Vivendi’s lines of business. The names of various subsidiaries, including subsidiariesconducting operating activities of Vivendi’s various businesses domestically and internationally,have been omitted. None of the foregoing omitted subsidiaries are considered to be material inrelation to Vivendi’s statement of financial position and operations.     **Country**   **Vivendi SA (Parent Company)** France   **Universal Music Group**  Universal Studios Holding I Corp. USPolyGram Holding, Inc. USUniversal Music Group, Inc. USUMG Recordings, Inc. USCentenary Holding BV NetherlandsUniversal International Music BV NetherlandsUniversal Entertainment GmbH GermanyUniversal Music KK JapanUniversal Music France SAS FranceCentenary Music Holdings Ltd. UKUniversal Music (UK) Holdings Ltd. UK   **Vivendi Games**  Vivendi Games USBlizzard Entertainment, Inc. USSierra Entertainment, Inc. US   **Canal+ Group**  Groupe Canal+ SA FranceCanal+ SA FranceCanalSatellite SA FranceStudioCanal SA FranceMultiThématiques FranceCyfra+ PolandMedia Overseas France   **SFR**  SFR FranceNeuf Telecom SA France   **Maroc Telecom**  Maroc Telecom SA MoroccoMauritel Mauritania   **NBC Universal**  Universal Studios Holding I Corp. US
 

 
     **Country**   NBC Universal, Inc. US   **Other**  Vivendi Telecom International SA FranceElektrim Telekomunikacja PolandPolska Telefonica Cyfrowa (a) Poland(a) As of December 31, 2005, Polska Telefonica Cyfrowa (PTC) was not consolidated. See forfurther information “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects” and “Item 18. FinancialStatements — Note 31”.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the Quarterly Report of TenFold
Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert P. Hughes, 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, 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 presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                                                                                       
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Robert P. Hughes                                                                   
|Robert P. Hughes                                                                       
|Chief Financial Officer and Chief of Staff (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
|November 1, 2007
Before the Second Division,

April 4, 1961

No. 65392.

#### D. P. Harris Hdw. & Mfg. Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 287122-K (Detroit).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Schmidt Pritchard & Co. et al.*(47 C.C.P.A. 152, C.A.D. 750), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
1 The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, United St ates District Judge for the District of Nebraska. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 06-1775

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Nebraska. William D. Lamb, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: March 7, 2007 Filed: March 12, 2007

___________ Before WOLLMAN, HANSEN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Following his guilty plea, William D. Lamb was convicted of one count of conspiracy to distribute 500 or more gram s of methamphetamine, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2 and 21 U.S.C. § 841. The district court 1 imposed a sentence of 312 months in prison, to be followed by five years of supervised release. On appeal, Lamb challenges the district court’s denial of his motion to compel the government to file a substantial-assistance sentence-reduction motion and further argues that the court erred in imposing a sentence within his a dvisory Guidelines range. We affirm.-2- Lamb’s plea agreement did not incl ude any language regarding Lamb’s potential cooperation, and the parties confirmed at Lamb’s guilty plea hearing that his cooperation was not anticipated as a part of the bargain. While Lamb complains that he was not credited for his pre-indictment a ssistance, he admits that he provided that assistance as part of a prior non-prosecu tion agreement, the terms of which he violated. The government’s refusal to move for a substantial assistance departure was not unconstitutional, and thus the court’ s refusal to compel that motion was appropriate. SeeUnited States v. Mullins , 399 F.3d 888, 890 (8thCir. 2005) (where plea agreement does not require government to file substantial assistance motion, district court may intervene only if govern ment’s refusal to make such motion was based on unconstitutional motive, such as unl awful discrimination or other action not rationally related to legitimat e governmental interest). Mo reover, Lamb directs us to nothing in the record to support his claim th at the district court did not recognize its sentencing discretion or that his Guid elines sentence was unreasonable. See United States v. Haack , 403 F.3d 997, 1004 (8th Cir. 2005) (sentence is unreasonable if it appears district court gave significant we ight to improper factor, failed to fully consider appropriate factor, or othe rwise made clear error of judgment). Independently reviewing the entirety of the record, we are satisfied the court understood that the Guidelines were adviso ry and properly considered the factors enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) in fashioning its sentence.
Accordingly, we affirm.

______________________________
Exhibit 99.2



CERTIFICATION



Pursuant to the requirement set forth in Section 906 of the Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act of 2002 (18
U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted), Jeffrey J. Bairstow, Chief Financial Officer of Vitria Technology, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the Company) hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge, as follows:



The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
period ended March 31, 2003, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 99.2 (the Periodic Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that
the information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition at the end of the period covered by the Periodic Report and results of operations of the Company for the period covered by the
Periodic Report.



IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has set his hand hereto as of this 14th day of May, 2003.



By:

/s/    JEFFREY J.
BAIRSTOWJeffrey J. Bairstow Chief Financial Officer






A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Vitria Technology, Inc. and will be retained by
Vitria Technology, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. This certification accompanies the Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not
to be incorporated by reference into any filing of Vitria Technology, Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-Q), irrespective of any
general incorporation language contained in such filing.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

SECTION 302 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Jesse Whittenton, Chief Financial and Executive Officer, certify that:



1.

I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-ksb of AutoFund Servicing, Inc.;



1.

Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual report;



2.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;



3.

I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:



a.

designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;



b.

evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this annual report (the "Evaluation Date"); and



c.

presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;



4.

The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):



a.

all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and



b.

any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls;



5.

The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this annual report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.



Date: February 17, 2004



By:

/s/ Jesse Whittenton







Jesse Whittenton
Chief Financial and

Executive Officer
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Dairy 2002.**
 
Parts: 01020304
 
SuDoc Number:A 101.2:D 14/2/
Item Number:0010 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000559710
 
February 13, 2020
EXHIBIT 32.01


                            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 Montgomery Realty Group, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2005, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Dinesh Maniar, 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, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

         (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 result of
                  operations of the Company.



/s/ Dinesh Maniar
----------------------------
Dinesh Maniar
Chief Executive Officer
October 4, 2006

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Case 2:03-cv-06604-JP Document 484 Filed 04/18/12 Page 1 of 4
Case 2:03-cv-06604-JP Document 484 Filed 04/18/12 Page 2 of 4
Case 2:03-cv-06604-JP Document 484 Filed 04/18/12 Page 3 of 4
Case 2:03-cv-06604-JP Document 484 Filed 04/18/12 Page 4 of 4