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



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  filing of the  Quarterly
Report on Form 10-QSB for the Quarter Ended  November 30, 2003 (the "Report") by
Advanced Media, Inc. ("Registrant"), the undersigned hereby certifies that:

1.       to the  best of my  knowledge,  the  Report  fully  complies  with  the
         requirements  of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities  Exchange Act
         of 1934; and

2.       to the best of my knowledge,  the  information  contained in the Report
         fairly presents, in all material respects,  the financial condition and
         results of operations of Registrant.




February 9, 2004                              By:   /S/ BUDDY YOUNG
                                                    -------------------------
                                                    Buddy Young
                                                    Chief Executive Officer and
                                                    Chief Financial Officer
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



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  filing of the  Quarterly
Report on Form 10-QSB for the Quarter  Ended  August 31, 2006 (the  "Report") by
Advanced Media Training, Inc.  ("Registrant"),  the undersigned hereby certifies
that:

1.       to the  best of my  knowledge,  the  Report  fully  complies  with  the
         requirements  of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities  Exchange Act
         of 1934; and

2.       to the best of my knowledge,  the  information  contained in the Report
         fairly presents, in all material respects,  the financial condition and
         results of operations of Registrant.




October 10, 2006                    By:   /S/ BUDDY YOUNG
                                          -------------------------------------
                                              Buddy Young
                                              Chief Executive Officer and Chief
                                              Financial Officer
Exhibit 31.1





PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATION





I, Kelly T. Hickel, certify that:





(1)    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of United EcoEnergy Corp.;





(2)    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 quarterly report;





(3)    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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;





(4)    The small business issuer's other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and we have:





(a)    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, 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 small business issuer’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based upon based such evaluation; and





(c)    Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting;





(5)    The small business issuer's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer’s auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):





(a)    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and





(b)    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal controls over financial reporting.





Dated: April 15, 2010
By:
/s/ Kelly T. HickelKelly T. Hickel

Chief Executive Officer
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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JESSE WASHINGTON, No. CIV S-04-1317 MCE GGH P

Plaintiff, 

v. ORDER

J. FANNON, ET AL., 

Defendants. 

 /

On August 25, 2005, this court adopted the findings and

recommendations filed April 27, 2005, addressing defendants’

motion to dismiss. This court ordered defendants Kissinger,

DeForest, Lynn, Ratliff and Epperson to file an answer. The

court inadvertently failed to order defendants Hibbit and Jackson

to file an answer. See April 27, 2005, findings and

recommendations, p. 15: 19-25 (setting forth colorable claims).

///

///

///

Case 2:04-cv-01317-MCE -GGH Document 36 Filed 09/15/05 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

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within twenty days of

the date of this order, defendants Hibbit and Jackson shall file

an answer.

DATED: September 15, 2005

_____________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

Case 2:04-cv-01317-MCE -GGH Document 36 Filed 09/15/05 Page 2 of 2
Before the First Division,

July 2, 1943

No. 48501.

#### Protest 42690-K of Mason Bros. and Tarlin (Boston).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

It was stipulated that the articles in question are similar to the clay ducks involved in Abstract 47474. In accordance therewith the claim at 45 percent under paragraph 397 was sustained.
<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

      In connection with the Annual Report of Diversified Thermal Solutions,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2005, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, J. Terry Medovitch, 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; and

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

April 14, 2006                         /s/ J. Terry Medovitch
                                       ---------------------------------------
                                       J. Terry Medovitch
                                       Chief Financial Officer
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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TIMOTHY O’KEEFE,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2277 DFL JFM P

vs.

SERGEANT DIEBALL, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff has filed his third request for an extension of time to file and serve an

opposition to defendants’ March 14, 2005 motion to dismiss. Good cause appearing, the request

will be granted. No further extensions of time will be granted.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s July 25, 2005 third request for an extension of time is granted; and

2. Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of this order in which to file and

serve an answer to defendants’ March 14, 2005 motion to dismiss. No further extensions of time

will be granted.

DATED: August 22, 2005. 

12/kf;okee02277.36a 

Case 2:04-cv-02277-DFL -JFM Document 45 Filed 08/22/05 Page 1 of 1
---

---

Exhibit 4.(a).56

(not
an official translation-for convenience only)



The State of Israel
Ministry of Communications
General License for Partner Communications Ltd. for the Provision of
Mobile Radio Telephone (MRT) Services using the Cellular Method

# Amendment No. 43

By virtue of the powers of the
Minister of Communications under Article 4 (e) of the Communications Law
(Telecommunications and Broadcasts), 5742-1982, that have been delegated to us, by all our
other powers under any law and after having given Partner Communications Company
Ltd. (hereinafter: Partner) the opportunity to present their
arguments regarding this matter, we hereby amend the General License for the provision of
mobile radio telephone (MRT) services using the cellular method granted to Partner on 7
April 1998, as follows:

# Amendment of Article 67A

| | 1. | In
article 67A.7, instead of  (commencement date),
          excluding article 67A.2 shall come: 
,
excluding article 67A.1 (a) that shall become effective on 15 March 2007
(commencement date) but excluding article 67A.2".
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(19 February 2007)

| | (sgd)
Mordechai Mordechai  Director-General | (sgd)
Haim Giron, Adv.Senior Deputy Director-General,Engineering and Licensing
| | --------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



---

---
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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JEFFREY MARSHALL,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1657 DFL PAN P

vs.

DEPUTY CASTRO, et al., 

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. By court order filed February 8, 2005, the court found that the

complaint stated a claim against inter alia, defendant Davis and ordered plaintiff to complete

summons for service within thirty days. By court order filed April 13, 2005, the court ordered

service by the United States Marshall on, inter alia, defendant Davis. On October 26, 2005, the

United States Marshall returned service unexecuted as to defendant Davis; the notation on the

form indicated that plaintiff had withdrawn his complaint against defendant Davis. In an order

filed December 28, 2005, the court indicated that it appeared the plaintiff wished to withdraw

claims against defendant Davis and that the court would dismiss such claims under Federal Rule

of Civil Procedure Rule 41(a) unless plaintiff indicated within 10 days that he wanted to pursue

them. Plaintiff has failed to respond in any way to this aspect of the December 28, 2005 order. 

Case 2:04-cv-01657-AK Document 109 Filed 08/25/06 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

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s claims against

defendant Davis be dismissed without prejudice. See Fed R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2). 

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s

Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the

specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951

F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: August 24, 2006.

14

mars1657.fta

Case 2:04-cv-01657-AK Document 109 Filed 08/25/06 Page 2 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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KEITH CASSELLS,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1798 FCD EFB P

vs.

D. MEHTA, et al.,

Defendants. Order

 /

Plaintiff is a prisoner proceeding without counsel in this civil rights action brought under

42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has filed a document styled, “Motion in Limine.”

Plaintiff asserts that during his deposition, defendants inquired into matters not relevant

to this action. He seeks an order prohibiting the use of evidence that is “irrelevant, inadmissible

and prejudicial.” A motion to exclude evidence at trial is premature at this time an any such

motion should be brought within the time prescribed in the final pretrial order, once it issues. 

It also appears that plaintiff is disputing whether these matters are subject to discovery at

all. “Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is relevant to the

claim or defense of any party . . . .” Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1). Information is relevant if it is

“reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence,” even though the

information itself may not be admissible. Id.

Case 2:04-cv-01798-FCD-EFB Document 79 Filed 08/29/06 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

2

Plaintiff identifies no question at deposition to which he objected upon the ground it was

outside the scope of discovery and the court cannot rule on the relevance of evidence in the

abstract. On the record before the court there are no grounds upon which to conclude that the

matters inquired into during plaintiff’s deposition were not properly subject to discovery. To the

extent plaintiff contends that these topics are irrelevant, plaintiff may move to exclude evidence

in advance of trial or object to evidence when offered in a particular proceeding.

Accordingly, plaintiff’s July 19, 2006, motion in limine is denied.

So ordered. 

Dated: August 29, 2006.

\cass1798.dny m in limine

Case 2:04-cv-01798-FCD-EFB Document 79 Filed 08/29/06 Page 2 of 2
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 18.1

OpenTV Corp.
275 Sacramento Street
San Francisco, CA 94111


March 12, 2004


Ladies and Gentlemen:

We have audited the consolidated balance sheets of OpenTV Corp. ("the Company")
as of December 31, 2003 and 2002, and the related consolidated statements of
operations, shareholders' equity and comprehensive loss, and cash flows
for each of the years in the two-year period ended December 31, 2003, and have
reported thereon under date of February 16, 2004. The aforementioned
consolidated financial statements and our audit report thereon are included in
the Company's annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003.
As stated in Note 6 to those financial statements, the Company changed its
method of applying Statement of Financial Accounting Standards ("SFAS") No. 142
such that the annual impairment testing date relating to goodwill and intangible
assets with indefinite lives was changed from September 30 to December 31 and
states that the newly adopted accounting principle is preferable in the
circumstances because it conforms with the methodology applied by the Company's
controlling shareholder. In accordance with your request, we have reviewed and
discussed with Company officials the circumstances and business judgment and
planning upon which the decision to make this change in the method of accounting
was based.

With regard to the aforementioned accounting change, authoritative criteria have
not been established for evaluating the preferability of one acceptable method
of accounting over another acceptable method. However, for purposes of the
Company's compliance with the requirements of the Securities and Exchange
Commission, we are furnishing this letter.

Based on our review and discussion, with reliance on management's business
judgment and planning, we concur that the newly adopted method of accounting is
preferable in the Company's circumstances.

Very truly yours,

/s/ KPMG LLP
Exhibit 23.1

Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Forms S-8 Nos. 33-00175, 33-16187,
33-00176, 2-76657, 2-91931, 33-16188, 33-38361, 2-40012, 2-87193, 2-61721, 2-89418,
33-38360, 33-38361, 33-52760, 33-52758, 33-52756, 33-52762, 333-16113, 333-56119, 333-56752,
333-62759, 333-68566, 333-100436, 333-104066 and 333-104067 and Forms S-3 Nos. 333-46329 and
333-108626), of Keane, Inc. and in the related Prospectuses of our report dated February 6, 2004, except for Note 17, as to which the date is February 27, 2004,
with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Keane, Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2003.



Boston,
Massachusetts
March 9, 2004

---

QuickLinks
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4768 

To require an evaluation of the Nutrition Services Incentive Program of 

the Department of Agriculture. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 24, 2024 

Mr. HICKENLOOPER (for himself and Mr. MARSHALL) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry 

A BILL 

To require an evaluation of the Nutrition Services Incentive 

Program of the Department of Agriculture. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Nutrition Services Im5 provement Plan Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. GAO STUDY OF NUTRITION SERVICES INCENTIVE 

7 PROGRAM. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after the 

9 date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General 

10 of the United States shall conduct a study to evaluate the 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4768 IS

1 Nutrition Services Incentive Program of the Department 

2 of Agriculture under section 311 of the Older Americans 

3 Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3030a) (referred to in this section 

4 as the ‘‘Program’’). 

5 (b) INCLUSIONS.—The study under this section shall 

6 include an assessment of the ability of the Program— 

7 (1) to engage and support local farms in sup8 plying food products for nutrition services under the 

9 Older Americans Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3001 et 

10 seq.); and 

11 (2) to support produce prescription programs 

12 and medically tailored meals for older individuals (as 

13 defined in section 102 of that Act (42 U.S.C. 

14 3002)). 

15 (c) FACTORS FOR CONSIDERATION.—In conducting 

16 the study under this section, the Comptroller General of 

17 the United States shall take into consideration— 

18 (1) the impact of the Program on local farms 

19 participating in the Program; 

20 (2) the demand for the Program from local 

21 farms; and 

22 (3) effects on the health of older individuals (as 

23 so defined) as a result of the provision of fresh 

24 produce under the Program. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 32.2

The following certification shall not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the 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 Exchange Act, except to the extent that the registrant specifically incorporates it by reference.

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 on Form 10-Q of Magellan Midstream Holdings, L.P. (the
Partnership) for the quarter ending March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John D. Chandler, Chief Financial Officer of Magellan Midstream Holdings GP,
LLC, the General Partner of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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; and

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



|                                         
|-----------------------------------------
|                                         
|/s/ John D. Chandler                     
|John D. Chandler, Chief Financial Officer
|Date: May 6, 2008                        

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