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

**SECTION      1350 CERTIFICATION**

|   | 1. | The                Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB/A of the Company for the period ended                September 30, 2006 (the “Periodic Report”) fully complies with the                requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange                Act of                1934 (15 U.S.C. §§78m or 78o(d));                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. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----

----
Exhibit 99.6



CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



The undersigned, as the Chief Executive Officer of DHX Media
Ltd., certifies that, to the best of his knowledge and belief, the annual report on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ended June 30,
2015, which accompanies this certification, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable,
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the information contained in the annual report on Form 40-F for the fiscal
year ended June 30, 2015 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of DHX
Media Ltd. at the dates and for the periods indicated. The foregoing certification is made pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350) and shall not be relied upon for any other purpose. The undersigned expressly disclaims any
obligation to update the foregoing certification except as required by law.



Date: September 28, 2015



|/s/ Dana Sean Landry          | 
|----------------------------- | 
|Dana Sean Landry              | 
|Chief Executive Officer       | 
|(principal executive officer) |
**Exhibit 32**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

Pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18of the United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of The WashtenawGroup, Inc., does hereby certify with respect to the Quarterly Report ofThe Washtenaw Group, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30,2005 (the “Report’) that

 

(1)           The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)           The information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Registrant.

 

 
| Date: August 12,  2005 | /s/ Charles C.  Huffman                |   |
|-----------------------------|----------------------------------------|--------|
|                        | Charles  C. Huffman                    |
|                        | President and  Chief Executive Officer |
|                        |                                   |
|                        |                                   |
| Date:  August 12, 2005 | /s/ Howard M.  Nathan                  |   |
|                        | Howard  M. Nathan                      |
|                        | Vice President  and Financial Officer  |

 

Theforegoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18of the United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Report or as aseparate disclosure document.

 

----
#### Alfred A. Freeman, *as Executor, etc., Appellant, v.*Harriet A. Coit and Florence A. Freeman.

—Decision modified so as to allow the appellant costs and disbursements of appeal to be adjusted.
Case Wo. 13,864.

#### The THALES.

[Nowhere reported; opinion not now accessible.]
EXHIBIT 32.1CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ANDCHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
In connection with the Annual Report of Global Energy Group, Inc. (the“Company”) on Form 10- KSB for the year ending December 31, 2003 as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), we,the undersigned, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adoptedpursuant 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 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and 2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.        September 29, 2004 /s/ Carlos Coe   Carlos Coe   Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 35.1

Servicer Compliance Statement

I, Joseph
Guage, Vice President - Operations Strategy of The Student Loan Corporation (SLC), the administrator under the administration agreement and the servicer under the servicing agreement, each among SLC, SLC Student Loan Receivables I, Inc.
and certain others (together, the Servicing Agreement), relating to SLC Student Loan Trust 2010-1, certify that:



|(a) | A review of SLCs activities during the calendar year ended December 31, 2014 (the Reporting Period) and of SLCs performance under the Servicing Agreement has been made under my supervision.
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(b) | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, SLC has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

March 20, 2015



By:

/s/ Joseph GuageName:

Joseph GuageTitle:

Vice President - Operations Strategy
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration 

          - [TA-W-60,970] 

Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on February 16, 2007 in response to a worker petition filed a company official on behalf of workers at TDS/US Automotive, Chesapeake, Virginia. 

The petitioner has withdrawn the petition. Thus, this investigation is terminated. 

Signed at Washington, DC,  this 26th day of March 2007. 

Richard Church, 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. E7-6182 Filed 4-3-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
#### Penson & Co. et al. *v.*United States

No. 7327.

Invoices dated London, England, February 13, 1946, etc.

Certified February 13, 1946, etc.

Entered at New York, N. Y., March 21, 1946, etc.

Entry Nos. 746988; 763988.

(Decided July 9, 1947)

*Barnes, Richardson & Colburn (Hadley S. King*of counsel) for the plaintiffs.

*Paul P. Rao,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Lawrence, Judge:

It has been agreed between the parties hereto that the issues herein relating to the above-mentioned merchandise are the same in all material respects as those decided in *United States*v. *Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp.,*33 C. C. P. A. (Customs) 183, C. A. D. 334, and that the record therein may be incorporated herein.

Upon the agreed facts I find the export value, as defined in section 402 (d), Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for determining the values of merchandise covered by the appeals for reappraisement enumerated in the annexed schedule which is marked *“A”*and made a part of this decision, and that such values are the appraised values, less additions made by importers on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
(Reap. Dec. 10184)

#### Brechner Brothers *v.*United States

Entry No. 978265.

(Decided February 27, 1962)

*575
      *Siegel, Mandell & Davidson*for the plaintiff.

*William. H. OrricJc, Jr.,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Mollison, Judge:

The merchandise the subject of the above-enumerated appeal for reappraisement consists of rubber-soled footwear with rayon uppers.

Counsel for the parties have submitted the case for decision upon stipulation, on the basis of which I find export value, as defined in section 402a (d), Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, is the proper basis for the determination of the values of the merchandise involved and that such values were the entered unit values, as set forth on the invoice, which values include all of the dutiable charges.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
Exhibit 32.1



SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION OF

PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

OF ALPHA NETWORK ALLIANCE VENTURES
INC.



In connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form
10-K of Alpha Network Alliance Ventures Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2016, the undersigned, Eleazar Rivera, President of
Alpha Network Alliance Ventures Inc., does hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1) such Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2016 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 such
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of Alpha Network Alliance Ventures Inc.



|Date:  November
    7, 2017 | /s/ Eleazar Rivera                                                                                                                        
|--------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                            | Eleazar Rivera                                                                                                                            
|                            | President, Secretary, Treasurer and Director (and principalexecutive officer, principal financial officer and principalaccounting officer)
**Exhibit 31.2**
**Certification of Chief Financial Officer**Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  I, Michael D. Bornak, Chief Financial Officer, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Portec RailProducts, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows ofthe registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand have:
a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared; b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s boardof directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves managementor other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.   November 15, 2004 /s/ Michael D. BornakDate Michael D. Bornak Chief Financial Officer
No. 49764.

#### Protest 605608-G, etc., of S. Shulman & Bro. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

The evidence showed that the hats in question are similar to those involved in *Caradine*v. *United States*(9 Cust. Ct. 69, C. D. 664), which record was admitted herein. The claim at only 25 percent ad valorem under paragraph 1504 (b) (5) was therefore sustained as to this item.
EXHIBIT 32.01

                  CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER &

                            CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Michael Pacult, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of
White Oak Financial Services, Inc. as general partner of Providence Select
Fund, L.P., certify that (i) the Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009
of Providence Select Fund, L.P. fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the
information contained in the Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of Providence Select Fund, L.P.

PROVIDENCE SELECT FUND, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

By:  White Oak Financial Services, Inc., General Partner

By:  /s/ Michael Pacult
Michael Pacult
Chief Executive Officer &
Chief Financial Officer

Date:	August 18, 2009
Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record

Plant ID 09379

Removed 

from Public 

(Non-CBI) 

Docket1

Copyright 

Flag2File Name Description

x 09379\09379_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

09379\09379_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist

09379\09379_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted

x 09379\09379_PartA.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 09379\09379_PartE.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 09379\09379_PartH.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 09379\Supporting Documentation\09379_Aerial Map.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 09379\Supporting Documentation\09379_Water Balance Diagram.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

09379\09379_Certification Statement.pdf Plant certification statement

09379\09379_Cover Letter.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

1

 Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database . 

2

 Copyright documents are available from the docket.
Exhibit 34.3

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Directors

Citibank, N.A.:

We have examined
managements assertion, included in the accompanying Managements Assertion of Compliance, that the Agency and Trust division of Citibank, N.A. (or Company) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of
the Securities and Exchange Commissions Regulation AB for publicly-issued (i.e., transaction-level reporting initially required under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) and certain privately issued (i.e., for which
transaction-level reporting is required pursuant to contractual obligation) automobile loan or lease-backed securities, equipment loan-backed securities and student loan-backed securities issued on or after January 1, 2006 for which the Company
provides trustee and paying agent services (the Platform), except for servicing criteria 1122(d)(1)(i)-1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(2)(i), 1122(d)(2)(iii), 1122(d)(2)(vi)-1122(d)(2)(vii), 1122(d)(3)(i) and 1122(d)(4)(i)-1122(d)(4)(xv), which
the Company has determined are not applicable to the activities it performs with respect to the Platform, as of and for the twelve months ended December 31, 2011. Management is responsible for the Companys compliance with the servicing
criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on managements assertion about the Companys compliance based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the
Companys compliance with the servicing criteria specified above and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing selected asset-backed transactions and securities that
comprise the Platform, testing selected servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selected activities in compliance with the servicing criteria.
Furthermore, our procedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report. Our procedures were not designed to determine whether errors may have occurred either
prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report for the selected transactions or any other transactions. We believe that our
examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Companys compliance with the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, managements assessment that the Company complied with the aforementioned servicing criteria as of and for the twelve months ended December 31, 2011 is fairly stated, in all
material respects.



|                                                 |  | 
|------------------------------------------------ |  | 
|/s/ KPMG LLP Chicago, Illinois February 28, 2012
Exhibit 21  Subsidiaries of Ableauctions.com, Inc.  Unlimited Closeouts Inc. Ojai, California Icollector International, Ltd. Fife, Washington Ableauctions.com (Washington) Inc. Fife, Washington iTrustee.com International, Ltd. Fife, Washington  Our operations in Canada include: 0716590 B.C. Ltd. Coquitlam, British Columbia Jarvis Industries Ltd. Coquitlam, British Columbia Icollector.com Technologies, Ltd. Coquitlam, British Columbia Rapidfusion Technologies Inc. Coquitlam, British Columbia Gruv Development Corporation Coquitlam, British Columbia Axion Investment Corporation Coquitlam, British Columbia 652297 B.C. Ltd Coquitlam, British Columbia
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CASIMIRO RAMIREZ

- RAMIREZ,

Petitioner,

v.

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney

General,

Respondent. No. 19

- 71948

Agency No. A209

- 798

- 701

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted December 14, 2021 * *

Before: WALLACE, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

Casimiro Ramirez

- Ramirez , a native and citizen of Guatemala , petitions for

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal

from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his motion to reopen removal

proceedings conducted in absentia. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

DEC 20 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPE ALS2 19

- 71948

We review for a

buse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen and review de

novo questions of law. Mohammed v. Gonzales , 400 F.3d 785, 791

- 92 (9th Cir.

2005). We deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Ramirez

- Ramirez ’s motion

to reopen for failure to establish exceptional circumstances, where h is asserted

basis for fail ing to attend his hearing is that he misread the hearing date

. See 8

C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(4)(ii ); see also 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(e)(1)

. Thus, Ramirez

Ramirez has not established that the IJ or BIA violated his right to due process by

denying the motion to reopen

. See Lata v. INS , 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir.

2000) (requiring error to prevail on a due process claim).

Ramirez

- Ramirez’s contention that the BIA ignored evidence or otherwise

erred in its analysis fails as unsupported by the record

. See Najmabadi v. Holder

,

597 F.3d 983, 990 (9th Cir. 2010) (the agency adequately considered evidence and

sufficiently announced its decision).

The temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the

mandate.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.