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




CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report of HEALTHMED SERVICES LTD. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Natalie Bannister – Chief Executive Officer and principal executive officer, of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





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





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





Date:  August 23, 2010








By:/s/ Natalie Bannister


Natalie Bannister


Chief Executive Officer and principal executive officer
Case: 2:10-cv-01101-MHW-NMK Doc #: 47 Filed: 04/20/12 Page: 1 of 1  PAGEID #: <pageID>

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2015-05-08T19:20:54-0400
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO.: 2:11-cr-264

JUDGE SMITH

MAGISTRATE JUDGE KEMP

TERREL L. PATTERSON, 

Defendant.

ORDER

On November 30, 2011, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), recommending that the Court accept Defendant Patterson’s guilty plea to

Count One of the Information charging him with knowingly possessing a firearm after previously

having been convicted of a felony. Defendant, represented by counsel, waived his right to appear on

the matter before a District Judge. The Magistrate Judge conducted the colloquy required by Rule

11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Defendant’s plea was knowing, voluntary, free from

coercion, and had a basis in fact. 

Defendant was specifically informed of his right to contest the Report and Recommendation

by filing any objections within 14 days of the issuance of the Report and Recommendation pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(B) and Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Defendant did

not file any objections. 

Case: 2:11-cr-00264-GCS Doc #: 24 Filed: 01/10/12 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation and ACCEPTS

Defendant’s plea of guilty to Count One of the Information. Defendant is hereby adjudged guilty of

being a felon in possession of a firearm.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 /s/ George C. Smith 

GEORGE C. SMITH, JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

-2-

Case: 2:11-cr-00264-GCS Doc #: 24 Filed: 01/10/12 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

RICHARD A. CHATMAN, 

Petitioner, 

CASE NO.: 2:10-CV-1091

v. JUDGE GEORGE C. SMITH

Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz

WARDEN, ROSS CORRECTIONAL

INSTITUTION, 

Respondent. 

OPINION AND ORDER

On March 26, 2013, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation

recommending that the instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus be dismissed. Although the 

parties were advised of the right to object to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and 

Recommendation, and of the consequences of failing to do so, no objections have been filed. 

The Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED and AFFIRMED. This action is hereby 

DISMISSED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 \s\George C. Smith_________ __ 

GEORGE C. SMITH, JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case: 2:10-cv-01091-GCS-MRM Doc #: 11 Filed: 04/17/13 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: <pageID>
EXHIBIT 32.1

                  CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE 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 Annual Report of Transax International Ltd. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB/A for the period ended December 31, 2005, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Stephen Walters, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify for the purpose of complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act") and Section 1350 of
Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code, that:

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

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


Dated: July 7, 2006                  By: /s/ Stephen Walters
                                         -------------------
                                         Stephen Walters, President and CEO
# C_2007140EN.01003901.xml

| 23.6.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 140/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.6.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 140/39

---

Action brought on 30 April 2007 — Colgate-Palmolive v OHIM — CMS Hasche Sigle (VISIBLE WHITE)

(Case T-136/07)

(2007/C 140/64)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Colgate-Palmolive Co. (New York, United States) (represented by: M. Zintler, H. Harmeling and K.-U. Plath, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: CMS Hasche Sigle (Cologne, Germany)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

| — | The decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal dated 15 February 2007 shall be annulled; |
| --- | --- |

—

The decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal dated 15 February 2007 shall be annulled;

| — | the Court shall confirm the decision of the Cancellation Division and declare that the Community trade mark No 802 793 ‘VISIBLE WHITE’ remains registered; |
| --- | --- |

—

the Court shall confirm the decision of the Cancellation Division and declare that the Community trade mark No 802 793 ‘VISIBLE WHITE’ remains registered;

| — | the applicant receives an award of costs in respect of the request for a declaration of invalidity, a reversal of the award of the costs made in the Board's decision, and an award of costs in respect of this application. |
| --- | --- |

—

the applicant receives an award of costs in respect of the request for a declaration of invalidity, a reversal of the award of the costs made in the Board's decision, and an award of costs in respect of this application.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Registered Community trade mark subject of the application for a declaration of invalidity: The word mark ‘VISIBLE WHITE’ for goods in class 3 — Community trade mark No 802 793

Registered Community trade mark subject of the application for a declaration of invalidity:

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: The applicant

Proprietor of the Community trade mark:

Party requesting the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark: CMS Hasche Sigle

Party requesting the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark:

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Rejection of the request for a declaration of invalidity

Decision of the Cancellation Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulment of the Cancellation Division's decision and declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Council Regulation No 40/94 as the Board of Appeal wrongly considered both the element ‘VISIBLE’ and the element ‘WHITE’ as descriptive in relation to ‘toothpaste’ as well as ‘mouthwash’ and considered the combination as a whole descriptive and devoid of distinctive character.

Pleas in law:

---
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 9072 

To require the Secretary of Homeland Security to provide candidates with 

a justification for candidate protection determinations. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 18, 2024 

Mr. PFLUGER (for himself and Mr. GIMENEZ) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To require the Secretary of Homeland Security to provide 

candidates with a justification for candidate protection 

determinations. 

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 ‘‘Counter Secretary 

5 Negligence In Protecting Election Runners Act’’ or the 

6 ‘‘Counter SNIPER Act’’. 

7 SEC. 2. PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE PROTECTION. 

8 Section 3056 of title 18, United States Code, is 

9 amended by adding at the end the following: 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 9072 IH

1 ‘‘(h)(1) In the case that the Secretary of Homeland 

2 Security determines that any Presidential candidate re3 questing a protective detail or an increase in assigned pro4 tective detail resources is not eligible for such detail or 

5 increased resources for the purpose of this section, the 

6 Secretary shall submit to the candidate and the advisory 

7 committee, within 14 days after such a request is made, 

8 a written notice of the Secretary’s determination, indi9 cating the criteria that such candidates failed to meet for 

10 such purpose. 

11 ‘‘(2) Any Presidential candidate may submit to the 

12 Secretary of Homeland Security a written request to re13 consider the determination described in paragraph (1), 

14 which may include facts to support that the criteria speci15 fied by the Secretary of Homeland Security have been met 

16 for the purpose of this section. 

17 ‘‘(3) Not later than 14 days after a request for recon18 sideration is submitted under paragraph (2), the Secretary 

19 of Homeland Security shall review such request and sub20 mit to the Presidential candidate a written notice of the 

21 Secretary’s final determination on whether the criteria 

22 have been met for the purpose of this section, and provide 

23 a copy of such final determination to the advisory com24 mittee.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-22-00250-CV

Texas Municipal League Intergovernmental Risk Pool

v.

City of Hidalgo

On Appeal from the

464th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. C-3507-21-L

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED. Costs of the appeal are adjudged 

against appellant.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

August 25, 2022
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the quarterly report of DayStar Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the three months ended June 30,2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date therein specified (the “Report”), I, Stephan J. DeLuca, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

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

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

Date: August 3, 2007 

 

This Certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed “filed” by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended, whether made before or after the date of this Report, irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to DayStar Technologies, Inc. and will be retained by DayStar Technologies, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED April 20, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-41297 Conference Calendar

JAMES EARL BREWSTER, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus UPENDRA KATRAGADDA; ET AL., Defendants, UPENDRA KATRAGADDA; DEBRA GREEN; ARUSHA JONES; C. STEPNER; JANIE COCKRELL, Defendants-Appellees.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:02-CV-420

-------------------- Before JONES, SMITH, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * James Earl Brewster, Texas prisoner # 664663, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis (IFP), appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action against Texas Department of Criminal Justice-Institutional Division officials. He argues that the defendants failed to protect him from being attacked by a fellow inmate. Brewster has not shownNo. 04-41297 -2- that the officials ignored his request to be moved, nor has he shown that the officials perceived the alleged threat as posing a substantial risk of serious harm. Accordingly, Brewster has failed to show that the defendants acted with deliberate indifference. See Farmer v. Brennan , 511 U.S. 825, 837 (1994); Velasquez v. Woods , 329 F.3d 420, 421 (5th Cir. 2003). Brewster’s appeal is without arguable merit and is thus frivolous. See Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Accordingly, we DISMISS his appeal as frivolous. 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2. The dismissal by the district court and the dismissal of this appeal as frivolous both count as strikes under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons , 103 F.3d 383, 385-87 (5th Cir. 1996). Brewster is WARNED that if he accumulates three strikes under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), he will not be able to proceed IFP in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
May 28, 2015 

 

Mr. Scott Biddle 

512 Cessna Avenue 

Friday Harbor, WA 98250 

Dear Mr. Scott Biddle: 

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption. It 

explains why we can not process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days. 

Why We Can Not Process Your Request 

We entered your April 22, 2015, exemption request on behalf into the public docket 

(No. FAA-2015-1113), but we are unable to process your request any further. The 

information you sent does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For 

us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following: 

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the 

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief. 

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole. 

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption 

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you 

seek an exemption. 

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request. 

What You Should Do 

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your 

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption. 
2 

If We Do Not Hear From You 

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

Brenda Robeson 

Program Analyst, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division 

Enclosure
# C_2007213EN.01000601.xml

| 12.9.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 213/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.9.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 213/6

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

11 September 2007

(2007/C 213/02)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,3824 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 157,31 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4473 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,68020 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,3200 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,6401 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 89,86 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,8515 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CYP | Cyprus pound | 0,5842 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,630 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 254,58 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7004 |
| MTL | Maltese lira | 0,4293 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,7895 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 3,3163 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 33,637 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,7790 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6715 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4467 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,7610 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,9819 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,1049 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 294,48 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 9,9094 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 10,4001 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3237 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 13 049,86 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,8584 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 65,056 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 35,2250 |
| THB | Thai baht | 44,709 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,3824

JPY

Japanese yen

157,31

DKK

Danish krone

7,4473

GBP

Pound sterling

0,68020

SEK

Swedish krona

9,3200

CHF

Swiss franc

1,6401

ISK

Iceland króna

89,86

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,8515

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CYP

Cyprus pound

0,5842

CZK

Czech koruna

27,630

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

254,58

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7004

MTL

Maltese lira

0,4293

PLN

Polish zloty

3,7895

RON

Romanian leu

3,3163

SKK

Slovak koruna

33,637

TRY

Turkish lira

1,7790

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6715

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4467

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,7610

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,9819

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,1049

KRW

South Korean won

1 294,48

ZAR

South African rand

9,9094

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

10,4001

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3237

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

13 049,86

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,8584

PHP

Philippine peso

65,056

RUB

Russian rouble

35,2250

THB

Thai baht

44,709

---

(1)

1

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a),
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
   2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this Quarterly 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 Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and 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 registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made
known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which
this Quarterly Report is being prepared;b)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal
control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles;c)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant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
Quarterly Report based on such evaluation; andd)
    
    Disclosed in this Quarterly Report any change in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent
fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report)
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrants internal control over financial reporting; and
  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 registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting.
  /s/ Larry A. Frakes

Larry A. FrakesPresident and Chief Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 66 (Friday, April 6, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 17091]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-6463]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Foreign Agricultural Service


Trade Adjustment Assistance for Farmers

AGENCY: Foreign Agricultural Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice.

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

    On March 22, 2007, the Administrator, Foreign Agricultural Service 
(FAS), denied a petition for trade adjustment assistance (TAA) for 
Michigan natural honey, white or lighter, that was filed on February 
16, 2007, by a group of apiarists.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Upon investigation, the Administrator 
determined that prices did not decline by at least 20 percent for the 
most recent marketing year compared to previous 5-year average. During 
the 2005 marketing year, prices were 89.6 percent of the 5-year base 
average. Since producer prices did not decline by at least 20 percent 
during the most recent marketing year, the petition did not meet the 
price decline requirement, a condition required for certifying a 
petition for TAA.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: Jean-Louis Pajot, Coordinator, Trade 
Adjustment Assistance for Farmers, FAS, USDA, (202) 720-2916, e-mail: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#9de9effcf9f8b3fcf9f7e8eee9f0f8f3e9ddfbfceeb3e8eef9fcb3faf2eb"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d9adabb8bdbcf7b8bdb3acaaadb4bcb7ad99bfb8aaf7acaabdb8f7beb6af">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: March 23, 2007.
W. Kirk Miller,
Administrator, Foreign Agricultural Service.
 [FR Doc. E7-6463 Filed 4-5-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-10-P


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