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 quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Varian Semiconductor Equipment Associates, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:



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



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



|                      |  |                        
|--------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Dated: August 7, 2006 |  | /S/ GARY E. DICKERSON  
|                      |  | Gary E. Dickerson      
|                      |  | Chief Executive Officer
# L_2005065EN.01002201.xml

| 11.3.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 65/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.3.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 65/22

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 407/2005

of 10 March 2005

concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the import of sorghum issued in Regulation (EC) No 2275/2004

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003, on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Article 12(1) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | An invitation to tender for the maximum reduction from third countries in the duty on sorghum imported into Spain was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2275/2004 (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

An invitation to tender for the maximum reduction from third countries in the duty on sorghum imported into Spain was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2275/2004 (2).

| (2) | Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1839/95 (3), allows the Commission to decide, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 25 of Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 and on the basis of the tenders notified to make no award. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1839/95 (3), allows the Commission to decide, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 25 of Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 and on the basis of the tenders notified to make no award.

| (3) | On the basis of the criteria laid down in Articles 6 and 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1839/95 a maximum reduction in the duty should not be fixed. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

On the basis of the criteria laid down in Articles 6 and 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1839/95 a maximum reduction in the duty should not be fixed.

| (4) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

No action shall be taken on the tenders notified from 4 to 10 March 2005 in response to the invitation to tender for the reduction in the duty on imported sorghum issued in Regulation (EC) No 2275/2004.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 11 March 2005.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 10 March 2005.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 396, 31.12.2004, p. 32.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 177, 28.7.1995, p. 4. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 777/2004 (OJ L 123, 27.4.2004, p. 50).

3

---
**Exhibit      8.1**

**Subsidiaries**

| NAME                                                   | COUNTRY                OF INCORPORATION |
|--------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|
| Lasermedia                UK Ltd                       | England                                 |
| Lasermedia                International Ltd.           | England                                 |
| Futuremedia                Interactive Ltd.            | England                                 |
| Futuremedia                America Inc.                | United                States            |
| Easycando.com                Ltd.                      | England                                 |
| Futuremedia                (BVI) Ltd                   | British                Virgin Islands   |
| C2W                Ltd.                                | England                                 |
| Activna                Objects Ltd.                    | England                                 |
| Temp                Ltd                                | England                                 |
| Futuremedia                Sverige AB                  | Sweden                                  |
| Lexon                Inc                               | British                Virgin Islands   |
| Betternote                Limited                      | England                                 |
| Button                Communications Holdings Limited  | England                                 |
| Meteor                Video Services Limited           | England                                 |
| Button                One to One (London) Limited      | England                                 |
| Button                Publishing Limited               | England                                 |
| The                Button Design Company Limited       | England                                 |
| Button                I.T. Limited                     | England                                 |
| The                Button Communications Group Limited | England                                 |

----
No. 99-9855.

#### Riley *v.*United States.

C. A. 11th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3859 

To ensure that homicides can be prosecuted under Federal law without 

regard to the time elapsed between the act or omission that caused 

the death of the victim and the death itself. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 29, 2024 

Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself and Mr. OSSOFF) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed 

A BILL 

To ensure that homicides can be prosecuted under Federal 

law without regard to the time elapsed between the act 

or omission that caused the death of the victim and 

the death itself. 

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 ‘‘Justice for Murder 

5 Victims Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 3859 CPS

1 SEC. 2. HOMICIDE OFFENSES. 

2 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 51 of title 18, United 

3 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol4 lowing: 

5 ‘‘§ 1123. No maximum time period between act or 

6 omission and death of victim 

7 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—A prosecution may be instituted 

8 for any homicide offense under this title without regard 

9 to the time that elapsed between— 

10 ‘‘(1) the act or omission that caused the death 

11 of the victim; and 

12 ‘‘(2) the death of the victim. 

13 ‘‘(b) RELATION TO STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS.— 

14 Nothing in subsection (a) shall be construed to supersede 

15 the limitations period under section 3282(a), to the extent 

16 applicable. 

17 ‘‘(c) MAXIMUM TIME PERIOD APPLICABLE IF DEATH

18 PENALTY IMPOSED.—A sentence of death may not be im19 posed for a homicide offense under this title unless the 

20 Government proves beyond a reasonable doubt that not 

21 more than 1 year and 1 day elapsed between— 

22 ‘‘(1) the act or omission that caused the death 

23 of the victim; and 

24 ‘‘(2) the death of the victim.’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•S 3859 CPS

1 (b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—The table of sections for 

2 chapter 51 of title 18, United States Code, is amended 

3 by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘1123. No maximum time period between act or omission and death of victim.’’. 

4 (c) APPLICABILITY.—Section 1123(a) of title 18, 

5 United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall 

6 apply with respect to an act or omission described in that 

7 section that occurs after the date of enactment of this Act. 

8 (d) MAXIMUM PENALTY FOR FIRST-DEGREE MUR9 DER BASED ON TIME PERIOD BETWEEN ACT OR OMIS10 SION AND DEATH OF VICTIM.—Section 1111(b) of title 

11 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after 

12 ‘‘imprisonment for life’’ the following: ‘‘, unless the death 

13 of the victim occurred more than 1 year and 1 day after 

14 the act or omission that caused the death of the victim, 

15 in which case the punishment shall be imprisonment for 

16 any term of years or for life’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
EXHIBIT 23.1














Stan J.H. Lee, CPA
 2160 North Central Rd Suite 209 tFort Lee tNJ 07024
 P.O. Box 436402t San Diegot CA 92143-9402
 619-623-7799 tFax 619-564-3408 tstan2u@gmail.com





To Whom It May Concerns:





The firm of Stan J.H. Lee, Certified Public Accountants,  consents to the inclusion of our report of May 19,  2011, on the audited financial statements of  Quantum Assets, Inc.  as of December  31, 2010 and for the fiscal year then ended in any filings that are necessary now or in the near future with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.


Very truly yours,















Stan J.H. Lee, CPA
 May 19, 2011
 Fort Lee, NJ 07024



















Registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board Registered with Canadian Public Accountability Board
 Member of New Jersey Society of Certified Public Accountants
EXHIBIT 11

                                ACTEL CORPORATION

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

                 Statement Re Computation of Per Share Earnings
                    (in thousands, except per share amounts)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                    Year Ended December 31,
                                                                            ----------------------------------------
                                                                                1996          1995          1994
                                                                            ------------  ------------  ------------
<S>                                                                         <C>           <C>           <C>
Primary:

Average common shares outstanding........................................         17,826        17,367        16,995

Net effect of dilutive stock options, warrants, and convertible
   preferred stock - based on the treasury stock method
   using average market price............................................          3,659            --           584
                                                                            ------------  ------------  ------------
Shares used in computing net income (loss) per share.....................         21,485        17,367        17,579
                                                                            ============  ============  ============
Net income (loss)........................................................   $     14,938  $     (1,132) $      7,867
                                                                            ============  ============  ============
Net income (loss) per share..............................................   $       0.70  $     (0.07)  $       0.45
                                                                            ============  ============  ============

Fully diluted:

Average common shares outstanding........................................         17,826        17,367        16,995

Net effect of dilutive stock options, warrants, and convertible
   preferred stock - based on the treasury stock method..................          4,057            --           584
                                                                            ------------  ------------  ------------
Shares used in computing net income (loss) per share.....................         21,883        17,367        17,579
                                                                            ============  ============  ============
Net income (loss)........................................................   $     14,938  $     (1,132) $      7,867
                                                                            ============  ============  ============
Net income (loss) per share..............................................   $       0.68  $     (0.07)  $       0.45
                                                                            ============  ============  ============
</TABLE>
# L_2005121EN.01008001.xml

| 13.5.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 121/80 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.5.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 121/80

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 724/2005

of 12 May 2005

fixing the maximum export refund for white sugar to certain third countries for the 25th partial invitation to tender issued within the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1327/2004

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 of 19 June 2001 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector (1) and in particular the second indent of Article 27(5) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 1327/2004 of 19 July 2004 on a standing invitation to tender to determine levies and/or refunds on exports of white sugar (2), for the 2004/2005 marketing year, requires partial invitations to tender to be issued for the export of this sugar to certain third countries. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1327/2004 of 19 July 2004 on a standing invitation to tender to determine levies and/or refunds on exports of white sugar (2), for the 2004/2005 marketing year, requires partial invitations to tender to be issued for the export of this sugar to certain third countries.

| (2) | Pursuant to Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1327/2004 a maximum export refund shall be fixed, as the case may be, account being taken in particular of the state and foreseeable development of the Community and world markets in sugar, for the partial invitation to tender in question. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Pursuant to Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1327/2004 a maximum export refund shall be fixed, as the case may be, account being taken in particular of the state and foreseeable development of the Community and world markets in sugar, for the partial invitation to tender in question.

| (3) | The Management Committee for Sugar has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its chairman, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The Management Committee for Sugar has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its chairman,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the 25th partial invitation to tender for white sugar issued pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1327/2004 the maximum amount of the export refund shall be 40,811 EUR/100 kg.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 13 May 2005.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 12 May 2005.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 178, 30.6.2001, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 39/2004 (OJ L 6, 10.1.2004, p. 16).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 246, 20.7.2004, p. 23. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1685/2004 (OJ L 303, 30.9.2004, p. 21).

2

---
Appendix 2: Proposed Choice Experiment Design

Description of variables:

x1 = North Full Body Contact: 2 levels. Current Condition is level 1, or safe wading only

x2 = South Full Body Contact: 2 levels. Current Condition is level 1, or safe wading only

x3 = North Flow & Forest: 3 levels. Current Condition is level 3, Expected Future is level 1

x4 = South Flow & Forest: 3 levels. Current Condition is level 3, Expected Future is level 1

x5 = Cost to household per year, 6 levels. Cost options range from zero (Expected Future and 

level 1), $10, $20, $30, $40, and $60 (level 6)

Nine survey blocks are proposed, of four choice questions (sets) each. The third alternative is 

always the Expected Future, no cost alternative.

Block Set Alt x1 x2 x3 x4 x5

1 1 1 2 2 3 3 6

2 1 1 1 3 4

3 1 1 1 1 1

1 2 1 2 2 2 2 4

2 1 2 1 1 2

3 1 1 1 1 1

1 3 1 1 2 1 3 4

2 2 2 2 1 4

3 1 1 1 1 1

1 4 1 1 1 3 1 3

2 2 2 3 3 6

3 1 1 1 1 1

2 1 1 1 2 3 3 5

2 2 2 1 1 2

3 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 1 1 2 2 2 3

2 1 2 3 3 5

3 1 1 1 1 1

2 3 1 2 1 3 1 4

2 2 1 1 3 3
Block Set Alt x1 x2 x3 x4 x5

3 1 1 1 1 1

2 4 1 1 2 3 2 2

2 2 1 3 2 2

3 1 1 1 1 1

3 1 1 2 2 1 1 1

2 1 2 2 2 3

3 1 1 1 1 1

3 2 1 1 2 3 2 2

2 2 1 3 2 2

3 1 1 1 1 1

3 3 1 2 1 2 3 2

2 2 2 1 1 2

3 1 1 1 1 1

3 4 1 1 2 3 2 2

2 2 1 2 3 2

3 1 1 1 1 1

4 1 1 2 2 3 3 5

2 2 2 2 2 4

3 1 1 1 1 1

4 2 1 2 2 2 2 3

2 1 1 3 2 2

3 1 1 1 1 1

4 3 1 1 2 1 1 2

2 2 2 1 3 3

3 1 1 1 1 1

4 4 1 1 1 1 3 4

2 2 2 3 3 6

3 1 1 1 1 1

5 1 1 1 1 2 3 1
Block Set Alt x1 x2 x3 x4 x5

2 1 1 3 2 2

3 1 1 1 1 1

5 2 1 2 2 1 3 3

2 2 1 3 1 4

3 1 1 1 1 1

5 3 1 2 2 3 3 6

2 2 2 2 1 5

3 1 1 1 1 1

5 4 1 1 2 3 2 2

2 1 1 2 3 2

3 1 1 1 1 1

6 1 1 1 2 2 2 4

2 1 2 1 1 2

3 1 1 1 1 1

6 2 1 2 1 2 1 5

2 2 2 3 3 6

3 1 1 1 1 1

6 3 1 2 1 1 3 3

2 2 2 2 2 4

3 1 1 1 1 1

6 4 1 2 2 3 3 5

2 1 1 3 1 3

3 1 1 1 1 1

7 1 1 2 1 1 3 3

2 1 2 1 1 2

3 1 1 1 1 1

7 2 1 1 2 2 2 3

2 2 1 1 3 3

3 1 1 1 1 1
Block Set Alt x1 x2 x3 x4 x5

7 3 1 2 1 3 1 4

2 2 2 2 2 3

3 1 1 1 1 1

7 4 1 1 2 3 3 5

2 2 1 3 1 4

3 1 1 1 1 1

8 1 1 2 2 3 2 2

2 1 1 2 3 2

3 1 1 1 1 1

8 2 1 1 1 2 3 2

2 1 1 3 2 2

3 1 1 1 1 1

8 3 1 1 1 3 1 3

2 2 2 1 1 2

3 1 1 1 1 1

8 4 1 1 2 1 3 4

2 2 2 3 3 6

3 1 1 1 1 1

9 1 1 2 2 1 3 3

2 1 2 1 1 2

3 1 1 1 1 1

9 2 1 2 2 1 1 2

2 2 1 2 3 2

3 1 1 1 1 1

9 3 1 1 1 3 2 2

2 2 2 2 2 3

3 1 1 1 1 1

9 4 1 1 2 2 2 4

2 1 1 3 1 3
Block Set Alt x1 x2 x3 x4 x5

3 1 1 1 1 1
----

| (1) | the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of the Company for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010 (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 material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |   |                                                           |   |
|--------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |   | /s/ William Lieberman                                          |   |
|   |   | Name: William Lieberman                                        |   |
|   |   | Title: Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer |   |
MEMORANDUM

DATE: August 31, 2011

SUBJECT: Summary of August 23 Meeting with Stak e holders

FROM: Bruce Moore, EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/FIG

TO: Air and Radiation Docket

INTRODUCTION

On August 23, 2011 , the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) conducted a

conference call with various stakeholders . The purpose of this call was to provide an overview

of the proposed oil and natural gas sector rules. The list of stakeholder s participating in the call

and a transcript of the discussion are included as separate attachments under this docket e ntry

.

LOCATION AND DATE

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

Research Triangle Park, NC

PARTICIPANTS

The fo llowing representatives from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

participated in the call in addition to the stakeholders shown on the Conference Participant

Report :

Peter Tsirigotis

, EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/IO

Bruce Moore

, EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/FIG

David Cozzie , EPA/OAQPS/SPPD/FIG

Alison Davis, EPA/OAQPS/ PACS

Scott Fraser, EPA/O A

/ OPA
#### Hank Leonard WILLIAMS, a minor by his mother, Betty Williams v. SOUTHEASTERN HATCHERIES OF MISSISSIPPI, INC., Morton Broiler Farms, Inc. and Macie H. Myers.

No. 50375.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

May 31, 1978.

Rehearing Denied July 26, 1978.

Barnett, Montgomery, McClintock & Cunningham, Ross R. Barnett, E. H. Cunningham, Jr., G. William Palmer, Jackson, Thomas D. Lee, Dannye Hunter, William C. Thompson, Forest, for appellant.

O. B. Triplett, Jr., Forest, Pat Donald, Morton, Daniel, Coker, Horton, Bell & Dukes, John M. Roach, B. Stevens Hazard, Jackson, for appellee.

*674Before SMITH, P. J., and WALKER and GOFER, JJ.

AFFIRMED.
*

 This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of

law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the

citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under

the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

** After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined

unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this

appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case therefore is ordered

submitted without oral argument.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

Filed 9/27/96

TENTH CIRCUIT

 

GARRY L. SNYDER and RITA L. SNYDER, )

Sui Juris, a “State” in Fact, a People for the )

Kansas state, )

)

Plaintiffs-Appellants, )

)

vs. ) 96-3167

) (96-1008-WEB)

DISTRICT COURT OF STAFFORD ) (D. Kan.)

COUNTY, STATE OF KANSAS, )

a Political Subdivision of the United States, )

i.e., The Municipal corporation of the District )

of Columbia, and All Agents, )

JEFF L. MCVEY, HANNELORE KITTS, )

TIMARIE WALTERS, KYANN BUCK, )

JEFF PARR, and CARLA J. STOVALL, )

individuals, )

)

Defendants-Appellees. )

 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

 

Before TACHA, BALDOCK, and BRISCOE, Circuit Judges.**

 
1 Defendant Jeff L. McVey’s motion to dismiss the appeal is denied as moot.

2

Plaintiffs Garry L. Snyder and Rita L. Snyder appeal from the district court’s order

dismissing their complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We exercise

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We have read the parties’ briefs and pleadings, and

reviewed the entire record before us. We affirm substantially for the reasons ably set

forth in the district court’s order dismissing the complaint for lack of subject matter

jurisdiction.1

AFFIRMED.

Entered for the Court

Per Curiam