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 of MangoSoft, Inc. and Subsidiary (the
      “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the three months ended March 31, 2007, as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
      I, Dale Vincent, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
      to 18
      U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted by 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.




By:
            /s/
                Dale VincentChief Executive Officer (principal executive and financial officer)May
                15, 2007




This
      certification is made solely for purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, subject
      to
      the knowledge standard contained therein, and not for any other purpose.
#### Bruce E. BARNETT v. STATE.

No. 36234.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 1967.

Writ of error coram nobis denied without opinion. 179 So.2d 259.
#### Easton CHAMPAGNE, Administrator of the Estate of Joseph Bartholomew Champagne v. AMERICAN SOUTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY and Adler V. Ledoux.

No. 54186.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 3, 1973.

In re: American Southern Insurance Company applying for writs of certiorari or review.

Granted. (See Order)

*544The petition of the relator in the above entitled and numbered case having been duly considered,

It is ordered that a Writ of Certiorari issue herein, directing the Honorable Isom J. Guillory, Jr. Judge of the Twenty-Seventh Judicial District, Court for the Parish of St. Landry, to transmit to the Supreme Court of Louisiana, on or before the second day of January, 1974, the record in duplicate, or a certified copy of the record in duplicate, of the proceedings complained of by the relator herein, to the end that the validity of said proceedings may be ascertained.

It is further ordered that the aforesaid Judge of said Court and the respondent through counsel shall show cause, in this court, on the 25th day of March, 1974, at 10 o’clock A.M., why the relief prayed for in the petition of the relator should not be granted.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          69,127
<SECURITIES>                                    61,734
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,347
<ALLOWANCES>                                       779
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               159,706
<PP&E>                                           9,257
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (4,654)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 191,294
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           78,975
<BONDS>                                            400
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            96
<OTHER-SE>                                     111,823
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   191,294
<SALES>                                         24,931
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                24,931
<CGS>                                           17,991
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   17,991
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  9,202
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,129
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,073
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,073
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .64
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .63


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF FIRST AMERICAN CLOCK CO. AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                             270
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   270
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  34,207
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,459
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           908
<OTHER-SE>                                      45,573
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    34,207
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,609
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 181
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (804)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (804)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (804)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.00)
        

</TABLE>
#### Harry BRANCH, Petitioner, v. ALBERTI FOOD CORPORATION et al., Respondents.

No. 42973.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Jan. 10, 1973.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 13, 1973.

Certiorari denied.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, ERVIN, ADKINS and BOYD, JJ, concur.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan



### November 25, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice



### 136924 Michael F. Cavanag h Elizabeth A. Weave r Marilyn Kell y Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. 

### NORMA GRIWATSCH and Stephen J. Markman, 

### DOLORES W. LIPCHIK, J ustices 

### Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v SC: 136924 COA: 275188 Presque Isle PC: 04-007955-ML PAUL NIEDZWIECKI, Defendant-Appellee.

________________ _________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 24, 2008 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.

p1117 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

November 25, 2008

Clerk
<PAGE>
                                                                      Exhibit 12

                    GE GLOBAL INSURANCE HOLDING CORPORATION
                                AND SUBSIDIARIES

                Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges

                        Nine months ended September 30, 2000

                                  (Unauditied)


(In millions)


Earnings:
   Earnings before income taxes                                    $438
   Fixed charges:
     Minority interest in net earnings of
         consolidated subsidiaries (1)                               66
     Interest expense (2)                                           100
                                                                   ----
                                                                   $604
                                                                   ====

Fixed charges:
   Minority interest in net earnings of
      consolidated subsidiaries (3)                                $ 67
   Interest expense (2)                                             100
                                                                   ====
                                                                   $167
                                                                   ====

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                                 3.62
                                                                   ====


(1)  Minority  interest in net earnings of  consolidated  subsidiaries  includes
     earnings from purchased affiliates and dividends on subsidiary's  preferred
     stock.

(2)  Interest  expense  includes an amount for one-third of the rental  expense,
     which the Company  believes is a reasonable  approximation  of the interest
     factor for such rentals.

(3)  The  fixed  charges  amount  for  minority  interest  in  net  earnings  of
     consolidated  subsidiaries  represents  the pre-tax  earnings  amount which
     would be required to cover such fixed charges as calculated below:

                     Earnings From Purchased Affiliates or
               Subsidiary's Preferred Stock Dividend Requirement
               -------------------------------------------------
                             100% - Income Tax Rate

     The  income  tax rate is based on the  relationship  of the  provision  for
     income taxes to earnings before income taxes for the respective period.


                                        8
November 3, 2011

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

IN THE INTEREST OF E.M.W., JR., M.J.W., AND I.W., CHILDREN

NO. 14-10-00964-CV

____________________

This cause, an appeal from the judgment in favor of appellee, Eula Mae West, 

signed , was heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find 

no error in the judgment. We order the judgment of the court below AFFIRMED.

We order appellant, Rotania La’Shea White-Thomas, to pay all costs incurred in 

this appeal. We further order this decision certified below for observance.
#### In the Matter of American Pen Corporation, Appellant, v Tax Commission of the City of New York et al., *250Respondents.

[722 NYS2d 27]

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (George Friedman, J.), entered June 3, 1999, which, in a proceeding to annul respondents’ retroactive assessment of real property taxes with retroactive interest and penalties, granted respondents’ motion to dismiss the petition for failure to state a cause of action, unanimously modified, on the law, to deny the motion insofar as addressed to the assessment of interest and penalties, and to grant the petition to the extent of allowing the assessment of interest and penalties only from the date in 1997 when respondents corrected their tax records, the matter remanded to respondents for revising the assessment in accordance herewith, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Petitioner acquired title to the subject properties in 1988. However, due to an error on the part of the City Register of Deeds, the properties were carried as tax exempt. In 1997, respondents discovered the error and corrected the tax assessment. However, in addition to billing petitioner for the back taxes *(Matter of Eversley & Co. v Finance Adm’r of City of N. Y.,*88 Misc 2d 340, *affd*49 AD2d 733, *affd*40 NY2d 863), respondents included interest and penalties thereon back to the date when petitioner acquired title to the properties. Under the circumstances presented, the back taxes did not become due and payable until respondents’ bill therefor was presented to petitioner, in 1997, and the period for imposing interest and penalties should be calculated from that date (see, NY City Charter § 1520). Significantly, the Statement of Operational Procedure of the Department of Finance is consistent with this conclusion, and respondents have failed to offer any explanation as to why the Operational Procedure should not be followed here. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Ellerin, Saxe and Friedman, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           1,110
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           2,652
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     51,846
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                         73,053
<ALLOWANCE>                                        308
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 134,108
<DEPOSITS>                                      85,181
<SHORT-TERM>                                    20,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              1,766
<LONG-TERM>                                     15,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            11
<OTHER-SE>                                      12,150
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  12,161
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  1,430
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  844
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    62
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 2,336
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                 944
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,422
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                              914
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        1
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   7
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                    681
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    418
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         418
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       269
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .39
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .38
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    6.77
<LOANS-NON>                                        120
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                    453
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   311
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        5
<RECOVERIES>                                         1
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  308
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               260
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                             48


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 137 (Tuesday, July 17, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 33287]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-15258]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 10464]


Notice of Renewal of the Charter of the International 
Telecommunication Advisory Committee (ITAC)

    This notice announces the renewal of the Charter for the 
International Telecommunication Advisory Committees (ITAC). In 
accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act 
(Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C. Appendix) and the general authority of the 
Secretary of State and the Department of State set forth in Title 22 of 
the United States code, in particular Sections 2656 and 2707, the 
charter of the International Telecommunication Advisory Committee has 
been renewed for another two years. The ITAC consists of members of the 
telecommunications industry, ranging from network operators and service 
providers to equipment vendors, members of academia, members of civil 
society, and officials of interested government agencies. The ITAC 
provides views and advice to the Department of State on positions on 
international telecommunications and information policy matters. This 
advice has been a major factor in ensuring that the United States was 
well prepared to participate effectively in the international 
telecommunications and information policy arena, including the 
International Telecommunication Union (ITU), the Organization of 
American States Inter-American Telecommunication Commission (CITEL), 
the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the 
Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Forum Telecommunications and 
Information Working Group, and other international bodies addressing 
communication and information policy issues.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Please contact Franz Zichy at 202-647-
5778, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0c76656f64756a664c7f786d7869226b637a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="7903101a11001f13390a0d180d1c571e160f">[email protected]</span></a>.

Stephan A. Lang,
Acting Director, Multilateral Affairs, Cyber and International 
Communications and Information Policy, U.S. Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2018-15258 Filed 7-16-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4710-07-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Personal communication with Andy McNeer, May 2009.

Aquapoint Sales Representative

Aquapoint manufactures the Bioclere onsite wastewater treatment s ys tem. The Bioclere s ys tem uses a fixed film biological trickling filter and clarifier to remove organics and nutrients from domestic wastewater. Installing the s ys tem to a new or existing conventional septic sy stem on a single family

home will cost about $6,500. This cost doesn’t include the cost for the septic tank and drain field that are alread y present w ith the existing sy stem.
# \-e-ie\Y 

# Vac<f^- Vi^v^'oo ? Adams , Kevi n (OST)



# . •r.viTMDrior — >VvS-^ORTATIC N .-::: T

## OPERATION S C2^Aq : L

i1 From : Sent : To : Cc : Subject : Attachments : Adams , Kevi n (OST ) Tuesday , Decembe r20 , 2011 8:3 6 A M 'Thoma s Adams ' Devany , Denni s (OST ) RE : Brainerd , M N Airport Order2009-8-10.pdf

Dea r Mayo r Adams ^ Thanks, fo r you r email
. I wil l plac e your ' comment s i nBrainerd' s EA S Docket , #2011-0135 , whic hyo u ca nacces s o nRegulations.gov
. I f yo u wish , I ca nassis t yo u i naccessin g tha t docke t --m ydirec t lin e i s below . Regardin g th e issu e o f capacit yfo r Brainerd , Orde r 2011-11-3 0 selecte d Grea t Lake s t o provid e 24 nonsto p round trip s pe r wee k t o Brainer d wit h19-sea t aircraft
. I hav e attache d abov e a recen t orde r wher e th e sam e issue s yo u hav e raise d wer e discusse d - - Orde r 2009-8-10 . A s discusse d i ntha t order , th e maximumcapacit yw e ca nguarante e an ycommunit yunde r th e EA S programi s 6 7 seat s pe r day . Grea t Lake s propose s t o provid e 7 6 seats , an d w e hav e selecte d tha t option
. W e onl yselecte d fou r round trip s pe r day , 7 6 seat s bein g mor e tha n67 , becaus e w e canno t selec t a portio no f anaircraft
. Regardin g th e issu e o f baggag e flo wthrough , I not e tha t Delt a Airline s ha s indicate d i t wil l b e workin g ver yclosel ywit hGrea t Lake s fo r a seamles s servic e transitio no ntha t and othe r matters . Finally , I not e tha t Brainer d Airpor t i s 114 mile s fro mth e l^inneapoli s airport , th e shortes t distanc e o f an

yo f th e l^innesota/Iow a communitie s wher e Delt a notice
. Whil e Grea t Lake s 19

- seater s d o no t hav e manyo f th e importan t passenge r feature s afforde d b ySaa b34 0 o r regiona l jets , i t i s a commo nrul e i nth e airlin e industrytha t th e close r anairpor t t o a hub , th e mor e importan t i s th e frequenc yo f ai r servic e provided
. Th e simpl e reaso ni s tha t th e bigges t competito r i s th e highwa yand th e privat e automobile
. Wit honl ytw o round trip s pe r dayprovide d wit ha 50-sea t regiona l je t o r 34-sea t Saa b340 , th e mos t w e coul d subsidize , manyprospectiv e passenger s fro mBrainer d and surroundin g communitie s woul d choos e t o drive
. A s such , I a

mhopefu l tha t Grea t Lakes ' servic e wil l bette r mee t th e need s o f th e communit y tha nth e les s frequen t servic e i t i s replacing , an d hopefull yreduc e th e leve l o f subsid y require d t o suppor t ai r servic e a t Brainer d whe nth e curren t rat e expire s i ntw o year s and w e nee d t o agai nreques t proposals . Bes t Regards , Kevi nAdam s 202-366-104 7

Origina l Messag e From : Thoma s Adam s rmailtorthadamsiSuslink.net l Sent : Monday , Decembe r 19 , 201 1 11:4 5 PM To : Adams , Kevi n(OST ) Subject : Brainerd , M NAirpor t Dea r Mr . Adams ,