alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                   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

     I, Jeffrey A. Leddy, Chief Executive Officer and President of SkyTerra
Communications, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to my knowledge:

     (1) The Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended
         December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
         Commission on the date hereof (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/ JEFFREY A. LEDDY
                                ----------------------------------
                                Name: Jeffrey A. Leddy
                                Title: Chief Executive Officer and President
                                       (Principal Executive Officer and
                                        Principal Financial Officer)
                                Date: November 10, 2005


     This certification accompanies the Report 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 Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

     A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or
other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company
and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

October 27, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

136871 Michael F. Cavanag h Elizabeth A. Weave r Marilyn Kell y Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Stephen J. Markman, Plaintiff-Appellee, J ustices

v SC: 136871 COA: 285018 Jackson CC: 06-003599-FH JOHN WILLIAM RODGERS, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appe al the May 27, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

K ELLY
, J., would grant leave to appeal for th e reasons set forth in her dissenting statement in People v Conway , 474 Mich 1140 (2006).

p1020 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.

October 27, 2008

Clerk
From: Richard Parker [mailto:richardparkerdc@gmail.com] 

Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2011 6:09 PM 

To: Andrew Delaski; Art Rosenfeld; Bob Smith; Brian Coffey; Caitlin Johnson; Carlos Siqueiros; Caskey, 

John; Chad Kennedy; Chris Bolduc; Chris Brown; Creevy, Jim; Dan Cohen; Daniel Young; Eduardo 

Robles; Edwards, Brenda; Eric Peterson; Freeman, Jeremiah; Gary Fernstrom; Greg Rosenquist; Jennifer 

Tiedeman; Jerry Schoen; Jim Raba; Joanna Mauer; John Cymbalsky; Katie Coughlin; Matthew Nardotti; 

Maxine Savitz; Meg Waltner; Michael Rivest; Millure, Dave; Phil Harter; Polinski, Raymond; Richard W. 

Parker; Rob Greeson; Robert Berman; Robert van Buskirk; Robin Roy; Ryan, Paul; Scott Beck; Steve 

Nadel; Steve Rosenstock; Ted Johnstone; Thomas Patzner; Thomas Petrosino; Tim Ballo; Vijay 

Tendulkar; Wes Patterson; Zhimei Luo 

Subject: LV Transformer Call; 

Dear Colleagues, 

Attached hot off the press are the updated and revised LCC/PBB and NIA results for low voltage 

transformers, DL 6-8, with engineering scatterplots included. Please note that a new TSL (TSL 

7) has been added to reflect the NEMA premium EL. You will see that the TSL numbering 

system is not listed in order of increasing stringency. 

See you on the call at 2:00 pm on Monday, Nov. 28. 

All best, 

RIchard Parker 

Facilitator
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Michael FRANGIA and Robert J. Coyle.

No. 53446.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 17, 1973.

ORDER

The writ of certiorari which issued out of this Court in the above matter is recalled.
U.S. Department 

of Transportation 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

FEB fl 2014 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Operations, M-30 

West Building Ground Floor 

Room W12-140 

1200 New Jersey A venue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

v:, __ f :r <-" 

i, .,__ ! ~, 

Subject: Request for Extension ofExemption No. 5118, Regulatory Docket# FAA-2001-9128 

Dear Sirs: 

FAA Flight Inspection Services, Operating Certificate # RU3A 796U, requests that it be granted 

an extension of exemption No. 5118, as amended. Exemption from 91.119 (b) and (c), 91.159, 

91.175 (a) and (b), 91.179, 91.515 (a) (1) and (a) (2) oftitle 14 CFR that permits FAA Flight 

_Inspection aircraft to deviate from specific flight rules required by subpart B of part 91 while 

conducting flight checks of air navigation facilities and instrument approach procedures. 

There have been no changes in the conditions and reasons relative to public interest and safety 

that were the basis for granting the original exemption. We believe continued operation under 

the provisions of the exemption would be in the public interest. 

Additionally, we request that the exemption period be granted for a period of at least three years, 

or longer if permitted. 

Thank you for your consideration. 

Sincerely, 

Lmry ~~~ G. H~ilton 

Director of Operations 

Flight Inspection Operations Group 

Flight Inspection Services
#### Donald R. FAUST v. FLORIDA GAS EXPLORATION COMPANY.

No. 49447.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Sept. 14, 1977.

Dale & Upton, Sebe Dale, Jr., Garland D. Upton, Columbia, for appellant.

Heidelberg, Woodliff & Franks, Kenneth I. Franks, Luther M. Thompson, Jackson, for appellee.

Appeal from Chancery Court, Jefferson Davis County; J. W. Walker, Chancellor.

Before INZER, P. J., ROBERTSON and BOWLING, JJ., and EDWARD C. PRI-SOCK, Commissioner.

AFFIRMED.
259 La. 893

#### Thomas GARNIER et al. v. Nils R. DOUGLAS et al.

No. 51825.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 18, 1971.

In re: Thomas Garnier, Deorice Smith and Rosemary Kendrick applying for writs of certiorari, mandamus and prohibition.

Application denied. It does not appear that the trial judge abused his discretion.
Exhibit
23.1





Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm.








CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





The
Board of Directors


Earth
Search Sciences, Inc.


Lakeside,
Montana





We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form
S-8 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 30, 2003 (File No.
333-106630) of our opinion, relating to the consolidated financial statements
appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Earth Search Sciences, Inc. for
the year ended March 31, 2006.








/s/
Malone & Bailey, PC


Houston,
Texas


www.malone-bailey.com


April
23, 2008
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1216 

To improve and increase the availability of on-job training and apprenticeship 

programs carried out by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, and for 

other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 25, 2013 

Mr. BENNET (for himself and Mr. JOHANNS) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To improve and increase the availability of on-job training 

and apprenticeship programs carried out by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Improving Job Oppor5 tunities for Veterans Act of 2013’’. 

6 SEC. 2. AUTHORITY TO INCREASE AVAILABILITY OF PRI7 VATE SECTOR ON-JOB TRAINING PROGRAMS. 

8 During the four-year period beginning on the date 

9 that is one year after the date of the enactment of this 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1216 IS

1 Act, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall carry out sec2 tion 3677(b)(1)(A) of title 38, United States Code, by sub3 stituting ‘‘75 per centum’’ for ‘‘85 per centum’’. 

4 SEC. 3. ON-JOB TRAINING AT FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS AND 

5 AGENCIES. 

6 Beginning on the date that is one year after the date 

7 of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Veterans 

8 Affairs shall enter into agreements with the heads of other 

9 Federal departments and agencies to operate programs of 

10 training on the job under section 3677 of title 38, United 

11 States Code, to train eligible veterans or persons to per12 form skills necessary for employment by the department 

13 or agency operating the program. 

14 SEC. 4. EXTENSION OF REDUCED PENSION FOR CERTAIN 

15 VETERANS COVERED BY MEDICAID PLANS 

16 FOR SERVICES FURNISHED BY NURSING FA17 CILITIES. 

18 Section 5503(d)(7) of title 38, United States Code, 

19 is amended by striking ‘‘November 30, 2016’’ and insert20 ing ‘‘December 31, 2016’’. 

Æ 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### In the Matter of Patricia Heap, Appellant, v David Heap, Respondent.

[656 NYS2d 994]

Order unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in decision at Herkimer County Family Court, Kirk, J. (Appeal from Order of Herkimer County Family Court, Kirk, J.—Support.) Present—Pine, J. P., Law-ton, Callahan, Doerr and Fallon, JJ.
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



The undersigned hereby certifies, in his capacity as an officer of Diedrich Coffee, Inc. (the Company), for
purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of his knowledge:



| |  |  | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for the period ended March 9, 2005 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.
| | - |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                          |  |  |  |                                                     
|------------------------- |  |  |  | ----------------------------------------------------
|                          |  | 
|Dated: September 27, 2005 |  |  |  | /s/ Martin A. Lynch                                 
|                          |  |  |  | Martin A. Lynch                                     
|                          |  |  |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer



Note: A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Diedrich Coffee, Inc. and will be retained by Diedrich Coffee, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Jasper M. F. TAYLOR, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-1263.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

July 13, 1971.

Cowart & Onctt and Alvin Entin, Miami, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and J. Robert Olian, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.

Before CHARLES CARROLL, HEN-DRY and BARKDULL, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See: Black v. Heininger, Fla.App. 1964, 163 So.2d 3; Loprince v. State, Fla.App.1969, 218 So.2d 212.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

AMY B. SCHWARTZ and JAY F. SCHWARTZ,

Appellants,

v.

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Successor by Merger to BAC HOME LOANS 

SERVICING LP f/k/a COUNTRYWIDE HOME

LOANS SERVICING, LP,1,

Appellee.

No. 4D19-3942

[March 4, 2020]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; Scott R. Kerner, Judge; L.T. Case No. 

502012CA01369XXXXMB.

Bruce Jacobs of Jacobs Legal, PLLC, Miami, for appellants.

No response filed for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We redesignate this proceeding as an appeal from the order denying the 

motion to vacate the final foreclosure judgment in this 2012 case. Fla. R. 

App. P. 9.130(a)(5). The petition for writ of certiorari is treated as the initial 

brief, and the trial court’s order is summarily affirmed. Fla. R. App. P. 

9.315(a).

Appellants defaulted on their home loan in January 2010. The 

foreclosure suit was filed in 2012 and litigated until a final foreclosure 

judgment was entered in October 2017. This Court affirmed the 

foreclosure judgment. See Schwartz v. Bank of Am., N.A., 267 So. 3d 414 

(Fla. 4th DCA 2019).

The motion to vacate now on appeal attempts to relitigate issues 

concerning standing that this Court rejected on direct appeal. The law of 

the case doctrine precludes relitigation of these issues. Fla. Dept. of 

Transp. v. Juliano, 801 So. 2d 101, 105 (Fla. 2001) (“The doctrine of the 

law of the case requires that questions of law actually decided on appeal 
2

must govern the case in the same court and the trial court, through all 

subsequent stages of the proceedings.”).

Appellants’ allegations of fraud were rejected on direct appeal, and the 

trial court did not err in denying post-judgment discovery as this Court 

has already concluded that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in 

concluding that “appellants had not diligently conducted discovery.”

Schwartz, 267 So. 3d at 414.

Summarily affirmed.

MAY, DAMOORGIAN and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCESBUREAU OF THE CENSUS

| Surervisors Distwict No_.<F ‘SHEET NOL
FOURTEENTH CENSUS OF THE UNITED STATES: 1220, SDPULATION enoennnon Oster No 222
schon lE oinay Wind OF WeoresneD race. : Wao oF cy aie
aa TMD WF HE oF ny et Bod Ea eamnnen ‘bf
Ht feze|B3] 0

a
rc Vehassexs 7 Ged
Ni rE Historie census records:
“ =O foeet
s] Hole Visit,

tt

yw. archi

‘maintained and released by the National Archives and

Records Administration, no

ives. gov for more information about publicly available records lke the one

i

tthe U.S, Census Bureau,

shown here.

ef

2

ae

ama

7

Ct fatleel\uicy

t aa eke
ca

estesenseeeasessssesassibededeesessereeress
#### STATE of Florida ex rel. Elaine L. DeLONES, formerly known as Elaine L. Mauro, Relator v. Honorable James H. EARNEST, as Judge of the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in and for Dade County, Florida, General Jurisdiction Division, Respondent.

No. 73-886.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

July 17, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Prohibition dismissed.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 23-0426 JESUS VILLANUEVA,

Petitioner and Appellant, v. ORDER STATE OF MONTANA,

Respondent and Appellee. Appellanthas filed an "early" motion for a 90-day extension oftimeto filehisreply brief. He explains that due to his incarceration the 14-day time limit to file his reply brief will infringe on his due process rights. The Court notes that Appellee's brief has not yet been filed. Thus, pursuant to M. R.App. P. 12(3), Appellant's motion is premature. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion for extension is DENIED. Appellant shall have 90 days from the date Appellee's briefis filed to file his reply brief. No further extensions will be granted. al
-Cra ?-cfin 1 1 .2—n-1, For the Court,
ChiefJustice 03/01/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0426
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1289 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1289

    To retain the existing vehicle weight limitations for vehicles 
traveling along any segment of U.S. Highway 78 within Mississippi after 
    such segment is incorporated into the Interstate Highway System.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 11, 2013

Mr. Cochran (for himself and Mr. Wicker) introduced the following bill; 
 which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 
                              Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To retain the existing vehicle weight limitations for vehicles 
traveling along any segment of U.S. Highway 78 within Mississippi after 
    such segment is incorporated into the Interstate Highway System.

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

SECTION 1. RETENTION OF VEHICLE WEIGHT LIMITATIONS ON U.S. HIGHWAY 78.

    Section 127(a) of title 23, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) by redesignating paragraph (12) as paragraph (13); and
            (2) by inserting after paragraph (11) the following:
            ``(12) With respect to all segments of the Interstate 
        Highway System within Mississippi that were previously 
        designated as U.S. Highway 78, the single axle weight, tandem 
        axle weight, gross vehicle weight, and bridge formula limits 
        set forth in paragraph (2) shall not apply to a vehicle using 
        any such segment if the vehicle could have legally operated on 
        such segment before it was designated as part of the Interstate 
        Highway System.''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 31.2

Section 302 Certification

I, Sean M. McCarthy, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Diedrich Coffee, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this 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 report;

4. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the 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 report is being prepared;

b. 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 report based on such evaluation; and

c. Disclosed in this 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

5. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of
internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

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; and

b. 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.



|                      |  |  |  |                        
|--------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|Dated: April 23, 2007 |  |  |  | /s/ Sean M. McCarthy   
|                      |  |  |  | Sean M. McCarthy       
|                      |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer
#### William Zeno SWAIN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. J-222.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. First District.

March 14, 1968.

Robert P. Miller, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and Wallace E. Allbritton, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.

PER CURIAM.

The briefs and the record on appeal having been read and given full consideration, and appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the judgment of the lower court hereby appealed is affirmed.

WIGGINTON, C. J., and CARROLL, DONALD K., and RAWLS, JJ., concur.
#### Leo ANDING et ux. v. SOUTHWESTERN INSURANCE COMPANY et al.

No. 62239.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

July 3, 1978.

In re: Leo Anding and Ora Mae Anding applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit. Parish of Vernon. 358 So.2d 690.

Writ denied.
EXHIBIT 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (333-147154 and 333-147153), in the Registration Statements on Form S-4 (No. 333-143243 and 333-157724) and in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-145741,
No. 333-138839, No. 333-96967, No. 333-55082, No. 333-48226, No. 333-31120, No. 333-69381, No. 333-37371, No. 333-37369 and No. 33-58991) of Exar Corporation of our report dated June 12, 2009
relating to the financial statements and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K.



|                                 
|---------------------------------
|/s/    PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
|PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP       
|San Jose, California             
|June 12, 2009