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



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



In connection with this Quarterly Report of Lyons Liquors, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Shefali Vibhakar, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifies to the best of his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                         
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|1. | Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2011, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2011, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Lyons Liquors, Inc.



|                      |                     |                                                                                     
|--------------------- | ------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                      | Lyons Liquors, Inc.
|                      |                    
|Date: August 12, 2011 | By:                 | /s/ Shefali Vibhakar                                                                
|                      |                     | Shefali Vibhakar                                                                    
|                      |                     | Chief Executive Officer,
Chief Financial Officer,
Chief Accounting Officer,
Director
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3928 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3928

To expand the special program for the sharing of Forest Service timber 
 sale receipts to include those counties in which national forests are 
   situated that are affected by decisions related to the California 
                              spotted owl.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 1, 1994

  Mr. Herger introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                        Committee on Agriculture

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To expand the special program for the sharing of Forest Service timber 
 sale receipts to include those counties in which national forests are 
   situated that are affected by decisions related to the California 
                              spotted owl.

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

SECTION 1. SHARING OF FOREST SERVICE TIMBER SALE RECEIPTS.

    Section 13982(a)(2) of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 
1993 (Public Law 103-66; 107 Stat. 681; 16 U.S.C. 500 note) is amended 
by inserting ``California spotted owl or the'' before ``northern 
spotted owl''.

                                 <all>
```
EX-31.1 SECTION 302 CEO CERTIFICATION

Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, T. Rhett Evatt, certify that:

1) I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Oconee Federal Financial Corp.;

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 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 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 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.

Date: February 14,
2011



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ T. Rhett Evatt                   
|T. Rhett Evatt                       
|President and Chief Executive Officer



27
#### The State, ex rel. Wilson, *v.*Court of Common Pleas of Lawrence County.

(No. 30336

Decided October 24, 1945.)

*5
      *Messrs. Pratt & Crowe,*for relatrix.

*Mr. John P. Phillips, Jr.,*for respondent.

By the Court.

Counsel have stipulated and agreed that this court overruled a motion for leave to appeal from the findings and orders of the Court of Common Pleas dismissing the petition of the present relatrix as contestor in an election contest proceeding.

Counsel for relatrix in this mandamus action urge grounds for a writ to compel the Court of Common Pleas to hear the issues on the merits in the former, case in addition to those grounds urged in the proceeding on motion for leave to appeal. With the exception of the contention that the appeal on leave to this court authorized by Section 4785-172, General Code, does not provide an adequate remedy at law and therefore mandamus lies, all the additional grounds now asserted could have been presented in the former proceeding on motion for leave to appeal.

An adequate remedy at law is provided by that section.

The extraordinary writ of mandamus may not be invoked to review or relitigate the remaining grounds now pressed on behalf of the relatrix. *Gannon*v. *Gallagher, Dir.,*145 Ohio St., 170, 60 N. E. (2d), 666.

A proceeding in mandamus or in *procedendo*may not be made the instrumentality for review. *State, ex*
      *6
      *rel. Barner,*v. *Marsh, Clerk,*120 Ohio St., 222, 165 N. E., 843.

*Writ denied.*

Weygandt, C. J., Zimmerman, Bell, Williams, Turner, Matthias and Hart, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.1

 

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)

 

In connection with this Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended December 31, 2021 (the “Report”) of PennantPark Floating Rate Capital, Ltd. (the “Registrant”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Arthur H. Penn, Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that:

 

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

 

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

 

|                    |        |                         |
|--------------------|--------|-------------------------|
| /s/ Arthur H. Penn |
| Name:              |   | Arthur H. Penn          |
| Title:             |   | Chief Executive Officer |
| Date:              |   | February 9, 2022        |

 

 

----
-82 -80 -78 -76 -74

 36

 38

 40

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★ ▲

▲ ▲

▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 1000

18 12 06 00

08/16

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 16 Aug 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.54 N 76.62 W Meters AGL
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                        Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 No. 33-55547, 33-55657 and 333-42019) of Coram Healthcare Corporation
of our report dated March 1, 1999 with respect to the consolidated financial
statements and schedule of Coram Healthcare Corporation included in this Annual
Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1998.

We also consent to the incorporation by reference in Amendment No. 3 to the
Registration Statements (Form S-3 No. 33-59661 and 33-60959) and Amendment No. 1
to the Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-12955) and related Prospectuses
of Coram Healthcare Corporation for the registration of 3,526,325, 2,686,656 and
184,444 shares, respectively, of its common stock, of our report dated March 1,
1999, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of
Coram Healthcare Corporation included in the above-referenced Form 10-K.

                                       ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Denver, Colorado
March 1, 1999
Ordered into Restriction of Movement (ROM)

No

What is

the Soldier’s 

status?

PCS

TDY

Continue to follow DoD’s Force 

Health Protection Guidance 

On Leave

Other Call 1-800-582-5552

for further guidance.

Not in a Travel or 

Leave Status 3

Go to PCS 

Flowchart

Go to TDY 

Flowchart

Go to Leave 

Flowchart

Where is 

the Soldier?

Single Gov’t 

QTRs/Barracks

Family Gov’t 

QTRs/Private 

Residence

Commercial 

Lodging 2

Assigned to 

ESM? 1

Entitled to

HDP-ROM

Stop meal collections 

while in I/Q

NOTES: 

1. Essential Station Messing (ESM) commonly referred to as a Meal Card Holder – These Soldiers are assigned to single Gov’t Quarter/Barracks and are required to eat in the DFAC. Soldiers are subject 

to automatic payroll deductions for meals provide by or on behalf of the Government.

2. Commercial Lodging: Means a motel, hotel, inn, apartment, or similar entity that offers lodging to the public in exchange for compensation. However, for the purpose of HDP-ROM, the commercial 

lodging cannot be the Soldiers residence and the Soldier must incur an additional cost for a secondary location to self-monitor.

3. Not in a Travel or Leave Status: Soldiers are for duty at their primary duty station/location. These Soldiers are not in a TDY, PCS, or returning from deployment status. Must Soldiers must also be 

ordered into restriction of movement for self-monitoring.

Did Soldier 

incur a cost 

for lodging?

Was cost 

reimbursed or 

defrayed?

Soldier 

ordered to 

isolate/ 

quarantine? 

(I/Q)

Start Yes

No Yes

No change to 

entitlements

Were meals 

provided by 

the DFAC?

No

Yes

Not entitled to

HDP-ROM

Yes No Stop meal collections and 

pay BAS II while in I/Q

No change to 

entitlements

Yes

Proponent: DAPE-PRC, Version 1, Dated: 27 March 2020
AUS-6204839-1 521106/1

No. 03-15-00259-CV

IN THE

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

____________________________________________________________

BECKY, LTD., 

Appellant

V. 

THE CITY OF CEDAR PARK, STEPHEN THOMAS, MATT POWELL, MITCH 

FULLER, LYLE GRIMES, LOWELL MOORE, JON LUX, AND DON TRACY, 

 Appellees 

_____________________________________________________________

ON APPEAL FROM THE

126TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, 

TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS

______________________________________________________________

APPELLANT’S SUPPLEMENTAL CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE TO 

MOTION TO FILE POST-SUBMISSION LETTER BRIEF

______________________________________________________________

TO THE HONORABLE THIRD COURT OF APPEALS:

Appellant Becky, Ltd. (“Becky”) hereby files its supplemental certificate of 

conference to its motion to file post-submission letter brief. Becky filed its Motion 

for Leave to File Post-Submission Brief on December 11, 2015. The undersigned 

was not able to confer with counsel for Appellees before filing, and therefore, 

indicated that it did not know if its motion for leave was opposed or unopposed. 

ACCEPTED

03-15-00259-CV

8239139

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

12/15/2015 10:53:23 AM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 12/15/2015 10:53:23 AM JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk
2

AUS-6204839-1 521106/1

Counsel for Appellees have since contacted the undersigned and indicated they do 

not oppose Becky’s motion. Becky will not oppose leave for Appellees to file any 

response to the letter brief.

Respectfully submitted,

HUSCH BLACKWELL LLP

By /s/ Elizabeth G. Bloch

ELIZABETH G. BLOCH

State Bar No. 02495500

Heidi.bloch@huschblackwell.com

111 Congress Avenue, Suite 1400

Austin, Texas 78701-4093

(512) 472-5456 (Telephone)

(512) 479-1101 (Facsimile)

Leonard B. Smith

State Bar No. 18643100

lsmith@leonardsmithlaw.com

P.O. Box 684633

Austin, Texas 78768

(512) 914-3732 (Telephone)

(512) 532-6446 (Facsimile)

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE

The undersigned certifies that she conferred with counsel for Appellees after 

Appellant filed its Motion for Leave to File Post-Submission Brief on December 

11, 2015. They indicated they do not oppose the motion

/s/ Elizabeth G. Bloch

ELIZABETH G. BLOCH
3

AUS-6204839-1 521106/1

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document 

was served on the 15th day of December, 2015, via the Court’s electronic 

filing system and/or email to the following counsel of record:

Cobby Caputo 

ccaputo@bickerstaff.com

Bradley B. Young

byoung@bickerstaff.com

Bickerstaff Heath Delgado Acosta LLP

3711 South MoPac Expressway

Building One, Suite 300

Austin, Texas 78746

/s/ Elizabeth G. Bloch
FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS 

INFORMATION SHEET BY COURT REPORTERS 

You are expected to file the reporter’s record by the original due date. See Tex. R. App. P.35. If 

a reporter determines that the due date may not be met, please advise the Clerk of the Court of 

Appeals immediately in writing, stating the reason and the due date by which the record will be 

filed. Generally speaking, for good cause shown, the Court will grant no more than two 

extensions from the original record due date, each extension not to exceed 30 days in regular 

appeals and 10 days in accelerated appeals for a total period not to exceed 60 days in regular 

appeals and 20 days in accelerated appeals.

 

Appellate Case Number: Trial Court Case Number: 

(1) Is there a Reporter's Record? Y N

(2) Are you the only court reporter involved in this appeal? Y N

If not, please provide the names and addresses of all other court

reporters below.

(3) Has the appellant requested that the reporter’s record be prepared or 

has the trial court ordered that the record be prepared?

 Y N

(4) Please select from the following options:

 A. The appellant has paid for the record.

 B. The appellant has made arrangements to pay for the record

 C. The appellant is appealing as indigent.

 D. The appellant has not paid or made arrangements to pay for the

 record and is not appealing as indigent.

(5) Extension (fill out if extension is required for any reason other than payment)

I was unable to file the record in this appeal by ________. I expect the record 

in this appeal to be approximately _______ pages. The record covers 

_______days of testimony. I believe that I can file the record by _________. I 

ask that the court grant an extension until that time for filing the record.

Additional Comments: ___________________________________________

Court Reporter's Signature, Full Address, Email Address and Telephone Number: 

_______________________________________________________________________ 

_______________________________________________________________________

 FILED IN 14th COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 1/8/2015 12:41:58 PM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ronnie Fedrick, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously af*1044firmed. Memorandum: Prior to his trial on charges arising out of three separate sales of cocaine to an undercover DEA agent, defendant sought a warrant declaring that the confidential informant who arranged the first two sales was a material witness. That request, not opposed by the People, was granted, but the informant was not located. On appeal, defendant argues that the failure of the People to produce the informant deprived him of a fair trial.

Because defendant did not demand production of the informant, defendant has failed to preserve this issue for review. Unlike *People v Brown*(84 AD2d 910), where defendant made several informal requests that the People produce the informant, defendant’s request for a material witness warrant cannot be construed as a demand for production. Even if it were so construed, the People met their burden of showing that they were not responsible for the disappearance of the informant; consequently, defendant was required to meet the heavy burden of establishing that the informant’s testimony could exculpate him or raise a reasonable doubt about the reliability of the People’s case *(People v Jenkins,*41 NY2d 307, 309, *rearg denied*42 NY2d 825). In our view, defendant failed to demonstrate affirmatively that the informant’s testimony would be exculpatory *(see, People v Miller,*124 AD2d 830, 831, *lv denied*69 NY2d 830, *cert denied*481 US 1071) or show the specific manner in which the informant’s testimony would aid the defense *(see, People v Watson,*120 AD2d 866). Consequently, reversal is not required.

Defendant’s statement to the undercover officer, although arguably taken in violation of his right to counsel, was admissible in rebuttal to impeach defendant’s testimony that he had no drug supplier in Los Angeles *(see, People v Jones,*134 AD2d 915, *lv denied*71 NY2d 1028). By failing to object to admission of the testimony on the ground that a proper foundation had not been established, defendant failed to preserve that issue for review (CPL 470.05 [2]).

We reject defendant’s argument that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence. Matters of credibility are best left to the trier of the facts *(see, People v Stroud,*143 AD2d 532, *lv denied*73 NY2d 790; *People v Christian,*139 AD2d 896, *lv denied*71 NY2d 1024) and, upon this record, we cannot conclude that the trial court, sitting as the trier of the facts, failed to give the evidence the weight it should be accorded *(see, People v Bleakley,*69 NY2d 490, 495).

We have examined the issues raised by defendant in his *1045supplemental *pro se*brief and find them to be lacking in merit. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Rossetti, J.—Criminal Sale Controlled Substance, 1st Degree.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Denman, Pine and Lawton, JJ.
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 OverNear, Inc.,
(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Fred E. Tannous, Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) and Chief
Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for
purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:



(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section
13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and



(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company at the dates and for the periods indicated.



|February 24, 2012 | /s/ Fred E. Tannous                                                                                                                                            | 
|----------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|                  | Fred E. Tannous
        Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) and
        Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) | 



[A signed original 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.]
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND

CHIEF FINANCIAL 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 quarterly Report of Thompson Designs, Inc.
(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2011 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the “Report”), I, Kade Thompson, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



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



2.The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the consolidated
financial condition of the Company as of the dates presented and the consolidated result of operations of the Company for the periods
presented.



|By:    | /s/ Kade Thompson                                                    
|------ | ---------------------------------------------------------------------
|Name:  | Kade Thompson                                                        
|Title: | Principal Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer and Director
|Date:  | August 9, 2011                                                       



This certification has been furnished solely pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.