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

                            SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION






<PAGE>



                                  Exhibit 32.1

                     CERTIFICATION OF DISCLOSURE 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  INTREorg  Systems,  Inc.  (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period  ending  September 30, 2010 as filed with
the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the  "Report") I,
Russell K. Boyd,  Principal  Executive  Officer,  Chief Executive Officer of the
Company and Principal  Accounting Officer,  certify,  pursuant to 18 USC section
1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
to the best of my knowledge and belief:

(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: November  22, 2010


/s/ Russell K. Boyd
---------------------------------------------------------
Russell K. Boyd, (Principal Executive Officer,
Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)


This  certification  accompanies  the  Report  pursuant  to  Section  906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 and shall not,  except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  be deemed  filed by the  Company  for  purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
### REVISED September 8, 2014



# Fourth Draft OMB Package, Version Two REVISED **Appendix F –** **State REAP Coordinator Data Collection**

**Request**
**PPSS TO 10: Studies of Rural Education Achievement Program (REAP) Grantees Subtask 3.6: Prepare Fifth Draft OMB**  **Clearance Package** Contract Number GS

- 10F
-0554N; Order Number ED

- PEP
- 11
- O
-0090 SRI Project #P21494

**Submitted to:** Andrew Abrams Policy and Program Studies Service U.S. Department of Education 400 Maryland Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20202
**Prepared by:** SRI International Kyra Caspary, Chris Padilla, Nancy Adelman, Rebecca Schmidt, Erica Harbatkin, and Kaily Yee**Study of Experiences and Needs of Rural Education Achievement Program (REAP) Grantees**

**Contact information Request for Sampled RE AP Districts**  We have sampled the districts below to participate in the data collection associated with the Study of Experiences and Needs of REAP Grantees. 1. For each district, please enter all requested information for the individual responsible for admin istering the REAP funds (i.e., the REAP coordinator) under the REAP coordinator information heading (Columns C through G) 2. Use Column H to indicate whether the district superintendent is also the REAP coordinator you listed. You may select “Yes” or “No” fro m the dropdown, or simply type the word Yes or No
. a. If the REAP coordinator is also the district superintendent, please enter her/his full mailing address under the Superintendent information heading (Columns K though O). In this scenario, you do not have to re - enter the name and email address. b. If the REAP coordinator is not the same individual as the district superintendent, please enter all requested information for the district superintendent under the Superintendent information heading (Columns I though P). 3. After entering all information, please save this spreadsheet and email it back to xxxx@sri.com
. 1 Note that we are providing this template for your convenience. If you would rather provide the information using your own spreadsheet, you may do so as long as your format contains all requested information. A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P

**REAP coordinator information Superintendent information**  **NCES ID District** 

**name First** 

**name Last**  **name Role/**  **position Email**  **Phone Same as REAP**  **coordinator? (if**  **yes, please only fill out the**  **address fields) First** 

**name Last**  **name Street**  **Address 1**  **Street Address 2**  **City State**  **Zip Email** 

Prefilled Prefilled Yes/No dropdown

1 SRI will delegate state outreach responsibilities to more than one staff member. The email address listed here will be custom ized with the individual responsible for outreach and d ata collection for each state.
#### In re the MARRIAGE of Christopher G. WALSH, Appellee, and Carol Jean Walsh, a/k/a Carol Jean Oberly, Appellant.

No. 80CA0209.

Colorado Court of Appeals, Div. I.

July 17, 1980.

Darrow & Kolman, Nicholas E. Darrow, Delta, for appellee.

Dickie D. Lewis, Grand Junction, for appellant.

COYTE, Judge.

Wife appeals from a judgment abating accrued child support. We modify and, as modified, affirm.

The parties stipulated in their dissolution proceeding that husband would pay $150 per month child support. Husband became delinquent and was badly injured in a fire on October 25, 1979. On November 14, 1979, he filed a motion to abate child support payments. On January 3, 1980, at a hearing on the delinquencies and abatement, the parties stipulated as to the delinquencies and payment thereon. The court ordered that child support payments which had accrued since October 25, 1979, would be abated until husband was able to return to his employment.

*914Relying on *Engleman v. Engleman,*145 Colo. 299, 358 P.2d 864 (1961), wife asserts that the court cannot abate child support payments which accrued prior to the date of the hearing on the abatement motion. We disagree.

Section 14-10-122(1), C.R.S.1973, states that a provision of a decree respecting support “may be modified only as to installments accruing subsequent to the motion for modification . . . .” Under this statute, the court may now modify support payments back to the date of the filing of the motion, rather than only from the date of the hearing on the motion as was the case under *Engleman, supra,*decided under the earlier statute.

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court abating child support payments back to October 25, 1979, is modified to the extent that the abatement shall begin as of the date the husband filed his motion, November 14, 1979. Thus, child support is abated from November 14, 1979, until husband is able to return to work.

Husband’s motion for damages and attorneys’ fees is denied.

The judgment of the trial court, as modified, is affirmed.

VAN CISE and KIRSHBAUM, JJ., concur.
DATE: May 15,2015 

USDA PURCHASE PROGRAM ANNOUNCED: 

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) plans to 

purchase domestic agricultural products to provide immediate relief and long term recovery 

efforts to the Food Nutrition Assistance programs to assist those affected by Typhoon Maysak in 

the Federated States of Micronesia. 

Offers will be solicited for commercially available CANNED WHOLE KERNEL CORN, 24/#300 

cans, labeled and packed according to the Food and Drug Administration requirements. Product 

must be 100% domestic origin. 

Solicitations will be issued in the near future for deliveries beginning June 16,2015. Offers to 

sell the product must be received not later than the date specified on the Solicitations. 

All offers must be submitted electronically through the Web-Based Supply Chain Management 

(WBSCM) website at http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/usdahome?navid=WBSCM. Offers 

submitted by any means other than WBSCM will be considered nonresponsive. 

Offerors are urged to carefully read all applicable terms and conditions of the AMS Master 

Solicitation for Commodity Procurements dated April 2015. 

To receive an electronic (e-mail) notification ofthe issuance of these solicitations, see the 

"Subscribe to AMS CP News (link)" available on the AMS Commodity Procurement website. 

Inquiries may be made by telephoning (202) 720-4517 or addressing the Contracting Officer, 

USDA/AMS Commodity Procurement Staff, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, STOP 0239, 

Washington, DC 20250-0256. 

An electronic version of this Purchase Announcement can be obtained through the Commodity 

Procurement Home Page at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/commoditypurchasing. 

The USDA prohibits discrimination against its customers. employees. and applicantsfhr employment on the bases of race. color. national origin. 

age. disability, sex, gender identity. religion. reprisal. and where applicable. political beliefs. manta/ status . .familial or parental status. sexual 

orientation. or all or part of an individual's income is derived.frmn any public assistance program. or protected genetic infonnatum m 

employment or in any program or activity conducted or .funded by the Department. (Not all prohibited bases will apply to all programs and'or 

employment activities.) To file a complaint of discrimination. write: USDA, q({ice oft he Assistant Secretary for Ci\'il Rights, O.Uice of 

Adjudication, J.IOO Independence Ave .. SW, Washington. DC 20250-9410 or call (866) 632-9992 (Toll~free Customer Service). (800) 877-8339 

(Local or Federal relay), (866) 377-8642 (Relay voice users). 

Together We're Making A Difference: American Agriculture for the American People 

Agricultural Marketing Setvice, Commodity Procurement Staff 

1400 Independence Ave., SW, Room 3522-S, STOP 0239 

Washington, DC 20250-0239 

Voice 202.720.4517 Fax 202.720.5871 

An Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer
USDA

•Section 32 Purchases
History

• Section 32 of the Act of August 24, 1935 authorizes the 

Secretary of Agriculture to use these funds for commodity 

purchases, entitlement purchases and disaster assistance

• Section 32 funds are an appropriation of annual U.S. 

customs receipts
Purpose of USDA Section 32 Purchases

• Help alleviate markets experiencing an oversupply situation. 

– USDA justification is to purchase relatively inexpensive and nutritious fruits/vegetables in consumer-friendly form 

suitable for use in domestic food assistance programs, including charitable institutions.

• USDA is here to help but this is not a long-term solution

– If there is constant over-supply, low prices are the way that the market is telling growers to produce less
How to Submit a Request for a Section 32 

Purchase

• A representative of the industry submits a written request to USDA asking for a Section 32 purchase

• A written request can be as simple or as detailed as the industry prefers

– However, the more information the industry is able to provide the better as this strengthens the 

case for why USDA should take action

• Please include in the request the dollar amount the industry would like the USDA to purchase
•Data Used for 

Analysis

• Production Levels

• Grower Prices

• Wholesale Prices

• Imports and Exports

• Data is typically compared to the previous year and to the three or 

five-year average when appropriate
•Data Sources

• National Agricultural Statistic Service

• Economic Research Service

• Global Agricultural Trade System

– Foreign Agricultural Service

• Any information the industry can provide with the purchase request is greatly 

appreciated and can help justify USDA action
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 

AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report On Form 10-QSB of Orgral Technologies Corp. for the quarter ending November 30, 2005, I, Helen Heit, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Orgral Technologies Corp. hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:
| 1. |   | Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending November 30, 2005, 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-QSB for the quarter ending November 30, 2005, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Orgral Technologies Corp. |
|----|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

Dated: January 23, 2006 

Orgral Technologies Corp.

By: /s/ Helen Heit

Chief Executive Officer and

Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 33 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 33

       Supporting the goals and ideals of National Public Safety 
                        Telecommunicators Week.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 10, 2019

Mrs. Torres of California (for herself, Mr. Fitzpatrick, Ms. Eshoo, Mr. 
   Khanna, Mrs. Davis of California, Mr. Grijalva, Mr. Ruiz, and Mr. 
   Cooper) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
            referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
       Supporting the goals and ideals of National Public Safety 
                        Telecommunicators Week.

Whereas the Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials (APCO) 
        International and other organizations have declared the second week of 
        April as National Public Safety Telecommunicators Week;
Whereas there are over 6,000 public safety call centers, known as public safety 
        answering points, in the United States;
Whereas public safety communications professionals dedicate their lives to 
        helping others;
Whereas public safety communications professionals work under challenging and 
        stressful circumstances;
Whereas public safety communications professionals are an important part of the 
        first responder community, providing critical support to the Nation's 
        law enforcement, fire, and rescue personnel; and
Whereas public safety communications professionals are critical to helping 
        preserve public safety and the general welfare: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That Congress--
            (1) supports the goals and ideals of National Public Safety 
        Telecommunicators Week;
            (2) honors and recognizes the importance and contributions 
        of the Nation's public safety communications professionals; and
            (3) encourages the people of the United States to remember 
        the value of the work performed by public safety communications 
        professionals.
                                 <all>
```
**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**




In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of ZAGG Incorporated, (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-Q for the quarter ending June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities
      and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Brandon T. O’Brien,
      Principal Accounting Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my
      knowledge, 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) or 15
      (d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and




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




**/s/****BRANDON T. O’BRIEN**Brandon
                T. O’BrienChief
                Financial OfficerAugust
                14, 2008
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit _____________

No. 21-51004

consolidated with

No. 21-51021

Summary Calendar

_____________

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Luis Adrian Carchi-Fernandez,

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 4:21-CR-477-1

USDC No. 4:21-CR-643-1

Before Higginbotham, Higginson, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

In these consolidated appeals, Luis Adrian Carchi-Fernandez appeals 

from the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for illegal 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this 

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited 

circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 11, 2022

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 21-51004 Document: 00516275120 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/11/2022
No. 21-51004

c/w No. 21-51021

2

reentry after having previously been removed, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) 

and (b)(1). Carchi-Fernandez contends, for the first time on appeal, that it 

violates the Constitution to treat a prior conviction that increases the 

statutory maximum under § 1326(b) as a sentencing factor, rather than as an 

element of the offense. He concedes that this issue is foreclosed by 

Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but he seeks to 

preserve the issue for future review and has filed an unopposed motion for 

summary disposition. Carchi-Fernandez also appeals from the revocation of 

a previously imposed term of supervised release, but he does not address the 

validity of the revocation or the revocation sentence in his brief on appeal, so 

he has abandoned any challenge to them. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 

224-25 (5th Cir. 1993).

As Carchi-Fernandez concedes, the issue he raises is foreclosed by 

Almendarez-Torres. See United States v. Pervis, 937 F.3d 546, 553-54 (5th Cir. 

2019); United States v. Wallace, 759 F.3d 486, 497 (5th Cir. 2014). Because 

this position “is clearly right as a matter of law so that there can be no 

substantial question as to the outcome of the case,” Groendyke Transp., Inc. 

v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969), summary disposition is proper. 

Accordingly, Carchi-Fernandez’s motion for summary disposition is 

GRANTED, and the judgments of the district court are AFFIRMED.

Case: 21-51004 Document: 00516275120 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/11/2022
Confidentiality Guidelines for the Livestock Mandatory  

Reporting Program

The 3/70/20 confidentiality guideline requires the following three conditions:

• At least three reporting entities need to provide data at least 50 percent of the

time over the most recent 60‐day time period.

• No single reporting entity may provide more than 70 percent of the data for a

report over the most recent 60‐day time period.

• No single reporting entity may be the sole reporting entity for an individual

report more than 20 percent of the time over the most recent 60‐day time

period.

The Livestock Mandatory Reporting Act of 1999 requires USDA to publish mandatory

data on livestock and meat price trends, contracting arrangements, and supply and

demand conditions in a manner that protects the identity of reporting entities and

preserves the confidentiality of proprietary transactions.
### Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA

- 

### 2013

- 1009 Directorate Identifier: 

### 2013

- NE

- 35

- AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If

they do not, click (or Tab) into an d then out of the changed cell

.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection,

replacement)

Do not include on

condition costs here Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine,

propeller, appliance)

Work

- hours

(include

access, testing,

and close

- up) Labor

co st

(@$8 5 /h

our) Parts Cost Total Costs

(labor +

parts) Number of

U.S.

Registered

Products Total Cost

for U.S. Fleet



### Modify p ower

t urbine (PT)

c ontainment r ing

by installing

r einforcement l iner 20 .0 $ 1,700.0

0 $ 

### 1

, 6 5 5 $ 3,355.00 

### 1000 $ 3,355,000.0

0



### (SP3478EN

- E) $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.0 0 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0 .00 $ 0.00



### The known number of products in compliance:

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $ 3,355,000



### Costs covered under warranty ( if known ) $

On

- Condition Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection,

replacement) Work

- hours

(include access,

testing, and close

up) Labor cost

(@$85/hour) Parts C ost Cost per Product

$ 0.00 $ $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

### Special considerations for Economic Analysis ( Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs) 

### : 

### N/A

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES * NO

* Explanation:

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES * NO

* Explanation:

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? E xplain for

either a Yes or No ans wer.

YES NO

Explanat ion:

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES * NO



### * Explanation 

### :
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

January 29, 2014

d0122 

# Order

Clerk January 29, 2014

147508

In re ESTATE OF GEORGE EUGENE STAN.

_________________________________________

GEORGIANN STAN, Personal Representative of

the ESTATE OF GEORGE EUGENE STAN,

Petitioner

- Appellant,

v SC: 147508

COA: 309958

Wayne PC: 2011

- 770208

- DE

CHRISTINE S. STAN,

Respondent

- Appellee.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 20, 2013

judgment 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.

M ARKMAN

, J . ( dissenting ).

MCL 700.3905 provides that “a provision in a will purporting to penalize an

interested person for contesting the will or instituting another proceeding relating to the

estate shall not be given effect if probable cause exists for instituting a proceeding

c ontesting the will or another proceeding relating to the estate.” (Emphasis added.) I

would grant leave to appeal to consider whether the beneficiary of a will relying on this

statutory exception to the enforcement of a no

- contest clause can establish “p robable

cause” for a legal challenge if he or she did not ultimately prevail in the challenge.