alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32

SECTION 906 CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF
OFFICEMAX INCORPORATED

We are providing this Certificate pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C., Section 1350. It accompanies OfficeMax
Incorporated's annual report on Form 10-K (the "Report") for the year ended December 29, 2007.

---

I,
Sam K. Duncan, OfficeMax Incorporated's chief executive officer, certify that:

(i)    the
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

(ii)    the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, OfficeMax Incorporated's financial condition and results of operations.

| | /s/SAM K. DUNCANSam K. Duncan
Chief Executive Officer
| | -----------------------------------------------------

I, Don Civgin, OfficeMax Incorporated's chief financial officer, certify that:

(i)    the
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

(ii)    the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, OfficeMax Incorporated's financial condition and results of operations.

|                         | /s/DON CIVGINDon Civgin
Chief Financial Officer
|------------------------ | -----------------------------------------------
|Dated: February 27, 2008 |                                                

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to OfficeMax Incorporated and will be retained by OfficeMax
Incorporated and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---



QuickLinks
Will there be opportunities for minority farmers/businesses to grow hemp? There is a great need for education and research in the area of hemp cultivation and processing. Providing grants to promote education is critical for the success of this new industry. 

Roy "Chip" Ellis

President

Hemp Commodity Industries
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1196 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow an increased work 

opportunity credit with respect to recent veterans, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 13, 2019 

Mr. KING of New York (for himself, Miss GONZA ́LEZ-COLO ́N of Puerto Rico, 

Mr. WELCH, Ms. WILD, Ms. GABBARD, and Mr. GARAMENDI) introduced 

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and 

Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow an 

increased work opportunity credit with respect to recent 

veterans, 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 ‘‘Jobs for Veterans Act 

5 of 2019’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 1196 IH

1 SEC. 2. WORK OPPORTUNITY CREDIT FOR RECENT VET2 ERANS. 

3 (a) WORK OPPORTUNITY CREDIT.—Section 51 of the 

4 Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at 

5 the end the following new subsection: 

6 ‘‘(l) SPECIAL RULES FOR VETERANS.—For purposes 

7 of this subpart— 

8 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—In the case of an individual 

9 who is an applicable veteran who begins work for the 

10 employer after December 31, 2019, and before Jan11 uary 1, 2024, the following rules shall apply: 

12 ‘‘(A) APPLICABLE VETERAN.—Such indi13 vidual shall be treated as a member of a tar14 geted group. 

15 ‘‘(B) INCREASED PERCENTAGE.—Sub16 section (a) shall be applied by substituting ‘100 

17 percent’ for ‘40 percent’. 

18 ‘‘(C) WAGE LIMITATION.—Paragraph (3) 

19 of subsection (b) shall be applied— 

20 ‘‘(i) by substituting ‘$5,000’ for 

21 ‘$6,000’, and 

22 ‘‘(ii) without regard to the parenthet23 ical therein. 

24 ‘‘(D) MINIMUM EMPLOYMENT PERIODS.— 

25 Subparagraph (A) of subsection (i)(3) shall be 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•HR 1196 IH

1 applied by substituting ‘0 percent’ for ‘25 per2 cent’. 

3 ‘‘(E) DISABLED VETERANS.—In the case 

4 of such an individual who is a qualified veteran 

5 by reason of subsection (d)(3)(A)(ii), the credit 

6 determined with respect to such individual 

7 under the rules of this subsection shall be in 

8 addition to any credit allowable with respect to 

9 such individual under this section determined 

10 without regard to this subsection. 

11 ‘‘(2) APPLICABLE VETERAN.—The term ‘appli12 cable veteran’ means any veteran (as defined in sub13 section (d)(3)(B)) who is certified by the designated 

14 local agency as having been discharged or released 

15 from active duty in the Armed Forces of the United 

16 States after September 11, 2001. 

17 ‘‘(3) ELECTION TO HAVE SUBSECTION NOT

18 APPLY.—A taxpayer may elect (at such time and in 

19 such form and manner as the Secretary shall pre20 scribe) to have this subsection not apply with respect 

21 to an individual for any taxable year.’’. 

22 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

23 subsection (a) shall apply to individuals who begin work 

24 for the employer after December 31, 2019. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
STEPHANIE LARSEN, CSR, RPR

OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

33rd Judicial District

P.O. Box 554 ** Marble Falls, TX 78654

(512)715-5230

33reporter@dcourttexas.org

 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

April 14, 2015 

Court of Appeals 

Third District of Texas 

P.O. Box 12547 

Austin, Texas 78711 

RE: 03-15-00127-CR 

 Texas vs. Aaron Joseph Hoes

 Cause No. 1167 

To Whom It May Concern: 

The reporter's record for the above-named appeal was due on 

3/30/15. I previously notified the Court of Appeals that I had 

not received Notice of Appeal or a Designation needed to begin 

preparation of same. 

I have now received these materials and have begun preparing 

the record. It will be complete within the ten days. 

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. 

Thank you, 

Stephanie Larsen
Exhibit32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection withthe Quarterly Report of Ames True Temper, Inc. (the"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period endingDecember 25, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the "Report"), I, RichardDell, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|           |                                                                                                                     |
|-----------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (1)  | TheReport 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 Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company. |

/s/    RichardDell                                        RichardDellPresident and Chief Executive Officer(Principal ExecutiveOfficer)February 4, 2005

----
Exhibit 31.1


                   CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, James S. Phalen, as Chief Executive Officer of the American Bar Association
Members/ State Street Collective Trust, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the American Bar
Association Members/ State Street Collective Trust;

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 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 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: November 14, 2003

                                                    /s/ James S. Phalen
                                                   -------------------------
                                                   James S. Phalen
                                                   Chief Executive Officer
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

DIETGOAL INNOVATIONS LLC,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

BRAVO MEDIA LLC, (DIVISION OF NBC 

UNIVERSAL MEDIA, LLC),

Defendant-Appellee

______________________ 

2014-1631

______________________ 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the 

Southern District of New York in No. 1:13-cv-08391-PAE, 

Judge Paul A. Engelmayer.

______________________ 

JUDGMENT

______________________ 

ERIC WILLIAM BUETHER, Buether Joe & Carpenter 

LLC, Dallas, TX, argued for plaintiff-appellant.

J. CHRISTOPHER CARRAWAY, Klarquist Sparkman, 

LLP, Portland, OR, argued for defendant-appellee. Also 

represented by NORMAN ANDREW SFEIR. 

VERA RANIERI, Electronic Frontier Foundation, San 

Francisco, CA, for amici curiae Application Developers 
 

Alliance, et al. Also represented by DANIEL K. NAZER;

CHARLES DUAN, Public Knowledge, Washington, DC.

______________________ 

THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

 PER CURIAM (DYK, MAYER, and REYNA, Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

April 8, 2015 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole

Date Daniel E. O’Toole 

 Clerk of Court
Opinion issued April 14, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-15-00287-CV

———————————

IN RE JESSICA BACHELOR, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, Jessica Bachelor, has filed a petition for writ of mandamus, 

challenging the trial court’s orders abating the underlying proceeding and 

transferring it to Smith County, Texas “for consolidation into the case pending 

there in County Court at Law #2, Cause No. 14-2462-F.”1

 1 The underlying case is In the Matter of the Marriage of Jessica Thao Mai Bachelor and 

Eric Charles Bachelor and in the Best Interest of E.J.M.B., a Child, Cause No. 2014-
2

We deny the petition for writ of mandamus. We dismiss relator’s motion for 

temporary relief as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Brown and Lloyd.

 

57427, in the 246th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Charley Prine 

presiding.
Exhibit 32.4

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                              U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                       AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     In connection with the amendment to the Annual Report of Boston Gas Company
(the "Corporation") on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, Joseph F. Bodanza,  Senior Vice President and Chief Financial  Officer of the
Corporation, 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) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, amended; and

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

                                                     /s/ Joseph F. Bodanza
                                                     ---------------------
                                              Name:  Joseph F. Bodanza
                                              Title: Senior Vice President and
                                              Chief  Financial Officer
                                              Date:  August 13, 2003


Note: A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906 has
been  provided  to Boston Gas Company and will be retained by Boston Gas Company
and  furnished  to the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  or its staff upon
request.
My question is one of legislative interpretation/ intent. I have been curious regarding whether the 2018 Farm Bill created a new definition for hemp that is distinguished from industrial hemp under the 2014 Farm Bill? As you may be aware, the 2014 Farm Bill created legislation surrounding the cultivation of “industrial hemp” whereas the new language is regarding simply “hemp.” Does the USDA anticipate regulating the two terms any differently, or will they be considered under the same regulations?

I anticipate expounding on the current definitions to better explain the concern and try to fill up the 3 minute talk time. 

Below is the information requested for my comment:

Nabil Rodriguez

Greenspoon Marder LLP
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                          32,635
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                20,075
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    174,963
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          32,644
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            32,639
<LOANS>                                        312,160
<ALLOWANCE>                                      3,524
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 591,203
<DEPOSITS>                                     527,131
<SHORT-TERM>                                    17,292
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              5,819
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            38
<OTHER-SE>                                      40,923
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 591,203
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 26,972
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               12,520
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   478
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                39,970
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              16,726
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              17,184
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           22,786
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      159
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  49
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 21,495
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  9,081
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       6,204
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,204
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.22
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.20
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.75
<LOANS-NON>                                      1,606
<LOANS-PAST>                                       177
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 3,995
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    1,101
<RECOVERIES>                                       471
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                3,524
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             2,580
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            944


</TABLE>
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

EITAN LEASCHAUER,

Petitioner,

v.
NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD ; FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION,

Respondents. No. 13

- 73818

NTSB No. EA

- 5680

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the National Transportation Safety Board

Submitted June 14, 2016 **

Before: BEA, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.

Eitan Leaschauer petitions pro se for review of the National Transportation
Safety Board’s (“NTSB”) final order suspending Leaschauer’s private pilot

certificate pending reexamination. We have jurisdiction under 49 U.S.C. § 1153.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

JUN 23 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 13

- 73818

We review the NTSB’s final order under the arbitrary and capricious standard

.
Gilbert v. NTSB , 80 F.3d 364, 368 (9th Cir. 1996 )

. We deny the petition for

review.

The NTSB’s determination that a reasonable basis existed for the Federal
Aviation Administration (“FAA”) to request reexamination of Leaschauer was not
arbitrary or capricious because substan tial evidence supported the NTSB’s finding
that Leaschauer took off without prior clearance

. See Arrington v. Daniels , 516
F.3d 1106, 1112 (9th Cir. 2008) (arbitrary and capricious standard requires agency
to base decision on consideration of relevant factors and avoid clear error); 49
U.S.C. § 1153(b)(3) (“Findings of fact by the Board, if supported by substantial
evidence, are conclusive.”); 49 U.S.C. § 4 4709 (empowering FAA to reexamine

certificate holders )

. The NTSB’s determination that the chief administrative law judge (“ALJ”)

did not err by denying Leaschauer’s motion to disqualify the ALJ was not arbitrary
or capricious because Leaschauer failed to s how that the ALJ had any bias or
prejudice from an extra

-

judicial source. See Arrington , 516 F.3d at 1112 ; Adm’r
v. Lackey , NTSB Order. No. EA

- 5419 at 11 (2008) (setting forth standard).

The NTSB’s determination that the ALJ ’s grant of leave for the FAA to3 13

- 73818

amend its complaint did not warrant relief was not arbitrary or capricious because
the amendment did not prejudice Leaschauer. See Janka v. NTSB , 925 F.2d 1147,
1152 (9th Cir. 1991) (reversal is warranted only for substantia l and prejudicial
errors in administrative procedure).
We reject as unsupported by the record Leaschauer’s contentions that he was
denied due process during proceedings. Id

. We reject as without merit Leaschauer’s contentions regarding misconduct
by the A LJ or NTSB

. All pending motions and requests are denied.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
# FY20 Vendor Table
**Exhibit 32**

**SECTION 906 CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVEOFFICER ANDCHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OFOFFICEMAX INCORPORATED**

We are providing this Certificate pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C., Section 1350. Itaccompanies OfficeMax Incorporated’s annual report on Form 10-K (the“Report”) for the year ended December 30, 2006.

----

I, Sam K. Duncan,OfficeMax Incorporated’s chief executive officer, certify that:

(i)    the Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

(ii)   the information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, OfficeMax Incorporated’s financialcondition and results of operations.
|        | /s/ SAM K.  DUNCAN      |
|--------|-------------------------|
|   | Sam K. Duncan           |
|   | Chief Executive Officer |

 

I, Don Civgin,OfficeMax Incorporated’s chief financial officer, certify that:

(i)    the Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

(ii)   the information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, OfficeMax Incorporated’s financialcondition and results of operations.
|                               | /s/ DON CIVGIN          |
|-------------------------------|-------------------------|
|                          | Don Civgin              |
|                          | Chief Financial Officer |
| Dated: February 28, 2007 |                    |

 

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 has been provided to OfficeMax Incorporated and will beretained by OfficeMax Incorporated and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

119

----