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





CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO


18
      U. S.
      C. SECTION 1350,


AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
      connection with the Report of MSGI Security Solutions, Inc. (the "Company")
      on
      Form 10-KSB for the period ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities
      and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, J. Jeremy Barbera,
      as
      Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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;
                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 14, 2008
            By:
            /s/
                J. Jeremy BarberaJ.
                Jeremy BarberaChairman
                of the Board and Chief Executive Officer(Principal
                Executive Officer)





This
      certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-KSB pursuant to Section 906
      of
      the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required
      by
      such Act, be deemed filed by the small business issuer for purposes of Section
      18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
Specialty Crops

Market News 

Washington, DC 

May 9, 2017
Market News is...

The Eyes and Ears 

of American Agriculture
Market News

Mission

To provide timely, accurate, and unbiased 

information on current agricultural markets.
 Get It

 Get It Right 

 Get It Out

Our Motto
Market Levels Covered

• Shipping point or f.o.b.

• Terminal/wholesale

• Retail – advertised weekly 

specials 

• Farmers markets and farmers 

auctions
Other Information 

Products

• Apple Juice Concentrate

• Grape Cold Storage

• Apples for Processing

• International markets of interest

• Honey and Beekeeping
Movement Data 

from Market News

• Shipments, domestic

Truck, rail

• Crossings from Mexico

• Trucks, air, boat

• Imports – 63 countries

• Air, truck, boat
Key Reports Issued

• Fresh Fruit and Vegetable 

National Shipping Point Trends

• National Retail Report –

Specialty Crops

• Fruit and Vegetable Truck Rate 

Report 

• Daily Movement Report

• Mexican Crossings Report

• National Specialty Crops 

Organic Summary
National Retail 

Report –

Specialty Crops
Specialty Crops 

Truck Rate 

Report
Fresh Fruit and 

Vegetable 

National 

Shipping Point 

Trends
Specialty Crops Market 

News Program Profile

• 1,453 markets covered

• 4,000 buyers and sellers interviewed 

• 411 commodities reported (includes 133 

organic)

• 54 million E-views annually (includes emails, 

fax, page views)
What’s Next?

• MARS – the Market Analysis and Reporting 

System

• Replaces both the Market News Information 

System (MNIS) database and the Market 

News Communication System (MNCS)

• Adds functionality and replaces the Market 

News Portal
What’s Next?

• ODI – the Organic Data Initiative

• 2-year project to grow organic reporting

• Adding up to 10 staff, mostly in existing office 

locations

• Focus on collecting additional organic data, 

both price and volume, at shipping point level
Other Outreach

• MIOA – the Market Information Organization of 

the Americas

• 33 member nations within the Western 

Hemisphere

• Enhance agricultural market information 

systems 

• Promote the importance of market 

transparency as a critical public good
Questions?
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 114 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 114

 To adjust the boundary of the Fort Frederica National Monument in the 
               State of Georgia, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 3, 2019

Mr. Carter of Georgia introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                 to the Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To adjust the boundary of the Fort Frederica National Monument in the 
               State of Georgia, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. FORT FREDERICA NATIONAL MONUMENT, GEORGIA, BOUNDARY 
              ADJUSTMENT.

    (a) Maximum Acreage.--The first section of the Act of May 26, 1936 
(16 U.S.C. 433g), is amended by striking ``two hundred and fifty 
acres'' and inserting ``305 acres''.
    (b) Boundary Expansion.--
            (1) In general.--The boundary of the Fort Frederica 
        National Monument in the State of Georgia is modified to 
        include the land generally depicted as ``Proposed Acquisition 
        Areas'' on the map entitled ``Fort Frederica National Monument 
        Proposed Boundary Expansion'', numbered 369/132,469, and dated 
        April 2016.
            (2) Availability of map.--The map described in paragraph 
        (1) shall be on file and available for public inspection in the 
        appropriate offices of the National Park Service.
            (3) Acquisition of land.--The Secretary of the Interior may 
        acquire the land and interests in land described in paragraph 
        (1) by donation or purchase with donated or appropriated funds 
        from willing sellers only.
            (4) No use of condemnation or eminent domain.--The 
        Secretary may not acquire by condemnation or eminent domain any 
        land or interests in land under this section or for the 
        purposes of this section.
                                 <all>
```
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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 CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-40332

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

LUIS ENRIQUE LOPEZ

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:07-CR-34-ALL

Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Luis Enrique Lopez violated the conditions of his term of supervised

release, imposed on him by the district court for the Southern District of

Mississippi in 2003, by returning to the United States illegally. After it executed

an acceptance of a transfer of jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3605, the

district court for the Southern District of Texas revoked Lopez’s term of

supervised release and sentenced him to serve 24 months in prison, with that

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

December 18, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 07-40332

2

term to run consecutively to his new illegal reentry sentence of 41 months of

imprisonment.

Lopez appeals the revocation of his supervised release. He contends that

the district court lacked jurisdiction over him because the order transferring

jurisdiction had not been signed by a judge of the Southern District of

Mississippi, the transferring court. At no time during the district court

proceedings did Lopez dispute the authenticity of the transfer document or object

to having the revocation action heard in Texas or otherwise challenge the

revocation proceedings.

We ordered a limited remand to the district court for the purpose oftaking

such further action as needed to determine whether clerical error was the reason

for the transfer order’s omission of the signature of the judge of the transferring

court. See FED. R. CRIM. P. 36 (a district court may “correct an error in the

record arising from oversight or omission” at any time). Based on documentation

produced by the transferring court and entered into evidence without objection,

the district court determined that the transferring court had electronically

signed the transfer order prior to any action being taken on the motion to revoke.

Consequently, the district court had jurisdiction to revoke Lopez’s term of

supervised release.

AFFIRMED.
# lnventoryExpertService A C1i vi SI0J) O! 

### thu Arm . Hit:illl
**ChCilliC~;;; ··--**  **-h--·~··~ ·······**  **-- -~--·**  **--- ··**  **---~~·** 

# .. **·······- 'h**  **~;:-G3~H~:Gl1-4tl 3870**  Fax : 614·44/ - 3/ 4 / 

### E ·mai!;

**•m~;wun;<!i car;.o**  **o** Wet> : www.C< 1 S. org/p c odvc:t s/ o l lll ) f • C::ts-products /c; lic m i• SOIViCI.' fJ/



### CAS 

# [] INVENTORY EXPERT SERVICE REPORT

Please print the 

## above CA Index Name on the appropriate page of your PMN. If thi s box is 

### checked , CAS 

## h < J S

**mt~dc c:o**  **rn ~ct**  **ion (s)**  

### m arke d in 

### red to your I E$ 

### order. 

## Pkilse nwke th e sa me correction s to your PMN b e fore s ubmitting i t 

### to thP FPA. 2 540

**OI~H1tangy** 

### Hiver HoacJ P.O . Box 3343 U S A
Order entered April 13, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-01092-CR

No. 05-14-01093-CR

LENWARD EARL GOREE JR., Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 4

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. F13-53643-K, F13-62239-K

ORDER

The Court REINSTATES the appeals.

On January 16, 2015, we ordered the trial court to make findings regarding whether the 

cases involve plea bargain agreements and also ordered the trial court to prepare certifications of 

appellant’s right to appeal that accurately reflect the proceedings. On April 7, 2015, we received 

certifications that state both that appellant waived his right to appeal and that he has no right to 

appeal the plea bargains. The clerk’s records filed on April 9, 2015 contain the documents that 

support the certifications. See Blanco v. State, 18 S.W.3d 218, 219–20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000). 

See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a), (d); Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005)
Accordingly, we DENY appellant’s March 31, 2015 pro se motion to appoint counsel. 

We will dispose of the appeals in due course.

We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order, to Lenward E. Goree, Jr. and to the 

Dallas County District Attorney’s Office. 

/s/ LANA MYERS

JUSTICE
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE 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 on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2011 of ReachLocal, Inc. (the Company) as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Zorik Gordon, Chief Executive 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 to the
best of my knowledge:

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.



/s/ Zorik GordonZorik GordonChief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)Date: May 16, 2011
IA 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 95 

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to require 

that the Supreme Court of the United States be composed of nine justices. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 24, 2020 

Mr. PETERSON (for himself and Mr. RIGGLEMAN) submitted the following 

joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United 

States to require that the Supreme Court of the United 

States be composed of nine justices. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives 

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled

3 (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the fol4 lowing article is proposed as an amendment to the Con5 stitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all 

6 intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 

7 ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several 

8 States within seven years after the date of its submission 

9 for ratification: 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HJ 95 IH 

1 ‘‘ARTICLE— 

2 ‘‘The Supreme Court of the United States shall be 

3 composed of nine justices.’’. 

Æ 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with BILLS
AMENDMENT TO PROMISSORY NOTE









EXHIBIT 4.14




 




AMENDMENT TO PROMISSORY NOTE




 




This AMENDMENT TO PROMISSORY NOTE (the

“Amendment”) is made this 31st day of August 2001, between EpicEdge, Inc., a

Texas corporation (“Maker”), and Carl R. Rose (“Payee”).




 




PREAMBLE




 




WHEREAS, Maker executed a Convertible Promissory

Note on the 7th day of November, 2000 whereby it promised to pay to

the order of Payee the sum of $400,000, (the “Original Note”), and




 




WHEREAS, in order to maximize the purposes for which

the Original Note was procured, Maker and Payee have agreed to amend the

payment terms.




 




NOW, THEREFORE, in exchange for ten and

no/100 dollars ($10), the mutual promises contained herein, and other good and

valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby

acknowledged, the parties hereto agree to amend the Original Note as follows:




 




1.       Section (a) of the introductory paragraph

of the Original Note shall be amended to reflect that interest shall be paid

based on the principal amount plus accrued interest commencing September 1, 2001;




 




2.       Section 1(b) of the Original Note shall

be deleted;




 




3.       Section 3(a) of the Original Note shall

be amended to increase the conversion rate from fifty cents ($.50) to one

dollar ($ 1.00);




 




4.       Section 2 of the Original Note shall be

amended to increase the cure period upon written notice of an event of default

from ten (10) days to thirty (30) days;




 




5.       Section (b) of introductory paragraph of

the Original Note shall be amended to reflect that the principal shall mature

on December 1, 2002.  If the company

defaults, the Payee has at its sole discretion the right to either convert the

note at $.50 per share, demand payment or to extend the maturity date until

December 1, 2003.  If the company again

defaults, the Payee has at its sole discretion the right to either convert the

note at $.25 per share, demand payment or extend the maturity date until

December 1, 2004.




 




6.                    All other terms of the

Original Note shall remain unmodified.




 





























 




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the parties hereto

has executed this Amendment or has caused this Amendment to be executed on its

behalf by a representative duly authorized, all as of the date first above set

forth.




 




MAKER:




 




EPICEDGE, INC.




	

   


  	

   


  
	

  By:


  	

   /s/ Richard Carter


  	

   


  	

   


  
	

  Name:


  	

   Richard Carter


  	

   


  	

   


  
	

  Title:


  	

   CEO


  	

   


  	

   


  
	

   


  	

   


  
	

  PAYEE:


  	

   


  
	

   


  	

   


  
	

  /s/ Carl R. Rose


  	

   


  	

   


  
	

  CARL R.

  ROSE


  	

   


  
							





 




2
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Election Commission

# AGENCY:

Federal Election Commission. 

# DATE AND TIME:

*Tuesday, April 24, 2012 at 10 a.m.*

# PLACE:

999 E Street NW., Washington, DC.

# STATUS:

This meeting will be closed to the public.

# ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED:

Compliance matters pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 437g.

Audits conducted pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 437g, 438(b), and Title 26, U.S.C.

Matters concerning participation in civil actions or proceedings or arbitration.

Internal personnel rules and procedures or matters affecting a particular employee.

Investigatory records compiled for law enforcement purposes, or information which if written would be contained in such records.

Information the premature disclosure of which would be likely to have a considerable adverse effect on the implementation of a proposed Commission action.

* * * * *

# PERSON TO CONTACT FOR INFORMATION:

Judith Ingram, Press Officer. Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

Shawn Woodhead Werth,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 2012-9615 Filed 4-17-12; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
[On Letterhead of Organization Providing the Critical Resource or Infrastructure]

EVIDENCE OF CRITICAL RESOURCES AND INFRASTRUCTURE

[Name of Applicant’s Authorized Organization Representative/Project Director]

[Applicant Organization]

[City, State]

Date: [Enter date]

Dear [Applicant’s Project Director]:

We [include a statement about committing/approving/granting permission, etc. of the critical resource or infrastructure] to the 20XX [LFPP/FMPP Project Title], for the time period of [include dates of commitment within proposed project period] in the following way:

[Describe the approved use of the critical resource or infrastructure approved for the project, any costs associated with its use, and any qualifying circumstances for its use.]

☐ By checking this box, I confirm that the critical resource(s) and infrastructure[footnoteRef:1] listed above are in place and usable for the start-up, implementation and completion of the proposed project activities. If requested by AMS, I will submit supporting documentation (e.g. copy of lease agreement, licenses, permits, picture(s) of facilities, etc.) as evidence.  [1:  Critical resources and infrastructure can be facilities, land, structure, use of city street/parks, shared-used kitchen, and/or other resources that are essential for the proposed project activities.] 

Sincerely,

[Signature of Partnering Organization’s Authorized Representative (AR)]

Printed Name of AR 

AR’s Title (e.g., Executive Director)

Address and telephone number if that information is not already on the letterhead
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

April 14, 2015

No. 04-15-00121-CV

INTEREST OF A.T., A.T., X.T., M.T., AND F.T.,

From the 131st Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013-PA-02073

Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Appellant’s request for a reporter’s record in this interlocutory appeal included a request 

for the records of the hearings conducted on September 10, 2013, October 24, 2013, and 

September 23, 2014. The docket sheet indicates these hearings were reported by court reporter 

David Zarate. The record was originally due March 30, but we granted Zarate an extension of 

time to April 10 to file the record. The records of these hearings have not been filed.

We order David Zarate to file the records of these hearings by April 17, 2015. No 

extensions of time will be granted. 

_________________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 14th day of April, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE 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 accompanying Quarterly Report of Copano Energy, L.L.C. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
September 30, 2004 (the "Report") filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on December 20, 2004, I, Matthew J. Assiff, Senior Vice President 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 to his knowledge:



|Date: December 20, 2004 |  | /s/MATTHEW J. ASSIFFMatthew J. Assiff
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|----------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1

---



QuickLinks