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 annual report on Form 10-K of Bedford Property Investors, Inc. (the Company) for the year ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Peter B. Bedford, 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 (Section 906), 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.





March 12, 2004

/s/ Peter B. Bedford

Peter B. Bedford

Chief Executive Officer





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
NO. 07-06-0009-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL C

MAY 4, 2006

______________________________

WILLIAM RIVAS, 

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, 

Appellee

_________________________________

FROM THE 222ND DISTRICT COURT OF DEAF SMITH COUNTY;

NO. CR-04I-129; HON. ROLAND SAUL, PRESIDING

_______________________________

Memorandum Opinion

_______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and REAVIS and HANCOCK, JJ.

Appellant, William Rivas, appeals from the trial court’s adjudication of his guilt for

aggravated assault with a deadly weapon by contending that his trial counsel was

ineffective. Counsel was purportedly ineffective because he did not obtain two expert

witnesses. The experts could have been used, he continues, at the hearing upon the

State’s motion to adjudicate guilt to show that he did not commit the crime resulting in the

decision to adjudicate. For the reason stated below, we dismiss the appeal.
2

No appeal may be taken from the trial court’s decision to adjudicate guilt. TEX.CODE

CRIM.PROC.ANN.art. 42.12 §5(b) (Vernon Supp. 2005); Hogans v. State, 176 S.W.3d 829,

832 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (involving a claim of ineffective assistance). Given this rule,

a defendant may not assert, on direct appeal, that his attorney denied him the effective

assistance of counsel during the proceeding to adjudicate. Hogans v. State, 176 S.W.3d

at 833. Here, appellant asserts that his attorney should have acquired two experts to prove

that he did not commit the crime upon which the trial court founded its decision to

adjudicate appellant’s guilt. As posited, trial counsel’s supposed ineffectiveness is offered

as a way to attack the decision to adjudicate. And, because it is, we have no jurisdiction

to review the matter. 

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

Brian Quinn

 Chief Justice

Do not publish.
#### Rosa Ehrenfeld, as Executrix of Martin Ehrenfeld, Deceased, Appellant, *v.*Elizabeth Ward, Respondent, et al., Undertenants.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,

June 25, 1959.

*962
      *Irving Novich*for appellant.

No one appearing for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

The landlord brought this proceeding to evict the tenants on the ground that the demised premises were being illegally used for single-room occupancy. It has been repeatedly held that in such a proceeding a case is not made out by merely showing the number of occupants in an apartment and the disposition of their sleeping quarters. There must be, in addition, proof that the physical layout of the apartment, particularly the means of egress, makes such occupancy illegal by virtue of section 248 of the Multiple Dwelling Law and section D26-3.7 of the Administrative Code *(Shapiro*v. Collins, 6 A D 2d 1038). Here it is true that this proof was not supplied directly. However, there was proof of a violation filed against the building because of the multiple occupancy of this apartment. Such departmental action is presumptive evidence that the physical conditions of the apartment did not permit of legal occupancy by the number of people living there. The tenant did not contest this fact and introduced proof to rebut the contentions of the landlord as to the number of occupants. This proof was so weak and equivocal that it can be rightly said that it did not even raise an issue.

Accordingly, the final order in favor of the tenant dismissing landlord’s petition should be reversed, with $30 costs, and final order directed in favor of the landlord as prayed for in the petition, with costs.

Steuer and Aurelio, JJ., concur; Hofstadter, J., dissents on authority of *Shapiro*v. *Collins*(6 A D 2d 1038) and *Realty Associates*v. *Bausch*(17 Misc 2d 874 [App. Term, 61 M. C. Feb., 1959]).
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 117 (Thursday, August 2, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H5708]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

           By Mr. POLIS:
       H.R. 6273.
       Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant 
     to the following:
       Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 (relating to the power of 
     Congress to provide for the general welfare of the United 
     States) and Clause 18 (relating to the power to make all laws 
     necessary and proper for carrying out the powers vested in 
     Congress)
       Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 (relating to the power of 
     Congress to dispose of and make all needful rules and 
     regulations respecting the territory or other property 
     belonging to the United States).
```
# Clean Ai rCounal

octcET ID'. EPfl-IAR- O

~~ 

# -2
~ 

# 13

Comments of Coryn Wolk Clean Air Council Re: EPA's Proposed Carbon Emissions Guidefines for Existing Stationary Sources: ECectric Utitity Generating Unifis


### My name is Coryn Wolk and I represent Clean Air Council, a Pennsylvania nonprofit organization headcluartered in

~ 

### that advocates for everyone's right to breathe clean air. The Council has serious concerns about EPA's proposed Carbon Rute. It is vital that EPA fznally take concrete, enforceable steps towards restricting carbon emissions and slowi.ng climate change. However, while the Carbon Rule would indeed restrict carbon emissions, it pushes inereased natural gas driIling as a viable alternative to burning coal. Climate Impacts of Natural Gas Drilling and Use: There are numerous issues with this, but I'11 start with the climate impacts. According to EPA's figures, at 3.2% leakage of inethane, natural gas ceases to be better for the climate than coal. Estimates of inethane leakage rates vary widely, but a recent study by Howarth et al at Cornell University found that their own previous estimate of 3.3% methane leakage was reasonable but probably low. So already, using conservative estimates, switching to natural gas from coal provides no advantages in fighting climate change. However, the reality is even less positive. The figures currently tised by EPA put methane at 21 times the global warming potential of carbon dioxide over a 100-year tirnespan. Elowever, the most recent IPCC report estimated that methane's global warming potential is actually 34 times that of carbon dioxide in the I00-year time frame. EPA lias had plenty of time to update its science, as even the previous IPCC report put methane's GWP at 25. One wonders when EPA will choose to update the figures on which they base such crucial calculations. Furthermore, given that the next few decades are critical for stopping clirnate change's rnomentum, the shorter timeframe is more relevant in choosing a course of action. The IPCC says that there is no scientiftc argument for preferring a I00-year measurement. In the 20-year tiineframe, according to the IPCC, methane has 86 times the global warming potential of carbon dioxide.

Phi#adetphid 135 ;. lr)tif SfreO Si.iiie 300 ' Philade!nhia. PA 191 1 03 ' 215-567-4004 .=tix 217:567 5741 :v.vw.clear:air.org h9arrisburg 101

1 N.i

- ranP5lre0 ° Suite113 " f1arrisb;iret,P.4 17101 ' 717•23 3 0-?t8?6 - Fex717-?3Q 8808 vr

~ •:v,fa:ebuok.tcrr:;:ienaircevnci'= WilmingtQn 1OGW. 1t71h 5ree1 ` Sui)s607 `rviirnington, DE 1 98,01 ! 302-6 9 1 {7112 ws, ~ . vitlecccmiclec^

~ :it

~ ouncil

### Clean Air Council believes that decisive EPA action oji climate change, namely limiting

greenhouse gas emissioiis, is essential. However, the proposed rule does not constitute that. I-TA needs to use its authority to create--and enforce—regulations that will actually bi-iiig us closer to solving the climate crisis.
PD-0188-15

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

Transmitted 2/24/2015 1:30:42 PM

Accepted 2/26/2015 4:11:30 PM

ABEL ACOSTA

CLERK
Exhibit 21


                                   SUBSIDIARIES

The following is a list of the Company's consolidated subsidiaries as of 
December 31, 1998:

                                              State or             Percent of
                                             Country of        Voting Securities
          Subsidiary                        Organization            Owned
          ----------                        ------------       -----------------
The Beard Company(1)                         Oklahoma             Registrant
Beard Leasing Company                        Delaware                 80%
Beard Mining, L.L.C.                         Oklahoma                100%
Beard Oil Company                            Delaware                100%
Beard Oilfield Service and Supply Co.(2)     Oklahoma                100%
Beard Sino-American Resources Co., Inc.      Oklahoma                100%
Beard Technologies, Inc.                     Oklahoma                100%
Carbonic Reserves(2)                         Nevada                  100%
Interstate Travel Facilities, Inc.           Oklahoma                 80%
ISITOP, Inc.                                 Oklahoma                 80%
ITS-TESTCO, L.L.C.                           Oklahoma                 50%
Reid Supply Company(2)                       Nevada                  100%
The Oaks Venture, Inc.                       Oklahoma                100%
TESTCO INC de MEXICO, S.A. de C.V.           Mexico                   50%
________________

     (1) The consolidated financial statements of the Company include 
accounts of Registrant and the subsidiaries controlled by the Registrant. 

     (2) Inactive subsidiary.

     (3) Excludes 80%-owned Cibola Corporation.  Registrant 
does not have financial control of this subisdiary.
# Meigs - Appalachian Regional Commission

- Buckeye Hills Regional Council Executive Director Chasity Schmelzenbach Email &#x63;&#x73;&#104;&#109;el&#x7a;&#x65;&#x6e;&#98;ac&#x68;&#x40;&#x62;&#117;&#99;k&#x65;&#x79;&#x65;&#104;&#105;l&#x6c;&#x73;&#x2e;&#111;&#114;gThe post Buckeye Hills Regional Council appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 478 

To require the imposition of sanctions against Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary 

Guard Corps, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 12, 2017 

Mr. POE of Texas (for himself and Mr. SHERMAN) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

A BILL 

To require the imposition of sanctions against Iran’s Islamic 

Revolutionary Guard Corps, 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 ‘‘IRGC Terrorist Sanc5 tions Act of 2017’’. 

6 SEC. 2. SANCTIONS AND REPORT BY PRESIDENT. 

7 (a) SANCTIONS.—The President shall, not later than 

8 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, des9 ignate Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a ter10 rorist entity under section 1(b) of Executive Order 13224 


rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 478 IH

1 of September 24, 2001, and impose sanctions against 

2 Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps under section 

3 1(b) of Executive Order 13224 of September 24, 2001, 

4 or under any other provision of law, as applicable. 

5 (b) REPORT.— 

6 (1) IN GENERAL.—The President shall submit 

7 to Congress a report that contains the results of the 

8 imposition of sanctions under subsection (a). 

9 (2) FORM.—The report under paragraph (1) 

10 should be submitted in unclassified form, but may 

11 contain a classified annex. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with BILLS
#### Morris STEPHENS, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America.

No. 11195.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

March 15, 1939.

Roy W. Rucker and James Daleo, both of Kansas City, Mo, for appellant.

Maurice M. Milligan, U. S. Atty, and Randall Wilson, Sam C. Blair, Thomas A. Costolow, and Richard K. Phelps, Asst. U. S. Attys, all of Kansas City, Mo.

PER CURIAM.

Judgment and sentence vacated, etc, and cause remanded with full power and authority in District Court to permit appellant to change his pleas, etc, on motion of appellant and consent of counsel for appellee.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 127 (Wednesday, September 19, 2012)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1573]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                       SENATE COMMITTEE MEETINGS

  Title IV of Senate Resolution 4, agreed to by the Senate on February 
4, 1977, calls for establishment of a system for a computerized 
schedule of all meetings and hearings of Senate committees, 
subcommittees, joint committees, and committees of conference. This 
title requires all such committees to notify the Office of the Senate 
Daily Digest--designated by the Rules Committee--of the time, place, 
and purpose of the meetings, when scheduled, and any cancellations or 
changes in the meetings as they occur.
  As an additional procedure along with the computerization of this 
information, the Office of the Senate Daily Digest will prepare this 
information for printing in the Extensions of Remarks section of the 
Congressional Record on Monday and Wednesday of each week.
  Meetings scheduled for Thursday, September 20, 2012 may be found in 
the Daily Digest of today's Record.

                           MEETINGS SCHEDULED

                              SEPTEMBER 25
     2 p.m.
       Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
       Federal Financial Management, Government Information, 
           Federal Services, and International Security 
           Subcommittee
         To hold hearings to examine improving financial 
           accountability at the Department of Defense.
                                                            SD-342
```
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.
 Department of Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
 Docket Nos.Nova Power, LLC
EG24-1-000Crow Creek Solar, LLC
EG24-2-000Inertia Energy Storage, LLC
EG24-3-000Torrecillas Energy Storage, LLC
EG24-4-000Ben Milam Solar 1 LLC
EG24-5-000Ben Milam Solar 3 LLC
EG24-6-000Salt Creek Township Solar, LLC
EG24-7-000BCD 2024 Fund 1 Lessee, LLC
EG24-8-000South Cheyenne Solar, LLC
EG24-9-000Sunlight Storage II, LLC
EG24-10-000Willowbrook Solar I, LLC
EG24-11-000Cedar Creek Wind, LLC
EG24-12-000St. Gall Energy Storage I, LLC
EG24-13-000Silver Peak Energy, LLC
EG24-14-000Wild Springs Solar, LLC
EG24-15-000Skysol, LLC
EG24-16-000Beaumont ESS, LLC
EG24-17-000Placerita ESS, LLC
EG24-18-000Poblano Energy Storage, LLC
EG24-19-000( print page 1570)Century Oak Wind Project, LLC
EG24-20-000Black Walnut Energy Storage, LLC
EG24-21-000CPV Stagecoach Solar, LLC
EG24-22-000Faraday Interconnection LLC
EG24-23-000Faraday Solar B LLC
EG24-24-000Condor Energy Storage, LLC
EG24-25-000Babbitt Ranch Energy Center, LLC
EG24-26-000Windpark Duben Süd GmbH & Co. KG
FC24-1-000
 Take notice that during the month of December 2023, the status of the above-captioned entities as Exempt Wholesale Generators or Foreign Utility Companies became effective by operation of the Commission's regulations. 18 CFR 366.7(a) (2022). Dated: January 4, 2024. Debbie-Anne A. Reese, Acting Secretary.


[FR Doc. 2024-00336 Filed 1-9-24; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4860 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4860

 To relocate the headquarters of the Appalachian Regional Commission, 
                        and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 19, 2018

 Mr. Griffith introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
             Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To relocate the headquarters of the Appalachian Regional Commission, 
                        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. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Appalachian Regional Commission 
Relocation Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    Congress finds the following:
            (1) Regional commissions, such as the Delta Regional 
        Authority, the Denali Commission, and the Northern Border 
        Regional Commission, are each headquartered in their respective 
        region.
            (2) Headquartering regional commissions within the region 
        affected is a sensible approach to ensure that the commissions 
        are housed in more affordable locations than the District of 
        Columbia, thereby reducing administrative overhead and making 
        the commissions closer and more accountable to the people the 
        commissions were designed to serve.

SEC. 3. HEADQUARTERS OF THE APPALACHIAN REGIONAL COMMISSION.

    (a) In General.--Section 14301 of title 40, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(g) Headquarters.--The headquarters of the Commission shall be 
located in the Appalachian region.''.
    (b) Implementation.--
            (1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
        enactment of this Act, the Federal Cochairman of the Commission 
        shall take such actions as may be necessary to carry out the 
        amendment made in subsection (a).
            (2) Extension.--The Federal Cochairman of the Commission 
        may extend, by up to 180 days, the period for implementation 
        specified in paragraph (1) if the Federal Cochairman submits to 
        the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House 
        of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public 
        Works of the Senate written notice of the need for the 
        extension.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 4 (Friday, January 5, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 816]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-29013]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail and USPS Ground Advantage[supreg] 
Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: January 5, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
December 29, 2023, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage[supreg] 
Contract 164 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at 
www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2024-152, CP2024-158.

Sean Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2023-29013 Filed 1-4-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
#### MERCANTILE COMMERCE BANK & TRUST CO., Trustee, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America.

No. 11331.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Aug. 1, 1939.

Forest P. Tralles and Fred J. Hoffmeister, both of St. Louis, Mo., for appellant.

Harry C. Blanton, U. S. Atty., of Sikeston, Mo., Herbert H. Freer, Asst. U. S. Atty., of St. Louis, Mo., James W. Morris, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Andrew D. Sharpe and Leon F. Cooper, Sp. Assts. to Atty. Gen.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal, Brown v. United States, 21 F.Supp. 214, dismissed at cost of appellant, per stipulation of party.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM ULTRATECH
STEPPER INC., FORM 10-K AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          43,898
<SECURITIES>                                   120,451
<RECEIVABLES>                                   48,205
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,258
<INVENTORY>                                     37,337
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               257,023
<PP&E>                                          37,073
<DEPRECIATION>                                  14,788
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 300,001
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           33,797
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            21
<OTHER-SE>                                     263,611
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   300,001
<SALES>                                        136,677
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               147,349
<CGS>                                           62,995
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   69,671
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                30,050
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 2,205
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 165
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 25,094
<INCOME-TAX>                                     7,528
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             17,566
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    17,566
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.85
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.81
        

</TABLE>