alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Annual Report of Extended Systems Incorporated on Form
10-K for the year ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the "Report"), I, Charles W. Jepson, 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:

     (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 results of operations
          of Extended Systems Incorporated.




/S/ CHARLES W. JEPSON
------------------------
Charles W. Jepson
Chief Executive Officer
October 17, 2005
I

,

**OFFICE OF**  **THE ATTORNEY**  **GENERAL OF**  **TEXAS** AUSTIN



## w0cPaye

fitowart, i%wstient **lit&e bowl**  **of ’**  Cocimtology Austin, Texas DQZW L;rer

Gtowartt

0 of regiritrt2- VnllA untilurrrFay0 stewart,v~bruar7,24#1938,~0P

to la"ronwal lioonl30~ unloos the Wnor;Cl crpplgoation b sacto witl@n ouo rear attor the exp.Sration af the old 15oolso*

### The'tuot that thli et;0 wnor rettLlnud tho cu~~lvf&ionRnbequl~t dm ill gthe t&-a the &no wba olosod,would htws no ‘inf&uenw on 0~3 oonlrtrua P- ion of the statutcmeiaoc tho t&hop wao cloeeil

t&r a porlmd Op 

### mro tii on0 pw aftor tit0 espirationop the shop Yloonso nni1 no effort ma D&O to 

### renmr the liocmsowithin the year. It $8 ooncoi~ablothat the sow0 owmr ti@t close t&o ahop tor a period of eovernl roars uxl thendccld0 to r0-0 ;1 an? a ply fm o r0110:;n1

liotwso. !3-0

thix%?: the to$B l~turo Lt 0llL-l~ that *tier such a situationtho rrpp1ioant mlat Noat tho omf3 roqulror~to 98 anarspplloaat~ !

; i c
If his, 

### therefore,**tho ’** **o** P oaotthlBDov ptar?ant that lf a chop 

### 0wnw.t la to.rcmm Me 11-~ :- ooafm ou 

### orbefore on0 year attor tho data at lta axpiration,po m al.10 oanuot somreorewualliaexme~ **but** tast nxike

applioatioa

### tor a Liootmo and ton dcl&r too OS roc~~eil in 6iootiOn 17,ot ix fhe

$010 Kub .
#### Wilburn H. ALLEN, Movant, v. COMMONWEALTH of Kentucky, Opposed.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Feb. 15, 1952.

Robert W. Zollinger, Louisville, for appellant.

A. E. Funk, Atty. Gen., Walter C. Herd-man, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal denied. Judgment affirmed.
#### WRIGHT v. STATE.

No. 22073.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 15, 1942.

Ralph Dickson and Rush H.' Record, both of Wichita Falls, for appellant.

Spurgeon E. Bell, State’-s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

GRAVES, Judge.

The appellant was convicted of murder with malice, and his punishment assessed at twenty-five years in the penitentiary.

The record is before this court without statement'of facts or’bills-: of exceptions, in the absence of. which no question has been presented for review. The indictment and all matters of' procedure appear regular.

The judgment of the trial court.is affirmed.
#### PEMBERTON v. COMMONWEALTH.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Dec. 12, 1952.

P. H. Vincent, Thomas Burchett and J. W. McKenzie, Ashland, for appellant.

J. D. Buckman, Jr., Atty. Gen., and H. D. Reed, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

CAMMACK, Chief Justice.

Robert Pemberton was sentenced to five years in prison on a charge of maliciously shooting and wounding Joseph Hughes with intent to kill. In their original brief counsel for Pemberton asked that the judgment be reversed because (1) the trial court erred in admitting incompetent evidence; (2) a directed verdict should have been given in Pemberton’s favor; (3) the court did not instruct the jury on the whole law of the case; and (4) a new trial should have been granted upon the ground of newly discovered evidence. In a supplemental brief Pemberton’s counsel urge that the judgment should be reversed because “the court erred in failing to instruct the jury that, if it had a reasonable doubt as to the degree of the offense which the appellant committed, it was the duty of the jury to *382find him guilty of the lesser degree, under Section 239 of the Criminal Code of Practice.”

In the case of Ball v. Commonwealth, 278 Ky. 52, 128 S.W.2d 176, it was pointed out that the giving of the reasonable doubt instruction does not dispense with the requirements of Section 239 of the Criminal Code, where there is evidence furnishing a reasonable doubt as to the degree of the offense committed. We think the instruction should have been given in this case because of the conflicting proof concerning the affray at the time Hughes was shot.

Pemberton’s story was that he got his pistol and wont to the door of his restaurant in response to the call of his waitress, who was being pursued across the yard by Hughes and his drunken' companions. He said that, as he opened the door to let the waitress in, Hughes pushed her to one side and grabbed him (Pemberton) and said, “I am going to kill you, God damn you.” He then shot Hughes in the left arm. Pemberton said also that he feared Hughes and his companion were going to “kill me and rob me.”

 Clearly, the case was one for the jury. Furthermore, we find no basis for the contention that the self-defense instruction should have included Pemberton’s' right to defend the waitress. She may have been the cause of his going to the door with his gun, but from there on the affray was between himself and Hughes and his followers.

Since there may be another trial of the cause it is unnecessary for us to discuss the question of alleged newly discovered evidence.

The basis of the complaint as to incompetent evidence was that counsel for the Commonwealth, including the special prosecutor, appeared to be determined to get before the jury the accusation that Pemberton was a 'bootlegger. Pemberton was being tried on a charge of maliciously shooting and wounding Joseph Hughes. If those persons who were prosecuting Pem-berton feel that he should be tried on a charge of bootlegging, they should avail themselves of the proper avenues for the presentation of such a charge.

Judgment reversed, with directions to set it aside, and for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
2179 N POWERLINE ROAD

STE 1

POMPANO BEACH, FL 33069

Current Principal Place of Business:

Current Mailing Address:

2179 N POWERLINE ROAD

STE 1

POMPANO BEACH, FL 33069 US

Entity Name: TECNOMEDIA & SATELLITE SERVICES LLC

DOCUMENT# L14000087377

FEI Number: 32-0441526 Certificate of Status Desired:

Name and Address of Current Registered Agent:

REGOJO, ANTONIO 

3550 BISCAYNE BLVD

#507

MIAMI, FL 33137 US

The above named entity submits this statement for the purpose of changing its registered office or registered agent, or both, in the State of Florida.

SIGNATURE:

Electronic Signature of Registered Agent Date

Authorized Person(s) Detail :

I hereby certify that the information indicated on this report or supplemental report is true and accurate and that my electronic signature shall have the same legal effect as if made under 

oath; that I am a managing member or manager of the limited liability company or the receiver or trustee empowered to execute this report as required by Chapter 605, Florida Statutes; and 

that my name appears above, or on an attachment with all other like empowered.

SIGNATURE:

Electronic Signature of Signing Authorized Person(s) Detail Date

FILED

Mar 30, 2015

Secretary of State

CC0418639285

CLAUDIO P FERNANDEZ MGR 03/30/2015

2015 FLORIDA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ANNUAL REPORT

No

Title MGR

Name FERNANDEZ, CLAUDIO P 

Address 2179 N POWERLINE ROAD STE 1 

City-State-Zip: POMPANO BEACH FL 33069
September 27, 2011 

MEMORANDUM 

From: William H. Maxwell 

EPA/SPPD/ESG (D243-01) 

To: Docket Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234 

Subject: Meeting with American Electric Power (AEP) 

Attendees: 

Peter Tsirigotis, EPA/OAR/OAQPS/SPPD 

Kevin Culligan, EPA/OAR/OAQPS/SPPD 

Robert J. Wayland, EPA/OAR/OAQPS/SPPD 

Bill Maxwell, EPA/OAR/OAQPS/SPPD 

John McManus, AEP 

John Hendricks, AEP 

Scott Weaver, AEP 

Janet Henry, AEP 

Paul Jackson, AEP 

Frank Blake, AEP 

Bruce Brain, AEP 

Discussion: 

A general discussion was held of the comments submitted by AEP on the proposed Mercury and 

Air Toxics Standards.
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 Merrill Lynch Preferred
Capital Trust IV (the "Trust") and Merrill Lynch Preferred Funding IV, L.P.
for the period ended December 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Marlene Debel,
Regular Trustee of the Trust, 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; and

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





                              MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED CAPITAL TRUST IV


                              By:  /s/ MARLENE DEBEL
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                              Name:    Marlene Debel *
                              Title:   Regular Trustee









Dated: March 24, 2006
_____________________

* Marlene Debel functions as the equivalent of the Chief Executive Officer
  and Chief  Financial  Officer of the Trust for  purposes  of Section  906
  of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
BOEM Seeks Public Involvement in Preparing an Environmental Assessment for the Shell Chukchi Sea 

Ancillary Activities Notice for the 2013 Open Water Season

The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) is preparing an Environmental Assessment (EA) for 

Shell’s Ancillary Activities to take place in federal waters in the Chukchi Sea during the 2013 open water 

season. These activities include 

 Offshore Ice Gouge Surveys- approximately 621 mi (1,000 km) of ice gouge surveys

 Site Clearance and Shallow Hazards Surveys-a total of approximately 1,988 mi (3,200 km) of 

tracklines in three survey areas

BOEM is inviting the public to comment on issues that should be considered by BOEM in preparing the EA.

BOEM received Shell’s Ancillary Activities Notice for operations in federal waters on April 19, 2013. This 

notice is available at:

http://www.boem.gov/uploadedFiles/BOEM/About_BOEM/BOEM_Regions/Alaska_Region/Leasing_and_Pl

ans/Plans/2013-04-

19%20Shell%20Chukchi%20Sea%202013%20Ancillary%20Activity%20Notice%20Open%20Water%20M....pd

f

BOEM is only accepting and considering public comments submitted through the Federal eRulemaking 

Portal (http://www.regulations.gov, docket number BOEM-2013-0032). The deadline to receive these 

comments is June 5, 2013 (12:00 midnight, EST). BOEM cautions that before including your address, phone 

number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware 

that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, may be made publicly available 

at any time. While you may ask BOEM (prominently at the beginning of your submission) to withhold your 

personal identifying information from public view, BOEM cannot guarantee that it will be able to do so. 

BOEM will not consider anonymous comments.
Exhibit 23.1

                     INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS' CONSENT

To the Board of Directors
GSV, Inc. and subsidiaries
Westport, Connecticut

We hereby consent to incorporation by reference in Registration Statement
Numbers 333-75159 and 333-91575 on Form S-8 of our report dated March 29, 2005
on the consolidated balance sheet of GSV, Inc. and Subsidiaries as of December
31, 2004 and the related consolidated statements of operations, changes of
stockholders' equity and cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2004 and
2003, which appear in the December 31, 2004 Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of GSV,
Inc.


/s/  Comiskey & Company, P.C.
Comiskey & Company, P.C.
Denver, Colorado
March 30, 2005
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 203 (Thursday, October 19, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62768-62769]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-26886]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Notice of Issuance of Amendment to Materials License SNM-2501

[Docket No. 72-2]


Virginia Electric and Power Company Surry Independent Spent Fuel 
Storage Installation

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) has 
issued Amendment 12 to Materials License SNM-2501 held by Virginia

[[Page 62769]]

Electric and Power Company (Virginia Power) for the receipt, 
possession, transfer, and storage of spent fuel at the Surry 
Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI), located in Surry 
County, Virginia. The amendment is effective as of the date of 
issuance.
    By application dated November 15, 1999, as supplemented on May 26, 
August 7, and August 14, 2000, Virginia Power requested to amend its 
ISFSI license to permit the use of the TN-32 dry storage cask to store 
spent fuel with a higher initial enrichment and burnup than currently 
specified in the Technical Specifications for the Surry ISFSI. This 
amendment complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic 
Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules 
and regulations. The Commission has made appropriate findings as 
required by the Act and the Commission's rules and regulations in 10 
CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in the license amendment.
    In accordance with 10 CFR 72.46(b)(2), a determination has been 
made that the amendment does not present a genuine issue as to whether 
public health and safety will be significantly affected. Therefore, the 
publication of a notice of proposed action and an opportunity for 
hearing or a notice of hearing is not warranted. Notice is hereby given 
of the right of interested persons to request a hearing on whether the 
action should be rescinded or modified.
    Also in connection with this action, the Commission prepared an 
Environmental Assessment (EA) and Finding of No Significant Impact 
(FONSI). The EA and FONSI were published in the Federal Register on 
September 22, 2000 (65 FR 57407).
    In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's ``Rules of Practice,'' 
a copy of this letter and its enclosure will be available 
electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or 
from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of NRC's document 
system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day of October 2000.
    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
E. William Brach,
Director, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety 
and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 00-26886 Filed 10-18-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
#### SOWELL v. STATE.

No. 23426.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 29, 1946.

James Ingram, of Houston, for appellant.

A. C. Winborn, Cr. Dist. Atty., and E. T. Branch, Asst. Cr. Dist. Atty., both.of Houston, and Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

Conviction is for burglary, the punishment assessed being twelve years in the penitentiary.

The indictment is in proper form. The record is before us without any statement of facts or bills of exception. In this condition, nothing is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.
4ar 

RHODE ISLAND 

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 

235 Promenade Street, Providence, RI 02908-5767 TDD 401-222-4462 

25 March 2015 

David Conroy 

U.S. EPA — Region 1 

5 Post Office Square, 

Suite 100 (OEP05-02) 

Boston, MA 02109-3912 

Re: Technical Revisions to Six Air Pollution Control Regulations 

Dear Mr. Conroy: 

On February 12, 2015 the Department of Environmental Management's Office of Air Resources 

filed technical revisions to seven of its Air Pollution Control Regulations. Five of these 

regulations are currently pending as SIP revisions, one regulation is federally enforceable, but 

not in the SIP and one regulation is not currently in the SIP. 

We are providing you six of these regulations to replace the current versions you have on file. 

Attached is a document that explains the changes that were made to each regulation and their 

current SIP status. 

Technical revisions are changes to a regulation that do not change the substance of the regulation 

in any way. Example revisions are typos, mislabeled sections, incorrect references, etc. 

If you have any questions on this issue, please contact me at (401) 222-2808, x-7011. 

Sincerely, 

Douglas L. McVay, ef 

Office of Air Resources 

cc: Anne Arnold, EPA 

Ida McDonnell, EPA 

itiol 30% post-consumer fiber
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                                                              EXHIBIT 12


                                                               MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED CAPITAL TRUST III
                                                                MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED FUNDING III, L.P.
                                                                 COMPUTATION OF RATIOS OF EARNINGS TO
                                                   COMBINED FIXED CHARGES AND PREFERRED SECURITIES DISTRIBUTIONS
                                                                          (dollars in thousands)


                                                                                                           FOR THE PERIOD
                                      FOR THE YEAR ENDED                  FOR THE YEAR END                JANUARY 16, 1998
                                      DECEMBER 29, 2000                   DECEMBER 31, 1999             TO DECEMBER 25, 1998
                           ---------------------------------  ---------------------------------  ----------------------------------
                              MERRILL LYNCH    MERRILL LYNCH     MERRILL LYNCH    MERRILL LYNCH    MERRILL LYNCH    MERRILL LYNCH
                                 PREFERRED       PREFERRED          PREFERRED       PREFERRED        PREFERRED       PREFERRED
                           CAPITAL TRUST III FUNDING III,L.P. CAPITAL TRUST III FUNDING III,L.P. CAPITAL TRUST III FUNDING III, L.P.
                           ----------------- ---------------  ----------------- ---------------  ----------------- ----------------

<S>                        <C>                 <C>            <C>               <C>               <C>               <C>

Earnings                       $ 54,124           $ 63,565        $ 54,124           $ 63,471         $ 51,727            $ 60,685
                               ========           ========        ========           ========         ========            ========


Fixed charges                  $      -           $      -        $      -           $      -         $      -            $      -

Preferred securities
 distribution
 requirements                    52,500             54,124          52,500             54,124           50,175              51,727
                               --------           --------        --------           --------         --------            --------

Total combined fixed
 charges and preferred
 securities distribution
 requirments                   $ 52,500           $ 54,124          52,500           $ 52,124         $ 50,175            $ 51,727
                               ========           ========        ========           ========         ========            ========

Ratio of earnings to
 combined fixed charges
 and preferred securities
 distribution requirements         1.03               1.17            1.03               1.17             1.03                1.17


</TABLE>
Kevin_Bromberg_to_Melanie_King_4-19-12.txt

From: "Bromberg, Kevin L." <kevin.bromberg@sba.gov> 

To: Melanie King/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

Cc: RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, <Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov>, JohnB 

Chamberlin/DC/USEPA/US@EPA 

Date: 04/19/2012 04:48 PM 

Subject: RE: RICE Reconsideration

I didn’t want to bother Cortney with this type of question. Now everyone can have 

these handy 

tables. Thx 

Hi Cortney! 

From: Melanie King [mailto:King.Melanie@epamail.epa.gov] 

Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 4:44 PM 

To: Bromberg, Kevin L. 

Cc: RobertJ Wayland; Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov; JohnB Chamberlin 

Subject: Re: RICE Reconsideration

Hi, 

EPA Region 1 has a good website that has some handy tables, which are taken from a 

presentation I 

did. Links to both are below. Also, I believe since the rule it at OMB now for 

interagency review, it would 

be a good idea if you could route questions through Cortney. 

http://www.epa.gov/region1/rice/ 

http://www.epa.gov/apti/video/pdfs/RICENESHAP-NETIwebinar12-7-11.pdf 

Melanie King 

Energy Strategies Group 

Sector Policies and Programs Division 

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Mail Code D243-01 

RTP, NC 27711 

Phone: (919) 541-2469 

Fax: (919) 541-5450 

king.melanie@epa.gov 

 "Bromberg, Kevin L." ---04/19/2012 04:26:16 PM---Hi Melanie - Is there a good table

on the EPA 

website listing the current SI and CI 

From: "Bromberg, Kevin L." <kevin.bromberg@sba.gov> 

To: Melanie King/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

Cc: RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

Date: 04/19/2012 04:26 PM 

Subject: RICE Reconsideration

Hi Melanie - 

Is there a good table on the EPA website listing the current SI and CI RICE 

requirements by 

engine size, and status (existing, new)? I’m reviewing the new proposal. Hope all is

well. 

Kevin 

Page 1
Kevin_Bromberg_to_Melanie_King_4-19-12.txt

Kevin Bromberg | Assistant Chief Counsel for Environmental Policy | SBA Office of 

Advocacy | 409 3rd St. SW, 

Washington, DC 20416 | p 202/205-6964 | f 202/481-2963 | kevin.bromberg@sba.gov | 

website | listserv | blog | 

Facebook | twitter | 

Page 2
EXHIBIT
10(xii)(b)

AMENDMENT TO
THE STANLEY WORKS
1997
LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN

The Stanley Works (the
‘‘Company’’) has adopted this amendment to
The Stanley Works 1997 Long-Term Incentive Plan effective as of
December  13,  2005.

The first sentence of Section
9(a) of the Plan is hereby amended to read as
follows:

‘‘(a)   Upon
theoccurrence of a Change in Control (as hereinafter defined), unless
otherwise determined by the Committee and set forth in an Award
Agreement,’’

THE STANLEY
WORKS


		By:______________________





		Its:______________________




1