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 Quarterly Report of Corautus Genetics Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Richard E. Otto, President and 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.



Date: April 30, 2004



/s/ RICHARD E. OTTOName: Richard E. Otto Title: President and Chief Executive Officer






---

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Corautus Genetics Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert T. Atwood, 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 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.



Date: April 30, 2004



/s/ ROBERT T. ATWOODName: Robert T. Atwood Title: Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
#### Roiesler, Plaintiff in error, vs. The State, Defendant in error.

*September 20*

October *14, 1924.*

*Intoxicating liquors: Destruction of fluids on premises being searched.*

The evidence in this case is *held*sufficient to sustain a conviction for secreting or destroying fluids on premises being searched under a warrant, p. 636.

Error to review a judgment of the municipal court of Milwaukee county: A. C. Backus, Judge.

*Affirmed.*

Plaintiff in error was behind the bar on premises licensed for the sale of soft drinks. Three officers in uniform, one with a search warrant, entered. Before the warrant was produced or read the defendant proceeded to dispose of the contents of a glass he was then holding, which glass was immediately seized. The liquid remaining in the glass contained alcohol. He was found guilty of a violation of the prohibition law, making it unlawful to secrete or destroy fluids on premises being searched, and from the judgment he sued out this writ of error.

The cause was submitted for the plaintiff in error on the brief of *A. W. Richter*of Milwaukee, and for the defendant in error on that of the *Attorney General, Eugene Wengert,*
      *636district attorney oí Milwaukee county, and *John P. Don-nelly,*assistant district attorney.

Eschweiler, J.

There is sufficient evidence in the record to support the result reached.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
### Date**~, ~~**  

## g: \ ':L 0 I 

## tfMeeting: 

### S**~** 

### lJV (>""-+**~ M-e~**  \2-e 

### 1,

. S Rule(s) Discussed: Written Materials? Yes/No N am e Or g ani z ation Phone N urn her 

## S (o 'fT

### ~A'l-!Vt**~N** 1 

### f/.l e Lu CJ;L 2o 2- -<-I t;,C,

- I LJ<f 

# r 

# M · A R.,N 12_ 

# 11 )J\L 

# I(**~~e** 2 0 

### 1 'YJoiJL_/!121 ?A-vL 

### (;1//IJArwJr 

## Fr , r;. .. 1 

### d-o)

-**sCf~-!~J-b**

## ~f4rJ /

### /~Aufj/1 f) 

# \2Io 1/ 

### 'f? I**~-;)Cjj-** 

## V£Ycj ""' 

### 'I v =- 7 I
# Tree/Shrub Establishment (Ac.) (612) Conservation Practice Standard

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Resources 
-  Tree/Shrub Establishment (Ac.) (612) Conservation Practice Standard 

Download the national conservation practice standard document and supporting documents for Tree/Shrub Establishment (Ac.) (612).

## National Standard Document

NOTICE - National conservation practice standards should not be used to plan, design or install a conservation practice. To find these documents at the local level, visit our Field Office Technical Guide website.

Conservation Practice Name (Units) (Code) (Date Issued)

612 NHCP CPS Tree Shrub Establishment 2023(120.26 KB)

###   Supporting Documents

Tree/Shrub Establishment (Ac.) (612) CPPE(26.01 KB)

612 NHCP NED Tree Shrub Establishment 2023 final(72.28 KB)

612 NHCP PO Tree Shrub Establishment 2023(439.87 KB)

## Conservation at Work: Tree/Shrub Establisment

This video explores how Larry Brown of Ennis, MT, planted trees to benefit his honey bees and other pollinators. 

##   Additional Information

### Conservation Practice Standards

On this page find links to national conservation practice standards and supporting documents.
Learn More

### Conservation Practice Standards Information

Learn about the information provided in conservation practice standards and supporting documents, such as overviews, worksheets, and network effects diagrams.
Learn More
NO. 07-04-0052-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL A

MAY 18, 2004

______________________________

LUCIO ROMAN CARRASCO, APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

_________________________________

FROM THE 251ST DISTRICT COURT OF POTTER COUNTY;

NO. 46,805-C; HONORABLE PATRICK A. PIRTLE, JUDGE

_______________________________

Before JOHNSON, C.J., and REAVIS and CAMPBELL, JJ.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Lucio Roman Carrasco appeals a conviction for possession of a controlled

substance with intent to deliver. We dismiss for want of jurisdiction.
-2-

BACKGROUND

Appellant pled guilty to the charge of possession of a controlled substance with

intent to deliver. Sentence was imposed on December 1, 2003. He did not file a motion

for new trial. Notice of appeal was filed on February 6, 2004. 

LAW

In a criminal case, appeal is perfected by timely filing a notice of appeal. TEX. R.

APP. P. 25.2(b). The notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days after the day sentence

is imposed or after the day the trial court enters an appealable order, unless a timely

motion for new trial is filed. TRAP 26.2(a). The time for filing a notice of appeal may be

extended for 15 days under certain circumstances. TRAP 26.3. If the time for filing a

notice of appeal is to be extended, both a notice of appeal and a motion for extension of

time which complies with TRAP 10.5(b) must be filed within the 15 day period. TRAP 26.3;

Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 523-25 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996). 

An untimely-filed notice of appeal will not invoke the jurisdiction of the court of

appeals. See State v. Riewe, 13 S.W.2d 408, 411 (Tex.Crim.App. 2000). Thus, if an

appeal is not timely perfected, a court of appeals does not have jurisdiction to address the

merits of the appeal, and can take no action other than to dismiss the appeal. Slaton v.

State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex.Crim.App. 1998); Olivo, 918 S.W.2d at 523-25.
-3-

ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION

Appellant’s notice of appeal was not timely filed. A motion to extend time to file the

notice of appeal was not filed. Accordingly, this court does not have jurisdiction over the

appeal. Slaton, 981 S.W.2d at 210; Olivo, 918 S.W.2d at 523. 

The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. TEX. R. APP. P. 39.8, 40.2, 43.2.

Phil Johnson

Chief Justice

Do not publish.
#### Thomsen, Appellant, vs. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Company, Respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the circuit court for Milwaukee county dated January 15, 1927: Walter Schinz, Judge.

Personal injury. Crossing accident. Judgment for defendant, from which plaintiff appeals.

For the appellant: *Joseph G. Hirschberg*of Milwaukee.

For the respondent: *John F. Baker*of Milwaukee.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
EXHIBIT 99.1

                                  CERTIFICATION
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
           AS ADOPTED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


           I, Floyd Warkol, as Chief Executive Officer of KSW, Inc., (the
"Company"), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss.1350, as adopted by Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

           (1) the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period
ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
(the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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: May 13, 2003


                                           /s/ Floyd Warkol
                                           -----------------------------------
                                           Floyd Warkol
                                           Chief Executive Officer


           A signed original 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.








                                       21
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-1203
DONALD VAN METER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus KATHERINE VAN METER; BARBARA GREIG, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (CA-03-104) Submitted: June 19, 2003 Decided: June 24, 2003 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Donald Van Meter, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Donald Van Meter appeals the district court’s order dismissing his complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Van Meter v. Van Meter , No. CA-03-104 (E.D. Va. filed Jan. 31, 2003; entered Feb. 3, 2003). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
August 2023

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Helping People Help the Land 

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

Conservation Practice Overview

Water and Sediment Control Basin (Code 638) 

A water and sediment control basin (WASCOB) is an earth

embankment or a combination ridge and channel

constructed across the slope of a minor drainageway. 

Practice Information 

The purpose of this practice is to reduce gully erosion, trap

sediment, and reduce and manage runoff. WASCOBs are

constructed across small drainageways where they

intercept runoff. The basin detains runoff and slowly

releases it allowing sediment to settle. WASCOBs generally use an underground outlet to control the

release and carry the runoff in a pipe to a receiving stream or ditch. 

This practice applies to sites where— 

• The topography is generally irregular. 

• Gully erosion is a problem. 

• Other conservation practices control sheet and rill erosion. 

• Runoff and sediment damages land and works of improvement. 

• Stable outlets are available. 

WASCOBs alone may not be sufficient to control sheet and rill erosion on sloping upland areas. In

addition, outlets from water and sediment control basins can provide a direct conduit to receiving

waters for contaminated runoff from cropland. For these reasons, additional practices may be needed

to adequately protect sloping upland areas from erosion and to protect down-slope water quality. 

Common Associated Practices 

The Conservation Practice Standard (CPS) Water and Sediment Control Basin (Code 638) is

frequently associated with CPSs Conservation Crop Rotation (Code 328); Residue and Tillage

Management, No Till (Code 329); Residue and Tillage Management, Reduced Till (Code 345); Cover

Crop (Code 430); Critical Area Planting (Code 342); Filter Strip (Code 393); and Nutrient Management

(Code 590). 

For further information, contact your local NRCS field office.
ANIMAL ID TREATMENT FINAL CYCLE PIT UTERINE Progesterone LHRAT TIME BODY WT. WEIGHT(MG) WEIGHT (G) ng/ml dil #1--10+49033687 ATR 6.25 mg/kg 2000 279 PRO 12.5 0.4789 9.42 033710 ATR 6.25 mg/kg 2000 285 D 13.6 0.4556 3.547 0.01833754 Control 2000 279 D 13.5 0.3548 40.864 0.03533774 ATR 6.25 mg/kg 2000 294 PRO 11.9 0.4864 7.288 0.0333779 ATR 1.5 mg/kg 2000 288 PRO 13.3 0.4366 9.05 0.11933650 Control 1400 272 D 12.3 0.3394 3.19 0.07533701 ATR 1.5 mg/kg 1400 266 D 11.9 0.3148 5.986 0.0433755 Control 1400 317 D 12.6 0.3358 10.876 0.08933759 ATR 1.5 mg/kg 1400 286 D 12 0.3088 19.023 0.11533677 ATR 1.5 mg/kg 1600 228 D 10.8 0.2987 12.811 0.01433695 Control 1800 247 D 12.4 0.3587 26.362 0.03933715 ATR 1.5 mg/kg 1800 257 PRO 11.6 0.376 8.107 0.05933763 ATR 1.5 mg/kg 1800 270 PRO 10.6 0.4911 75.829 1.64833778 ATR 3.12 mg/kg 1800 281 D 11.9 0.3501 14.161 0.01433769 ATR 1.5 mg/kg 1600 266 D 14 0.3166 4.889 0.05833751 ATR 6.25 mg/kg 1600 294 D 15.5 0.3582 26.201 0.1133768 Control 1600 253 PRO 11.4 0.4468 15.856 0.06333773 ATR 3.12 mg/kg 1600 275 D 13.1 0.3664 8.288 0.0533790 ATR 6.25 mg/kg 1600 285 PRO 14.5 0.3644 9.457 0.10433660 ATR 6.25 mg/kg 1200 281 D 14.1 0.4078 12.243 0.03833694 ATR 3.12 mg/kg 1400 319 D 12.9 0.3628 3.633 0.02633696 ATR 6.25 mg/kg 1400 276 D 13.3 0.374 25.64 0.07433720 ATR 1.5 mg/kg 1400 226 D 10.6 0.357 21.473 0.10533714 ATR 6.25 mg/kg 1600 257 D 8.8 0.321 10.047 0.0633735 ATR 1.5 mg/kg 1600 262 D 11.7 0.4269 4.94 0.02333762 Control 1800 309 D 12.2 0.3627 7.032 0.04933722 ATR 1.5 mg/kg 1800 257 D 10.7 0.3867 14.403 0.088Rats not achieving proestrous criteria in groups receiving 1..56, 3.121 and 6.25 mg.kg Atrazine33738 ATR 3.12 mg/kg 1800 264 PRO 12.9 0.7205 45.73 3.48533811 ATR 6.25 mg/kg 1800 273 PRO 10.6 0.3565 23.212 0.07733802 Control 1800 212 PRO 9.3 0.5571 6.809 0.01933835 ATR 1.5 mg/kg 1800 227 PRO 10.7 0.9611 9.752 0.131LHdil #2-100+4000.1440.1190.4940.1930.3450.3110.3090.1540.4480.260.1390.15927.3040.2110.3340.9880.7230.1940.4130.2680.4270.520.4610.40.180.2210.37946.7410.2310.3880.752
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 24.2

                               POWER OF ATTORNEY

We, the undersigned directors and officers of Aetna Inc. (the "Company"), hereby
severally constitute and appoint Alan M. Bennett, William J. Casazza and Edward
L. Shaw, Jr., and each of them individually, our true and lawful attorneys, with
full power to them and each of them to sign for us, and in our names and in the
capacities indicated below, the Company's 1999 Form 10-K and any and all
amendments thereto to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, hereby ratifying and confirming our
signatures as they may be signed by our said attorneys to the Form 10-K and to
any and all amendments thereto.

Dated as of February 25, 2000.


/s/ William H. Donaldson
-------------------------------------
William H. Donaldson
Chairman, Chief Executive Officer,
President and Director
(Principal Executive Officer)
#### Schmidt, Administratrix, Respondent, vs. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railway Company, Appellant: Hebert, Impleaded Defendant.

For the appellant: Bender, *Trump & McIntyre*of Milwaukee, and *F. J. Smith*of Merrill.

For the respondent: *O’Melia & Kaye*of Rhinelander.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.
Exhibit 23.1



CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM



We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-91316, 333-102962, 333-122555 , 333-123408 and 333-129033 ) of  Kinder Morgan Management, LLC of our report dated February 28, 2007relating to the financial statements, managements assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K, and of our report dated February 28, 2007 relating to the financial statements, management's assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P., which appears in Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P.s Annual Report on Form 10-K which is incorporated by reference in this Form 10-K.







PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Houston, Texas

February 28, 2007
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATION


REQUIRED
BY RULE 13a-14(b) or


RULE
15d-14(b) AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


(AS
ADOPTED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)





I, Floyd
Warkol, as Chief Executive Officer of KSW, Inc. (the “Company”), certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002:





(1) the accompanying Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”) on the date hereof fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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
11, 2010





/s/ Floyd WarkolFloyd
      WarkolChief
      Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 10.44

                                 PROMISSORY NOTE



$100,000.00                                               Date:  April 19, 2001



FOR VALUE  RECEIVED,  PAWNBROKER.COM  hereby promises to pay, in lawful money of
the United  States of America,  to the order of EDWARD F. ROMANO,  the PRINCIPAL
SUM of $100,000.00 plus interest at the rate of eighteen percent (18%) per annum
from April 19th,  2001. The term of the loan shall be 90 days and the balance of
principal and interest  shall be due and payable on the  nineteenth day of July,
2001. Any part or all of the balance of said principal sum may be prepaid at any
time without penalty.

The  undersigned  promises  and agrees that in case of default in the payment of
any installment of principal and/or interest as provided herein, or in the event
that any maker of this Note shall make a general  assignment  for the benefit of
creditors or be adjudged a bankrupt,  then upon the happening of any one of such
events,  the whole sum of principal and interest  which shall then remain unpaid
shall  become  forthwith  due and  payable,  although  the time of  maturity  as
expressed in this promissory Note shall not have arrived.

If one or more of the provisions of this Note shall be deemed  invalid,  illegal
or  unenforceable  in any respect,  such provision shall be deemed to be severed
from the note, and the validity,  legality and  enforceability  of the remaining
provisions  contained  herein  shall  not in any  way be  affected  or  impaired
thereby. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, any provisions herein
to the contrary notwithstanding, Holder shall in no event be entitled to receive
or collect,  nor shall or may amounts  received  hereunder be credited,  so that
Holder  shall be paid,  as  interest,  a sum  greater  than the  maximum  amount
permitted by law. If any  construction  of this Note indicates a different right
given to the Holder to ask for,  demand or receive any larger sum, as  interest,
such is a mistake in  calculation or in wording which this clause shall override
and control, and proper adjustment shall automatically be made accordingly.

The undersigned  promises and agrees that in case any suit or legal or equitable
action,  or  proceedings,  are  instituted  to collect  this Note or any portion
thereof,  or any interest  thereon,  to pay all costs and expenses in connection
therewith including a reasonable attorney's fee.

The maker and endorser severally waive presentment for payment,  demand, notice,
protest and notice of protest,  diligence and  nonpayment of this Note,  and all
defenses on the ground of any  extension of time of payment that may be given by
the Holder or Holders to them or either of them, and/or any other defenses which
they or either of them might or could have.

       PAWNBROKER.COM
       a Delaware Corporation



                                  By: /s/ Joseph D. Schlader
                                      ------------------------------------------
                                      Joseph D. Schlader, President
#### State v. Carlile, Judith Ann

(12378).

Reversed and remanded for trial. *State v. Delker,*26 Or App 497, 552 P2d 1313, *rev den*(1976); *State v. Broderick,*14 Or App 69, 511 P2d 1281 (1973); *State v. Poteet,*9 Or App 231, 495 P2d 783, *rev den*(1972). (603 P2d 783, aff’d 290 Or 161, 619 P2d 1280 (1980))
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF AMERICAN RESIDENTIAL SERVICES,
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           6,641
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   20,896
<ALLOWANCES>                                       729
<INVENTORY>                                      9,652
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                39,955
<PP&E>                                          19,957
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,507
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 189,755
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           24,446
<BONDS>                                         51,854
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            10
<OTHER-SE>                                     110,539
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   189,755
<SALES>                                         64,229
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                64,229
<CGS>                                           47,990
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   47,990
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                16,767
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,257
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (5,435)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       101
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (5,536)
<DISCONTINUED>                                     (3)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (5,539)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.70)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0

</TABLE>
#### Reedsburg Bank, Respondent, vs. Krueger and wife, Appellants.

For the appellants : *V. H. Cady*of Baraboo.

For the respondent: *H. E. Kjorstad*of Reedsburg.

*By the Court.*— Orders affirmed.