alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit
        32.1**
  WRITTEN
        STATEMENT FURNISHED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
 SARBANES-OXLEY
        ACT OF 2002, 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
  The
        undersigned, Deborah C. Wright, is the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
        of
        Carver Bancorp, Inc. (the “Company”).
  This
        statement is being furnished in connection with the filing by the Company
        of the
        Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 2007 (the
“Report”).
  By
        execution of this statement, I certify that:
  a)
              the
                  Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
                  of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or
                  78o(d)); and
  b)
              the
                  information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
                  respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
                  the Company
                  as of the dates and for the periods covered by the
                  Report.
  July
                  17, 2007
              /s/
                  Deborah C. WrightDated
              Deborah
                  C. Wright
  This
        certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
        Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
        purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
        amended.
 
 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.
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas July 20, 2021 No. 04-20-00528-CV Alberto MUNIZ and Bridget Muniz,

Appellants
v. Mike DUGI and Mary Ann Dugi,

Appellees From the 198th Judicial District Court, Bandera County, Texas

Trial Court No. CVDO-18-0000406 Honorable M. Rex Emerson, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R The Appellees' Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief is hereby GRANTED. The appellees' brief is due on or before July 26, 2021. No further extensions will be granted.

_________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 20th day of July, 2021.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1



                   SUBSIDIARIES OF THE ARISTOTLE CORPORATION


S-A Subsidiary, Inc.
Mr. Lupe Robles

Coldwell Banker D’Ann Harper

18756 Stone Oak Parkway

San Antonio, TX 78258

Dear Lupe Robles:

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket 

No. FAA−2015−3695). This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA) to process your petition.

 Describe the aircraft makes, models, and types (i.e., fixed-wing, rotorcraft, 

lighter-than-air) for the proposed UAS operation. The descriptions should include the 

maximum weight (including payload). This information can be located in the 

aircraft manuals.

Please submit the additional information (non-proprietary) to your docket at 

www.regulations.gov. Once your information has been submitted, please also send a copy of the 

requested information (and any proprietary information), as well as your comment tracking 

number from regulations.gov via e-mail to 333exemptions@faa.gov. If you want us to process 

your request any further, we must receive the information described above by 11/26/15. If we do 

not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267-4549.

Sincerely,

/S/

Michael J. Cameron

Program Analyst
Exhibit 32.1

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

In connection  with the Annual Report of Point.360 ( the "Company") on Form 10-K
for the  period  ended  December  31,  2003,  as filed with the  Securities  and
Exchange  Commission  (the  "Report"),  I, Haig S.  Bagerdjian,  Chief Executive
Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss.  1350,  as adopted
pursuant  to  Section  906  of  the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of  2002,  that,  to 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/  Haig S. Bagerdjian
-------------------------------
Haig  S. Bagerdjian
Chief Executive Officer

March 14, 2004

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.
Exhibit 8.1

LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES

The following is a list of the Registrants subsidiaries as of December 31, 2005,
other than certain subsidiaries that did not in the aggregate constitute a significant subsidiary.



|                                     |  |                              
|------------------------------------ |  | -----------------------------
|Name                                 |  | Jurisdiction of Incorporation
|QIAGEN AG                            |  | Switzerland                  
|QIAGEN AS                            |  | Norway                       
|QIAGEN GmbH                          |  | Germany                      
|QIAGEN, Inc.                         |  | California                   
|QIAGEN K.K.                          |  | Japan                        
|QIAGEN Ltd.                          |  | England                      
|QIAGEN North American Holdings, Inc. |  | California                   
|QIAGEN Instruments AG                |  | Switzerland                  
|QIAGEN Sciences, Inc.                |  | Maryland
~040 • 

USCIB: 5.1/10 

16 August 1954 

EJQWfBBf'l'i/d; 

Ml!MORANDtH FOR THE MDIBE2S OF UsCIB: 

Subject: Change in Manbership of USCIB Executive Committee. 

Mr •• 1 .... ______ __.I has been designated the CIA M•ber or 

the United States Communications Intelligence Board Executive 

Committee ~ce Mr. Huntington D. Sheldon. 

OGA 

USCIB: 5.1/10 

eclassified and a roved for release b NSA on 09-24-2014 ursuantto E.O. 1352
#### Monroe Telephone Company, Appellant, vs. Ludlow and others, Respondents.

*October 7*

October *26, 1909.*

*Telephone companies: Location of poles: Removal by city officers: Obstruction in streets.*

1. Where a telephone company, operating under a city ordinance requiring it to locate its poles as directed by the council, paid no attention to a resolution of the council, served upon the company, directing removal of a pole set without previous authority, it cannot complain because the mayor and other officers carried out the directions of the council and removed the pole.

>[2. Whether the mayor and aldermen were justified in summarily removing the pole as an obstruction in the public streets under secs. 1326, 1347, Stats. (1898), not determined.]

*511Appeal from a judgment of tke circuit court for Green ■county: Geoege Gbimm, Circuit Judge.

*Affirmed.*

*J. L.*Sherron, for the appellant.

For the respondents there was a brief by *A. S. Douglas,*attorney, and *Aylward, Davies & Olbrich,*of counsel, and ■oral argument by *Mr. Douglas*and *Air. M. B. Olbrich.*

Wietslow, C. J.

This action was brought to recover •damages for the wrongful removal of a telephone pole standing in the street in the city of Monroe, which is a city of ■the fourth class. The action was tried before the court, trial by jury having been waived. The plaintiff was operating its system in said city under an ordinance providing that the location and setting of all poles should be under the direction ■of the common council. It set the pole in question, without previous authority from the council, in one of the streets of the city, near its intersection with an alley, and in the traveled track, so as to materially obstruct free access to and from the alley. The city council by resolution directed the removal of the pole and served a copy of the resolution on the plaintiff company. Uo attention was paid to the resolution, and about twenty days thereafter the defendant *Ludlow,*who is the mayor of the city, aided by the street committee of the council and an experienced lineman, removed the pole, being ■careful to do no unnecessary damage-.

The facts stated show that there can be no recovery. The •company was required under the ordinance, which it had accepted and was acting under, to locate its poles as directed by the council. When directed to remove the pole in question it was plainly its duty to do so, and it cannot complain because the mayor, who is the chief executive officer of the city and charged with the duty of enforcing the state laws and city ordinances (sec. 925 — 38, Stats. 1898), carried out the directions of the council. This conclusion seems incontestable.

*512*It may well he, also, that the*mayor and aldermen were-justified in removing such an obstruction in the public streets, summarily under the provisions of secs. 1326 and 1347, Stats. 1898 *(State v. Leaver,*62 Wis. 387, 22 N. W. 576) ; but,, as the other ground of defense is complete, it is unnecessary to decide this question.

*By live Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# USSPACECOM commander visits NRO

By Anna-Marie WyantNational Reconnaissance Office

                FORT BELVOIR, Va.  –              
National Reconnaissance Office leadership welcomed the new commander of U.S. Space Command for a tour and mission briefs at Aerospace Data Facility – East on Sept. 2.Army Gen. James Dickinson, who assumed command of USSPACECOM Aug. 20, received in-depth briefings about the NRO from NRO Director Dr. Christopher Scolese, NRO Deputy Director Air Force Maj. Gen. Michael Guetlein and various subject matter experts.“This is an excellent opportunity to share our vital mission with a great partner,” Scolese said. “We’re honored to host General Dickinson and showcase our high-performing people who accomplish that mission each day.”Following social distancing and facemask protocols, Dickinson also toured the site, including the NRO Operations Center and a portion of the ADF-E Operations Floor.During the tour, Dickinson met space operators who recently transitioned from the U.S. Air Force to the U.S. Space Force. One officer presented a briefing that was previously featured in the President’s Daily Brief.“This is great,” Dickinson said. “You’re developing your tactics, techniques and procedures, and you can use this in the future. I applaud your efforts.”The NRO and USSPACECOM work together closely to protect U.S. and allied interests in space, as well as defend against potential threats. Dickinson said he appreciated his visit and is impressed with the NRO’s execution of its multi-faceted, important mission.“What you do here is remarkable,” Dickinson said. “You have opened my eyes ... Your efforts are essential to our national security, and I’m excited about the amazing things you’ll continue to do in the future.”USSPACECOM, the newest combatant command, was established within the Department of Defense on Aug. 29, 2019. Its mission includes conducting operations in, from and to space to deter conflict and defeat aggression; delivering space combat power for the joint force; and defending U.S. and vital interests with partners and allies.The National Reconnaissance Office is the U.S. government agency in charge of designing, building, launching and maintaining U.S. intelligence satellites. Headquartered in Chantilly, Virginia, the NRO has total force military and civilian personnel assigned to various locations across the globe.

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .gov**
A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
**Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

National Security Agency/Central Security Service

Search
Search

Search

-  About    -  Leadership             
  -  Mission & Combat Support             
  -  Cybersecurity             
  -  Signals Intelligence             
  -  Central Security Service             
  -  Locations             
  -  Research             
  -  Diversity, Equity, Inclusion & Accessibility             
  -  Cybersecurity Collaboration Center      -  Collaborative Partnerships             
    -  Enduring Security Framework             
    -  DIB Cybersecurity Services             
    -  Standards and Certifications             
    -  Artificial Intelligence Security Center 
-  Press Room    -  Press Releases & Statements             
  -  News & Highlights             
  -  Declassification & Transparency Initiatives             
  -  Cybersecurity Advisories & Guidance             
  -  Telework and Mobile Security Guidance             
  -  DoD Microelectronics Guidance             
  -  Research Publications 
-  Careers    -  Unique Pathways             
  -  Innovation 
-  History    -  National Cryptologic Museum             
  -  Cryptologic History             
  -  National Cryptologic Memorial 

# Cryptologic Machines Image Gallery

HomeHistoryNational Cryptologic MuseumExhibits & ArtifactsCryptologic MuseumMachines

Search

Search

                              - All Images 
                              - Design Elements 
                              - NSA Historical Photographs 
                              - Other 

                              - Upload Date
                              - Photo Date
                              - Title

----

Download Image: Full Size (1.8 MB)

Tags:machines

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23









Carver Bancorp, Inc.
75 West 125th Street
New York, New York 10027


We hereby consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
on Form S-8 of Carver Bancorp, Inc. of our report dated June 29, 1999 relating
to the consolidated financial condition of Carver Bancorp, Inc. and
subsidiaries as of March 31, 1999, and the related consolidated statements of
income, changes in stockholders' equity and cash flows for the year ended March
31, 1999, which report is incorporated by reference in the March 31, 1999
Annual Report on Form 10-K of Carver Bancorp, Inc. and subsidiaries.



/s/ Mitchell & Titus LLP

New York, New York
June 29, 1999
# CE2004078EN.01054901.xml

| 27.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 78/549 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 78/549

---

(2004/C 78 E/0584)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3446/03

by Sebastiano Musumeci (UEN) to the Commission

(13 November 2003)

Subject:   Authorisation for aid in connection with a biological rest period in Sicily in 2002

Subject:

In March 2002, pursuant to Regional Decree (D.A.) No 22/Fisheries, the Sicilian regional authorities notified the Commission regarding the granting of financial aid to fishermen in connection with the biological rest period in 2002.

Subsequent and wholly justified requests from the Commission for further information considerably delayed the reply from Brussels on the matter.

The aid provided for in the aforementioned decree was based on the legislation in force at the time, namely Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 (1).

1

The Commission surprisingly chose to take its decision on the basis of Regulation (EC) No 2369/2002 (2) of 20 December 2002, which substantially amended Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999.

2

The failure to authorise the provision of aid in connection with the biological rest period in 2002 is causing major financial problems for many fisheries operators who have implemented the rest period.

Given the above, would the Commission not agree that it should consider the request from the Sicilian regional authorities for 2002 to be compatible with Community law, so as not to add to the financial difficulties already being faced by Sicilian fisheries operators who are also being penalised by the measures provided for in the Community fisheries action plan?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(11 December 2003)

(11 December 2003)

The Commission can inform the Honourable Member that the situation described in his question was the subject of a letter from the Commission's Director-General for Fisheries in July of this year in which he referred to the relevant sections of the Community rules (3) and to the Guidelines for the examination of State aid to fisheries and aquaculture.

3

In October the Sicilian Regional Government's fisheries department sent the Fisheries Directorate-General a letter on the matter, and the Commission is still examining the dossier in the light of the abovementioned Guidelines (4) and Regulation.

4

---

(1)  OJ L 337, 30.12.1999, p. 10.

1

(2)  OJ L 358, 31.12.2002, p. 49.

2

(3)  Council Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 of 17 December 1999 laying down the detailed rules and arrangements regarding Community structural assistance in the fisheries sector, OJ L 337, 30.12.1999, p. 12.

3

(4)  OJ C 19, 20.1.2001.

4

---
NRO Payload Takes Last Ride Aboard Titan 

IV

| 20 October 2005 |

A National Reconnaissance Office payload rode aboard the final launch of a Titan IV from SLC 

#4E at Vandenberg Air Force Base, CA on Oct. 19, 2005 at 2:04 p.m., EDT.

"This marks the first Titan IV launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base this year and the last of 

the Titan IV launches; the end of an era and the beginning of a legend," said Colonel Chip 

Zakrzewski, Mission Director.

The Titan IV was the nation's largest expendable launch vehicle.
EXHIBIT 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



The Board of Directors:
Profile Technologies, Inc.


     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement
(No. 333-53575) on Form S-3 of Profile Technologies, Inc. of our report dated
September 27, 2002 relating to the balance sheet of Profile Technologies, Inc.
as of June 30, 2002, and the related statement of operations, stockholders'
equity (deficit), and cash flows for each of the years in the two-year period
ended June 30, 2002, which report appears in the June 30, 2002 annual report on
Form 10-KSB of Profile Technologies, Inc.

     Our report dated September 27, 2002 contains an explanatory paragraph that
states that the Company has incurred net losses since inception and has
projected working capital requirements at June 30, 2002 that raise substantial
doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern. The financial statements
do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of that
uncertainty.


                                               /s/ KPMG LLP
                                               ------------
                                               KPMG LLP


Seattle, Washington
October 14, 2002

                                       45
#### Chambers *v.*Smith.

Any omission, neglect or delay of the Clerk, or ¡my contrivance of the adverse party, or the improper conduct ot the County Court, in granting an appeal where properly applied for, is sufficient to entitle the party to a *certiorari,*and a new trial will be immediately granted in the court above.

Certiorari. *Per curiam*— It is stated in the affidavit of *Chambers,*that after the trial of the issue in this action in the County Court, he moved for ao appeal; and after-wards during the sitting of the court, he offered sufficient sureties for prosecuting the appeal with effect, but that the Clerk being not ready with the bond, and telling him it would do as well to give the bond at the nextCounty Court, which happened before the sitting of the Superior Court, he retired; and at the next court lie applied again, and was then told by the Clerk it was too late. If this be a true statement lie-is entitled to a new trial in this court, in the same manner as if the appeal had been regularly brought up. The decisions have been uniform, that after the party prays an appeal, and offers or gives sufficient sureties, and he is defeated of his appeal by the neglect, omission or delay of the Clerk, or by any contrivance of the adverse party, or by any improper conduct of the County Court, as if they adjourn after the tri*421*n\f*f0 prevent the pai’ty from applying for the appeal— in all such cases, this court will grant a certiorari, and order a trial here, without enquiring into the motives of the party praying the appeal, or into the merits <>f his cause ; for by the laws of the country, he is entitled to his appeal whenever he thinks proper to crave it, and he ought not to be defeated of his privilege by the conduct of others : and we would now order the new trial his counsel prays for, but for the contrary affidavits which render ii doubtful whether he. did offer the sureties as stated in' the affidavit. Wherefore let this cause lie over till the first day of next term, that the Plain) iff may produce the affidavits of the sureties themselves who were offered, or such other affidavits a. he may think proper.

*Note.*— Vide *Anonymous, ante*302.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

HERBERT TRAVER,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 49 MAL 2022

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 27th day of June, 2022, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
Exhibit 32



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 Airguide, Inc. (the Registrant) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report) I, James Frack, President, Treasurer and Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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 Registrant.



Date:

July 3, 2006



/s/  James Frack

James Frack

President, Treasurer

& Chief Executive Officer