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

I, Theodore A. Boutacoff, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, certify that the Quarterly Report of IRIDEX Corporation on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended July 4, 2009 (i) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of IRIDEX Corporation.

Date: August 13, 2009

|       |  |                                                                    
|------ |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------
|       | 
|By:    |  | /s/ THEODORE A. BOUTACOFF                                          
|Name:  |  | Theodore A. Boutacoff                                              
|Title: |  | President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
**Exhibit
      32.1**








CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO


18
      U.S.C
      SECTION 1350,


AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES -OXLEY ACTS OF 2002








In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Wireless Xcessories Group, Inc. (the
      “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2005 as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report”), I
      Stephen Rade, 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, to the best of my knowledge, that:





(1)
      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.








Date: November
                4, 2005
              By:
              /s/ Stephen
                RadeStephen
                RadeChief
                Executive Officer
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Elroda Shavaya THOMPSON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-3122

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 30, 2017

Decided: June 13, 2017

*754Elroda Shavaya Thompson, Appellant Pro Se. Angela Hewlett Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Steven N. Baker, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before KING, DUNCAN, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Elroda Shavaya Thompson seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Thompson has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We deny Thompson’s motion to appoint counsel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED*
#### BRUNSWICK CORPORATION, Sea Ray Boats, Inc., Appellants v. COBALT BOATS, LLC, Appellee

2017-1065

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

September 7, 2017

Jason C. White, Morgan, Lewis & Bock-ius LLP, Chicago, IL, argued for appellants. Also represented by Scott D. Sher-win; William R. Peterson, Houston, TX; Julie S. Goldemberg, Pittsburgh, PA; David M. Morris, Washington, DC; Christoper Reagan Liro, Aaron T. Olejniczak, Andrus Intellectual Property Law, LLP, Milwaukee, WI.

*1022Penny R. Slices, Stinson Morrison Hecker LLP, Kansas City, MO, argued for appellee. Also represented by Bradley Scott Eidson, Samir Ramesh Mehta, St. Louis, MO.

(Dyk, Moore, and Taranto, Circuit Judges).

JUDGMENT

Per Curiam

This Cause having been heard and con sidered, it is Ordered and Adjudged:

AFFIRMED. *See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Justice

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that on December 14, 2021 pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), ASTM International (“ASTM”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing additions or changes to its standards development activities. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, ASTM has provided an updated list of current, ongoing ASTM activities originating between September 15, 2021 and December 14, 2021 designated as Work Items. A complete listing of ASTM Work Items, along with a brief description of each, is available at                     *http://www.astm.org.*

                    On September 15, 2004, ASTM filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on November 10, 2004 (69 FR 65226).                

                    The last notification with the Department was filed on September 16, 2021. A notice was filed in the                     **Federal Register**                     on October 22, 2021 (86 FR 58690).                

Suzanne Morris,

Chief, Premerger and Division Statistics, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 2022-05199 Filed 3-10-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-P
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-7546

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

DARRYL LERON GILL,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge.

(CR-96-584, CA-99-2610-0-19)

Submitted: February 29, 2000 Decided: March 20, 2000

Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Darryl Leron Gill, Appellant Pro Se. Marvin Jennings Caughman,

Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Darryl Leron Gill appeals the district court’s order granting

the Government’s motion for summary judgment and dismissing Gill’s

motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 1999). We have

reviewed the record and find the dismissal proper because Gill

failed to demonstrate that his constitutional rights were violated

or that his counsel rendered ineffective assistance at trial.

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the

appeal. 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.

DISMISSED
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 911 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 321
104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                 S. 911

                          [Report No. 104-219]

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of 
   documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the 
   coastwise trade of the United States for the vessel SEA MISTRESS.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                 June 9 (legislative day, June 5), 1995

   Mr. Robb introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
   referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

                            January 26, 1996

              Reported by Mr. Pressler, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of 
   documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the 
   coastwise trade of the United States for the vessel SEA MISTRESS.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That notwithstanding 
section 27 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1920 (46 App. U.S.C. 883), the 
Act of June 19, 1886 (46 App. U.S.C. 289), and section 12106 of title 
46, United States Code, the Secretary of Transportation may issue a 
certificate of documentation with appropriate endorsement for 
employment in the coastwise trade of the United States for the vessel 
SEA MISTRESS (United States official number 696806).
                                     

                                                       Calendar No. 321

104th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                                 S. 911

                          [Report No. 104-219]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of 
   documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the 
   coastwise trade of the United States for the vessel SEA MISTRESS.

_______________________________________________________________________

                            January 26, 1996

                       Reported without amendment
```
Exhibit
32.1








CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








The
undersigned, Jeffrey Sternberg, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer of Trilliant Exploration Corporation, hereby certify pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that, to their knowledge, the Annual Report on Form 10-K of
Trilliant Exploration Corporation for fiscal year ended December 31, 2009, fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the
Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the
financial condition and results of operations of Trilliant Exploration
Corporation.








Date: April
15, 2010





/s/  
      "Jeffrey Sternberg"Jeffrey
      Sternberg
              President,
      Chief Executive Officer





/s/  
      "Jeffrey Sternberg"Jeffrey
      Sternberg
              Chief
      Financial Officer, Principal Accounting Officer





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signatures that appear
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906, has been provided to Trilliant Exploration Corporation and will
be retained by American Resources Corporation and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect to Libya

On February 25, 2011, by Executive Order 13566, the President declared a national emergency pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701-1706) to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States constituted by the actions of Colonel Muammar Qadhafi, his government, and close associates, which took extreme measures against the people of Libya, including by using weapons of war, mercenaries, and wanton violence against unarmed civilians. In addition, there was a serious risk that Libyan state assets would be misappropriated by Qadhafi, members of his government, members of his family, or his close associates if those assets were not protected. The foregoing circumstances, the prolonged attacks, and the increased numbers of Libyans seeking refuge in other countries from the attacks caused a deterioration in the security of Libya and posed a serious risk to its stability.

On April 19, 2016, the President signed Executive Order 13726, which expanded the scope of the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13566. The President found that the ongoing violence in Libya, including attacks by armed groups against Libyan state facilities, foreign missions in Libya, and critical infrastructure, as well as human rights abuses, violations of the arms embargo imposed by United Nations Security Council Resolution 1970 (2011), and misappropriation of Libya's natural resources threaten the peace, security, stability, sovereignty, democratic transition, and territorial integrity of Libya, and thereby constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States.

The situation in Libya continues to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States, and measures are needed to protect against the diversion of assets or other abuses by members of Qadhafi's family, their associates, and other persons hindering Libyan national reconciliation.

For this reason, the national emergency declared on February 25, 2011, and expanded on April 19, 2016, must continue in effect beyond February 25, 2022. Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13566.

                    This notice shall be published in the                     *Federal Register*                     and transmitted to the Congress.                

[FR Doc. 2022-04104

Billing code 3395-F2-P
Exhibit 32.1

     Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In  connection  with the filing of the  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-QSB for the
quarter  ended  March  31,  2004  (the  "Report")  by  SmartServ  Online,   Inc.
("Registrant"), each of the undersigned hereby certifies that:

1.   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
     Registrant.



                                                /s/  Robert M. Pons
                                                --------------------------------
                                                     Robert M. Pons
                                                     Chief Executive Officer
                                                     Dated:  May 19, 2004



                                                /s/  Len von Vital
                                                --------------------------------
                                                     Len von Vital
                                                     Chief Financial Officer
                                                     Dated:  May 19, 2004


A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to SmartServ  Online,  Inc.  and will be retained by SmartServ  Online,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities  and Exchange  Commission or its staff upon
request.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 734 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 171
104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 734

 To designate the United States courthouse and Federal building to be 
 constructed at the southeastern corner of Liberty and South Virginia 
   Streets in Reno, Nevada, as the ``Bruce R. Thompson United States 
       Courthouse and Federal Building'', and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

               April 27 (legislative day, April 24), 1995

  Mr. Reid (for himself and Mr. Bryan) introduced the following bill; 
 which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 
                              Public Works

               August 7 (legislative day, July 10), 1995

               Reported by Mr. Chafee, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the United States courthouse and Federal building to be 
 constructed at the southeastern corner of Liberty and South Virginia 
   Streets in Reno, Nevada, as the ``Bruce R. Thompson United States 
       Courthouse and Federal Building'', 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. DESIGNATION OF BRUCE R. THOMPSON UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE 
              AND FEDERAL BUILDING.

    The United States courthouse and Federal building to be constructed 
at the southeastern corner of Liberty and South Virginia Streets in 
Reno, Nevada, shall be known and designated as the ``Bruce R. Thompson 
United States Courthouse and Federal Building''.

SEC. 2. LEGAL REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, regulation, document, record, map, or other 
paper of the United States to the courthouse and Federal building 
referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the 
``Bruce R. Thompson United States Courthouse and Federal Building''.
                                     
                                                       Calendar No. 171

104th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                 S. 734

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 To designate the United States courthouse and Federal building to be 
 constructed at the southeastern corner of Liberty and South Virginia 
   Streets in Reno, Nevada, as the ``Bruce R. Thompson United States 
       Courthouse and Federal Building'', and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

               August 7 (legislative day, July 10), 1995

                       Reported without amendment
```
#### Barbara RUIZ-VELASCO, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 15-70884

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted July 11, 2017 *

Filed July 17, 2017

Barbara Ruiz-Velasco, Pro Se

Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Jennifer R. Khouri, Attorney, OIL, Tim Ramnitz, Trial Attorney, DOJ—U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, for Respondent

Before: CANBY, KOZINSKI, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R, App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Barbara Ruiz-Velasco, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review *685of an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) determination under 8 C.F.R. § 1208.31(a) that she did not have a reasonable fear of persecution or torture and thus is not entitled to relief from her reinstated removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the IJ’s factual findings, *Andrade-Garda v. Lynch,*828 F.3d 829, 833 (9th Cir. 2016), and we review de novo claims of due process violations in immigration proceedings, *Jiang v. Holder,*754 F.3d 733, 738 (9th Cir. 2014). We deny the petition for review.

We do not consider the materials attached to Ruiz-Velasco’s opening brief that are not part of the administrative record. *See Fisher v. INS,*79 F.3d 955, 963-64 (9th Cir. 1996) (en banc).

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s conclusion that Ruiz-Velasco failed to establish a reasonable possibility of future persecution in Mexico on account of a protected ground. *See Nagoulko v. INS,*333 F.3d 1012, 1016, 1018 (9th Cir. 2003) (possibility of future persecution “too speculative”).

Substantial evidence also supports the IJ’s conclusion that Ruiz-Velasco failed to demonstrate a reasonable possibility of torture by the Mexican government, or with its consent or acquiescence. *See Andrade-Garcia,*828 F.3d at 836-37.

We reject Ruiz-Velasco’s contentions regarding the conduct of her hearing. *See Padilla-Martinez v. Holder,*770 F.3d 825, 830 (9th Cir. 2014) (“An immigration decision violates due process if the proceeding were so fundamentally unfair that the [petitioner] was prevented from reasonably presenting [her] case.” (internal citation and quotation omitted)).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.