alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# **EXHIBIT 32.1**

# ** **

**CERTIFICATION**

** **

# **Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

**(Subsection (a) and (b) of Section 1350,Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)**

** **

**Pursuantto section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) ofsection 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersignedofficer of Vornado Realty Trust, sole general partner of Vornado Realty L.P.(the “Company”), hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that**:

 

The Annual Reporton Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003**(the “Report”) of the Company fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934and information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
|   March 12, 2004 | /s/ Steven  Roth |                                                                                           |
|-----------------------|------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                  | Name:            | Steven Roth                                                                                    |
|                  | Title:           | Chief  Executive Officer of Vornado Realty Trust,  sole General Partner of Vornado Realty L.P. |
|                       |                  |                                                                                                |  |

 

1

----
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.                  

###### Selective Service System

# AGENCY:

Selective Service System.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

Selective Service System Rescinds its Performance Review Board [FR Doc. 2024-24311 Filed 10-18-24; 8:45 a.m.] per the President's Memorandum on Restoring Accountability for Career Senior Executives, dated January 20, 2025.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lee Levells, Human Resources Officer, Selective Service System, 1501 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22209, telephone: 703-605-4011.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Sec. 4314(c) (1) through (5) of title 5, U.S.C., requires each agency to establish, in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Office of Personnel Management, one or more performance review boards. The board shall review and evaluate the initial appraisal of a senior executive's performance by the supervisor, along with any recommendations to the appointing authority relative to the performance of the senior executive. President's Memorandum on Restoring Accountability for Career Senior Executives, dated January 20, 2025, directs Agency heads to rescind their Performance Review Board and re-constitute membership with individuals committed to full enforcement of SES performance evaluations that promote and assure an SES of the highest caliber. The SSS PRB will be established at a later date once the Agency's appointees are in place.

Daniel A. Lauretano, Sr.,

General Counsel.

[FR Doc. 2025-01947 Filed 1-29-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8015-01-P
Net Reserves
    
    
    Future Net Cash Flow (M$)Oil
    
    
    NGL
    
    
    Gas
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Present WorthCategory
    
    (Barrels)
    
    
    (Barrels)
    
    
    (Mcf)
    
    
    Total
    
    
    at 10%Proved DevelopedProducing
    
    
    94,794
    
    
    
    3,605,891
    
    
    
    171,030,594
    
    
    $
    592,677
    
    
    $
    297,371Non-Producing
    
    
    4,044
    
    
    
    141,463
    
    
    
    29,580,264
    
    
    $
    94,945
    
    
    $
    55,866Proved Undeveloped
    
    
    118,814
    
    
    
    5,291,786
    
    
    
    175,959,828
    
    
    $
    389,887
    
    
    $
    102,998Total Proved(1)
    
    
    217,652
    
    
    
    9,039,140
    
    
    
    376,570,686
    
    
    $
    1,077,509
    
    
    $
    456,235
 
 1}
    
    The total proved values above may or may not match those values on the total
proved summary page that follows this letter due to rounding by the economics program.      




---



##### 








---



##### 



Very truly yours,
LaRoche Petroleum Consultants, Ltd.-s- Al lakovakisAl lakovakisSenior Staff Engineer-s- William M. Kazmann
    (SEAL)William M. KazmannLicensed Professional Engine
State of Texas No. 45012
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 Alchemy Enterprises, Ltd. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the three month period ended June 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jonathan R. Read, acting in the capacity as the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and I, Harold W. Sciotto, acting in the capacity as the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify to the best of our knowledge, 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 result of operations of the Company. |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

/s/ Jonathan R. Read

|   | Jonathan R. Read |  
 

Chief Executive Officer

 

 

August 14, 2006

 

 

/s/ Harold W. Sciotto

 

Harold W. Sciotto

 
 

Chief Financial Officer

 

 

August 14, 2006

 

 

 

 

 

  |
|--------|------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-6537

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

BERNARD GIBSON, SR., a/k/a Bernard Willis,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. 

Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. (8:94-cr-00454-PJM-2)

Submitted: July 27, 2017 Decided: August 1, 2017

Before AGEE and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Bernard Gibson, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Wilkinson, Assistant United States 

Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM: 

Bernard Gibson, Sr., appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a 

sentence reduction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) and Amendment 782 to the 

Sentencing Guidelines. We have reviewed the record and agree that Gibson was not 

entitled to relief under Amendment 782. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s 

judgment. See United States v. Gibson, No. 8:94-cr-00454-PJM-2 (D. Md. Apr. 7, 2017). 

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. 

AFFIRMED
Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
      a)
    
    designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls
and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by
others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;b)
    
    designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal
control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation
of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles;c)
    
    evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such
evaluation; andd)
    
    disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control
over financial reporting; and
  a)
    
    all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect
the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;
andb)
    
    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a
significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
  
 36
Christine CAVALARIS, f/k/a Christine Saccone, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Robert C. BURKE, Jr., Esq., Robert Kelly, Esq., Mariel Cavalaris, Michelle Towns and Lainie Rendina, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-3763

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 17, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
M.S.G. v. STATE

CR-16-0872

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

March 9, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
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 Victory Eagle Resources Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended October 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Ludvik Rolin, the President, Secretary, Treasurer and Director (Principal Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer and Principal Reporting 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 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 result of operations of the Company.

Dated: February 9, 2007

Ludvik Rolin

/s/ Ludvik Rolin(Principal Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer and
Principal Accounting Officer)
##### 



Exhibit 10.1
 2006 OMNIBUS STOCK AND PERFORMANCE INCENTIVE PLAN OF
ORBIMAGE HOLDINGS INC.
 (As Established Effective September 28, 2006)
 RECITALS
   Plan.
 Objectives.
 Definitions.
 Award
 Award Agreement
 Board
 Cash Award
 Change of Control is defined in Attachment A.
 Code
 Committee
 Common Stock Orbimage Holdings. Inc.




---



##### 



Company
 Consultant
 Consultant Award
 Consultant Award Agreement
 Director
 Director Award
 Director Award Agreement
 Dividend Equivalents
 Employee
 Employee Award
 Employee Award Agreement
 Fair Market Value
 2




---



##### 



Grant Date
 Grant Price
 Incentive Stock Option
 Nonemployee Director
 Nonqualified Stock Option
 Option
 Participant
 Performance Award
 Performance Goal
 Restricted Stock
 Restricted Stock Unit
 Restriction Period
 Stock Appreciation Right
 Stock Award
 Stock Unit
 Subsidiary
 3




---



##### 



Eligibility.
 Employees.
 Directors.
 Consultants.
 Common Stock Available for Awards.
  Administration.
   4




---



##### 



Delegation of Authority.
 Employee Awards and Consultant Awards.
  Options.
 Stock Appreciation Rights.
 5




---



##### 



Stock Awards.
 Cash Awards.
 Performance Awards.
 Nonqualified Performance Awards.
 Qualified Performance Awards. ®
  6




---



##### 



Director Awards.
  Options.
 Stock Awards.
    7




---



##### 



Change of Control.
 Non-United States Participants.
 Payment of Awards.
 General.
 Dividends, Earnings and Interest.
 Cash-out of Awards.
 Option Exercise.
  8




---



##### 



Taxes.
 Amendment, Modification, Suspension, or Termination of the Plan.
 Assignability.
 Adjustments.
   9




---



##### 



Restrictions.
 Unfunded Plan.
 Right to Employment.
 Successors.
 Governing Law.
 Effectiveness and Term.
 Name Change.
 10




---



##### 



Attachment A
 Change of Control
  Affiliate
 Associate
 Beneficial Owner
 i.e.
     11




---



##### 



Board
 Change of Control
     Common Stock
 12




---



##### 



Company
 Election Contest
 Exchange Act
 Exempt Person
 Exempt Rights i.e.
 Exempt Transaction
 Person
 Voting Stock
 13
Greg WHITAKER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-3677

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed April 9, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
A.L. III v. STATE

CR-16-1338

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

March 9, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 32


                    CERTIFICATIONS OF CEO AND CFO 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 report of Ridgewood Energy M Fund, LLC (the "Fund") on
Form 10-Q/A for the period ended September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the
undersigned hereby certifies, 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
their 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 Fund.


Dated: April 5, 2007                    RIDGEWOOD ENERGY M FUND, LLC

                            By:     /s/  ROBERT E. SWANSON
                                  Name:  Robert E. Swanson
                                 Title:  President and Chief Executive Officer
                                         (Principal Executive Officer)

Dated: April 5, 2007
                            By:     /s/  KATHLEEN P. MCSHERRY
                                  Name:  Kathleen P. McSherry
                                 Title:  Senior Vice President and Chief
                                         Financial Officer
                                         (Principal Financial and Accounting
                                         Officer)



A signed original of this written statement or other document authenticating,
acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form
within the electronic version of this written statement has been provided to
Ridgewood Energy M Fund, LLC and will be retained by Ridgewood Energy M Fund,
LLC and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request. The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of this report or as a
separate disclosure document.
LLANO FINANCING GROUP, LLC, Appellant, v. Israel SALABARRIA, et al., Appellees.

No. 3D17-1640

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed May 29, 2019

Pankauski Hauser, PLLC, and Robert J. Hauser (West Palm Beach), for appellant.

Lydecker | Diaz, Joan Carlos Wizel and Sandra Ferrin, for appellees.

Before EMAS, C.J., and SALTER, and FERNANDEZ, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-1168

DAVID B. CARR,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD OF SOUTH CAROLINA,

Defendant - Appellee,

and

RICHARD P. HORNE; DICK HORNE INSURANCE AGENCY,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge.

(CA-99-3155-2-18AJ)

Submitted: July 26, 2001 Decided: July 31, 2001

Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

David B. Carr, Appellant Pro Se. John H. Tiller, HAYNSWORTH,

SINKLER, BOYD, P.A., Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

David B. Carr seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion for reconsideration of the court’s order remanding

Carr’s civil action to the state court. Remand orders are generally

not reviewable on appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d) (1994). Accordingly, we 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
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kristopher VILLALOBOS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 03-20823.

Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

May 26, 2004.

James Lee Turner, Assistant US Attorney, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Kristopher Villalobos, Beaumont, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before JONES, BENAVIDES, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.*

The attorney appointed to represent Kristopher Villalobos has filed a motion to withdraw and a brief pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Villalobos has not filed a response. Our independent review of the brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue in this direct appeal. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the appeal is DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Exhibit 10.2


                        AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


         AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT made as of the 8th day of August,
2003 by and between GRIFFON CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation (hereinafter the
"Company") and ROBERT BALEMIAN (hereinafter the "Executive").

                              W I T N E S S E T H:

         WHEREAS, the Company and Executive entered into an Employment Agreement
dated as of July 1, 2001 (hereinafter the "Employment Agreement"); and

         WHEREAS, the Company and Executive desire to modify said Employment
Agreement.

         NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows:

         1.       Paragraph 2(b) shall be amended and restated as follows,
                  effective as of the date hereof:

                  "(b) EMPLOYMENT TERM. The Employment Term shall mean the
                  period commencing as of the date hereof and terminating on
                  December 1, 2009."

         2.       Except as specifically provided in this Amendment, the
                  Employment Agreement is in all other respects hereby ratified
                  and confirmed without amendment.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Amendment as of
the day and year first above written.


                                    GRIFFON CORPORATION


                                    By: /s/Harvey R. Blau
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                           Harvey R. Blau, Chairman of the Board

                                        /s/Robert Balemian
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                           Robert Balemian
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1168

DAVID B. CARR, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Defendant - Appellee, and RICHARD P. HORNE; DICK HORNE INSURANCE AGENCY, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge. (CA-99-3155-2-18AJ) Submitted: July 26, 2001 Decided: July 31, 2001 Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David B. Carr, Appellant Pro Se. John H. Tiller, HAYNSWORTH, SINKLER, BOYD, P.A., Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:David B. Carr seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion for reconsideration of the court’s order remanding Carr’s civil action to the state court. Remand orders are generally not reviewable on appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d) (1994). Accordingly, we 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
Gregory Bryan CROW v. STATE

CR-16-0989

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

March 2, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-13-00646-CV

Robert Ray PEREZ and Rhonda Lee Arevalo,

Appellants

v.

Arturo Zepeda ARREDONDO, CUSA KBC, LLC d/b/a Kerrville Bus Company,

Appellees

From the 79th Judicial District Court, Brooks County, Texas

Trial Court No. 10-07-15670-CV

Honorable Joaquin Villarreal III, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE STONE, JUSTICE ANGELINI, AND JUSTICE MARTINEZ

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is 

AFFIRMED. Costs of appeal are taxed against Appellants Robert Ray Perez and Rhonda Lee 

Arevalo.

SIGNED December 3, 2014.

_____________________________

Karen Angelini, Justice