alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.1


CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL 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 hereby certify, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in their capacities as officers of Procera Networks, Inc. (the “Company”), that, to their knowledge, the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,  and that the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company as of the dates and for the periods presented in the financial statements included in such report.
   March 11, 2010/s/ James F. BrearJames F. BrearPresident and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)/s/ Charles ConstantiCharles ConstantiChief Financial Officer(Principal Accounting and Financial Officer)
Exhibit 99.1

CONSENT OF NATIONAL CINEMEDIA, LLC

Board
of Directors
Regal Entertainment Group
7132 Regal Lane
Knoxville, TN 37918

Members
of the Board:

We
hereby consent to the use by Regal Entertainment Group (the "Company") of the audited financial statements of National CineMedia, LLC as of and for the year ended
December 27, 2007 (and comparative periods) appearing in the Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended December 27, 2007 filed by the Company with the Securities and
Exchange Commission and any amendment thereto.

| |  | National CineMedia, LLC
By National CineMedia, Inc., its managing member
| |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |  | By:                                                                     

---
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.                  

###### Farm Credit Administration

# AGENCY:

Farm Credit Administration Board, Farm Credit Administration.

# ACTION:

Notice, regular meeting.

# SUMMARY:

Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the Government in the Sunshine Act, of the forthcoming regular meeting of the Farm Credit Administration Board.

# DATES:

The regular meeting of the Board will be held July 8, 2021, from 9:00 a.m. until such time as the Board may conclude its business. *Note: Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, we will conduct the board meeting virtually. If you would like to observe the open portion of the virtual meeting, see instructions below for board meeting visitors.*

# ADDRESSES:

To observe the open portion of the virtual meeting, go to *FCA.gov*, select “Newsroom,” then “Events.” There you will find a description of the meeting and a link to “Instructions for board meeting visitors.” See **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION** for further information about attendance requests.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dale Aultman, Secretary to the Farm Credit Administration Board (703) 883-4009. TTY is (703) 883-4056.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Instructions for attending the virtual meeting: This meeting of the Board will be open to the public. If you wish to observe, at least 24 hours before the meeting, go to *FCA.gov*, select “Newsroom,” then “Events.” There you will find a description of the meeting and a link to “Instructions for board meeting visitors.” If you need assistance for accessibility reasons or if you have any questions, contact Dale Aultman, Secretary to the Farm Credit Administration Board, at (703) 883-4009. The matters to be considered at the meeting are as follows:

## Open Session

### Approval of Minutes

    - June 10, 2021

### Reports

    - Data Improvement and FCA Data Priorities
    - Cybersecurity—Recent Issues, Risk to FCA and FCS, and Mitigations
    - Climate Risk Task Force—Scope and Objective

### New Business

    - Risk-Weighting of High Volatility Commercial Real Estate—Proposed Rule

Dated: June 29, 2021.

Dale Aultman,

Secretary, Farm Credit Administration Board.

[FR Doc. 2021-14182 Filed 6-29-21; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE 6705-01-P
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

February 19, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
135393 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 135393 COA: 270476 Oakland CC: 2005-202163-FH GARY STUART LYON, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 11, 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

l0211 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

February 19, 2008

Clerk
U.S. flagAn 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** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Eastern Regional Research Center: Wyndmoor, PA
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    About ERRC
                        Greetings from the Director
                                    Directions/Lodging
                                    History and Accomplishments
                    Our Work
                        Biomass Pyrolysis Research
                                    IPMP 2013
                                    IPMP Dynamic Prediction
                                    IPMP Global Fit
                                    Pathogen Modeling Program (PMP)
                                    Predictive Microbiology Information Portal (PMIP)
                                    PoultryFARMSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Northeast Area Wyndmoor, Pennsylvania Eastern Regional Research Center Docs Poultry





- Research
- Highlights
- Publications
- Presentation
- Models
- Data
- Contact

PoultryFARM - Dataheadline bar  Many studies involved collection of log count data over time in inoculated pack studies.  Some sets of data were used to develop models.  Data file numbers correspond to publication numbers.  All are Excel files. 15
17
18
19
20
21
23
29
30
3132
36
38
41
42
44
46
47
49
5053
56
57
59
61
62
63
69
70
7375
76


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-6128

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

BEDFORD EUGENE FARMER,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, District

Judge. (CR-92-174, CA-96-676-1)

Submitted: May 15, 1997 Decided: May 29, 1997

Before RUSSELL, HALL, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Bedford Eugene Farmer, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Lee Keller, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, West Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying

his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997).

We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability

and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court.

United States v. Farmer, Nos. CR-92-174; CA-96-676-1 (S.D.W. Va.

Jan. 15, 1997). 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
CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT OF
                        ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION OF
                     BED & BISCUIT INNS OF AMERICA, INC.


     The  undersigned  President and Secretary  of  BED  &  BISCUIT  INNS  OF

AMERICA, INC. does hereby certify:

     That  the  Board  of Directors of said Corporation, at  a  meeting  duly

convened  and  held on the  17th day of March, 2003, adopted a resolution  to

amend the Articles of Incorporation as follows:

1.   Article I is amended to read as follows:

     The exact name of this corporation is:

                             DOGS INTERNATIONAL

     The number of shares of the corporation outstanding and entitled to vote

on an amendment to the Articles of Incorporation is 10,000,000; that the said

change and amendment has been consented to and approved by a majority of  the

stockholders  holding 7,500,000 shares of stock outstanding and  entitled  to

vote on March 17, 2003, which is sufficient to approve the Amendment.

DATED: March 17, 2003              /s/ Roxanna Vargas
                                   Roxanna Vargas, President

                                   /s/ Roxanna Vargas
                                   Roxanna Vargas, Secretary
STATE OF NEVADA     )
                    ) SS:
COUNTY OF CLARK     )

     On  March  17,  2003, personally appeared before me,  a  Notary  Public,
Roxanna  Vargas, who acknowledged that she executed the above  instrument  as
President and Secretary of BED & BISCUIT INNS OF AMERICA, INC.

                                   /s/ Debra K. Amigone
                                   NOTARY PUBLIC
I, Eric Majors, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Maximum Dynamics, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible
for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and
have:

         (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 small
         business issuer, 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) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer'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; and

         (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's
         internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
         small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business
         issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that
         has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,
         the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting;
         and

5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of
the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions):

         (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 small business issuer's
         ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;
         and

         (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
         other employees who have a significant role in the small business
         issuer's internal control over financial reporting.


Date: April 15, 2004


/s/ Eric Majors
-----------------------
Eric Majors
Chief Executive Officer
1

No. 03-14-00228-CR

IN THE

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRD DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

TROY WILLIAMS § APPELLANT

VS. §

THE STATE OF TEXAS § APPELLEE

APPEAL FROM THE 147TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS

CAUSE NO. D1-DC-12-904077

STATE'S FIRST MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS:

The State of Texas respectfully moves for an extension of the deadline for filing

the State’s brief and, in accordance with Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 38.6 and

10.5(b), advises the Court as follows:

(a) Following his conviction for Aggravated Kidnapping, the appellant filed his

notice of appeal in the above cause on April 10, 2014. Appellant’s counsel filed a brief

on May 28, 2015.

ACCEPTED

03-14-00228-CR

5848563

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

6/26/2015 4:20:52 PM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 6/26/2015 4:20:52 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk
2

(b) The State’s brief is currently due on June 29, 2015.

(c) This request is that the deadline for filing the State’s brief be extended by

30 days.

(d) The number of previous extensions of time granted for submission of the

State’s brief is: none.

(e) The State relies upon the following facts to reasonably explain the need

for an extension of the deadline:

1. During the period since this brief was filed, the attorney assigned to this case

has been working on other pressing appellate matters and has not had

sufficient time to prepare an adequate response to this brief.

2. This request is not made for the purpose of delay, but to ensure that the

Court has a proper State’s brief to aid in the just disposition of the above

cause.
3

WHEREFORE, the State of Texas respectfully requests that the deadline for

filing the State’s brief be extended to July 29, 2015.

Respectfully submitted,

ROSEMARY LEHMBERG

District Attorney

Travis County, Texas

___________________________

Angie Creasy

Assistant District Attorney

State Bar No. 24043613

P.O. Box 1748

Austin, Texas 78767

(512) 854-9400

Fax No. 854-4810

Angie.Creasy@traviscountytx.gov

AppellateTCDA@traviscountytx.gov
4

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE AND SERVICE

I hereby certify that this motion contains 231 words, based upon the

computer program used to generate this motion and excluding words contained in

those parts of the motion that Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.4(i) exempts

from inclusion in the word count, and that this motion is printed in a conventional,

14-point typeface.

I further certify that, on the 26th day of June, 2015, a true and correct copy of

this motion was served, by U.S. mail, electronic mail, facsimile, or electronically

through the electronic filing manager, to the Appellant’s attorney, Linda IcenhauerRamirez, Attorney at Law, 1103 Nueces, Austin, Texas 78701, [ljir@aol.com].

___________________________

Angie Creasy

Assistant District Attorney
#### Peter Demas, Respondent, v E&R Quilting Corp., Appellant, et al., Defendants.

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, defendant E&R Quilting Corp. appeals (1) as limited by its brief, from so much of an interlocutory judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Dowd, J.), dated April 21,1984, as is in favor of the plaintiff and against it upon a jury verdict after a trial on the issue of liability only and (2) from an order of the same court, dated July 23, 1984, which denied its motion to set aside the verdict and for judgment in its *' favor or for a new trial pursuant to CPLR 4404 upon the ground of newly discovered evidence.

*899Interlocutory judgment affirmed insofar as appealed from and order affirmed, with one bill of costs to respondent and to defendants Bush Terminal Hardware Co., Inc., and Radiator Specialties Co., Inc., appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

A fair interpretration of the evidence supports the jury verdict rendered in plaintiff’s favor as against defendant E&R Quilting Corp. (hereinafter E&R), the owner of the building where the accident resulting in plaintiff’s injury occurred. It is well settled that an owner of a building has a duty to exercise reasonable care to keep the premises in a reasonably safe condition *(Basso v Miller,*40 NY2d 233) and the issue of what precautions may reasonably be required of an owner is generally a question of fact for the jury *(see, Nallan v Helmsley-Spear, Inc.,*50 NY2d 507). In the case at bar, the evidence, fairly interpreted, could have led the jury to reasonably conclude that E&R maintained control of the subject premises, that it had notice that flammables were being stored in a room in which welding operations were conducted, that the room was inadequately ventilated, and that E&R acted unreasonably in failing to take steps to prevent just the sort of accident which occurred here. Accordingly, the court properly declined to disturb the jury verdict *(Nazito v Holton,*96 AD2d 550; *Palermo v Gambitsky,*92 AD2d 1005). Moreover, E&R failed to establish that the documents which it discovered a few days after the trial could not have been timely obtained by the exercise of due diligence, since most of the documents (corporate records on file with the Secretary of State) were a matter of public record. E&R, therefore, was not entitled to judgment in its favor or to a new trial on the basis of newly discovered evidence *(Di Bernardo v Gunneson,*65 AD2d 828; *Mully v Drayn,*51 AD2d 660). Mollen, P. J., Lazer, Mangano and Brown, JJ., concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ricardo Gamez, Appellant.

[943 NYS2d 882] —

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ronald A. Zweibel, J.), rendered September 30, 2010, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal mischief in the third degree, and sentencing him to a term of six months, with five years’ probation, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s argument concerning jail time credit toward his term of probation is unreviewable on this appeal. The proper *610vehicle for challenging a jail time credit calculation is a CPLR article 78 proceeding *(see People v*Nieves, 2 NY3d 310, 313 n 2 [2004]; *People v Young,*161 AD2d 367 [1990]). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Catterson, Moskowitz, Richter and ManzanetDaniels, JJ.
#### SHIPMAN, Appellant, v. TREADWELL et al., Respondents.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

March 6, 1912.)

Action by Leonard H. Shipman, as receiver of the F. Gray Company, against George Curtis Treadwell .and another.

PER CURIAM.

Order modified, so as to allow to the plaintiff disbursements made for certified copy of records, and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs. See, also, 133 N. Y. Supp. 970; infra.

BETTS, J., votes for affirmance.
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 603 

To modify the prohibition on recognition by United States courts of certain 

rights relating to certain marks, trade names, or commercial names. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 16, 2011 

Mr. NELSON of Florida (for himself and Mr. BURR) introduced the following 

bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To modify the prohibition on recognition by United States 

courts of certain rights relating to certain marks, trade 

names, or commercial names. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. MODIFICATION OF PROHIBITION. 

4 Section 211 of the Department of Commerce and Re5 lated Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999 (as contained in 

6 section 101(b) of division A of Public Law 105–277; 112 

7 Stat. 2681–88) is amended— 

8 (1) in subsection (a)(2)— 

9 (A) by striking ‘‘by a designated national’’; 

10 and 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 603 IS

1 (B) by inserting before the period ‘‘that 

2 was used in connection with a business or as3 sets that were confiscated unless the original 

4 owner of the mark, trade name, or commercial 

5 name, or the bonafide successor-in-interest has 

6 expressly consented’’; 

7 (2) in subsection (b), by striking ‘‘by a des8 ignated national or its successor-in-interest’’; 

9 (3) by redesignating subsection (d) as sub10 section (e); 

11 (4) by inserting after subsection (c) the fol12 lowing: 

13 ‘‘(d) Subsections (a)(2) and (b) of this section shall 

14 apply only if the person or entity asserting the rights knew 

15 or had reason to know at the time when the person or 

16 entity acquired the rights asserted that the mark, trade 

17 name, or commercial name was the same as or substan18 tially similar to a mark, trade name, or commercial name 

19 that was used in connection with a business or assets that 

20 were confiscated.’’; and 

21 (5) in subsection (e), as so redesignated, by 

22 striking ‘‘In this section:’’ and all that follows 

23 through ‘‘(2) The term’’ and inserting ‘‘In this sec24 tion, the term’’. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS