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



Certification



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



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



Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a)
and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of Entrust, Inc., a Maryland corporation (the Company), hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:



This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended
June 30, 2003 (the Report) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                       |  |  |  |                                         
|---------------------- |  |  |  | ----------------------------------------
|Date: January 21, 2004 |  |  |  |                                         
|                       |  | 
|                       |  |  |  | /s/ F. William Conner                   
|                       |  |  | 
|                       |  |  |  | Name:         F. William Conner         
|                       |  |  |  | Title:           Chief Executive Officer
* Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions

that have no precedential value and merely decide particular

cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes

needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal

profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-10075

Summary Calendar

__________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

WILLIAM JOSEPH LEE RICHEY,

 Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:94-CR-70-A(1)

- - - - - - - - - -

November 21, 1995

Before KING, SMITH and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction and

sentence, and the district court's order denying specific

performance of the plea agreement. Appellant argues that the

Government did not reserve to itself the "sole" discretion to

determine whether he had provided substantial assistance and

alternatively that the Government's refusal to file the § 5K1.1

motion was based on an improper motive. We have reviewed the
No. 95-10075

-2-

record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. United States v. Richey, No. 4:94-CR-70-A(1) (N.D. Tex.

Jan. 20, 1995).

Richey also argues for the first time on appeal that the

district court erred in attributing to him the entire amount of

losses arising out of the fraudulent telemarketing scheme and the

entire amount of the bogus tax refunds generated in the

fraudulent tax return scheme. The calculation of the amount of

loss is a factual finding. United States. v. Wimbish, 980 F.2d

312, 313 (5th Cir. 1992), cert. denied, 113 S. Ct. 2365 (1993). 

"[Q]uestions of fact capable of resolution by the district court

upon proper objection at sentencing can never constitute plain

error." United States v. Guerrero, 5 F.3d 868, 871 (5th Cir.

1993), cert. denied, 114 S. Ct. 1111 (1994) (citation omitted). 

AFFIRMED.
#### ELLIS v. SEAMAN.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.

March 28, 1898.)

Appeal—Review.

Where the determination below is not plainly against the weight of the evidence, the judgment will not he reversed.

Appeal from district court.

Action by Charles E. Ellis against Frank Seaman. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

*686Argued before BEEKMAN, P. J., and GILDEBSLEEYE and GIEGERICH; JJ.

Percival S. Jones, for appellant.

Daniel S. Decker, for respondent,

PER CURIAM.

There is no question of fraud or warranty in the-case. The only issue raised by the pleadings and exceptions is with respect to the terms of the contract, and its performance. What the agreement was, is evidenced by the written order which was given for the advertisements in question. It contained all of the elements' of a complete contract, and, under familiar principles, cannot be enlarged or varied by parol evidence. The only matter which remains-to be considered is whether there was a substantial performance, with respect to the quality of the work. This was a question of fact, which it was peculiarly within the province of the court below to determine, and we cannot say that such determination was so plainly against the weight of evidence as to justify us in reversing the judgment.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Project No. 3511-024]

## Notice of Waiver Period for Water Quality Certification Application

                    On July 2, 2021, Lower Saranac Hydro, LLC filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission a copy of its application for a Clean Water Act section 401(a)(1) water quality                           ( print page 40556)                        certification submitted to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (New York DEC), in conjunction with the above captioned project. Pursuant to 40 CFR 121.6, we hereby notify the New York DEC of the following:                

*Date of Receipt of the Certification Request:*                     July 2, 2021.                

*Reasonable Period of Time to Act on the Certification Request:*                     One year.                

*Date Waiver Occurs for Failure to Act:*                     July 2, 2022.                

If New York DEC fails or refuses to act on the water quality certification request by the above waiver date, then the agency's certifying authority is deemed waived pursuant to section 401(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1).

Dated: July 22, 2021.

Debbie-Anne A. Reese,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2021-16064 Filed 7-27-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 8 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. CON. RES. 8

      Recognizing women serving in the United States Armed Forces.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 28, 2011

  Mrs. Boxer (for herself, Mr. Burr, Mrs. Hagan, Mrs. Gillibrand, Mr. 
 Sanders, Mrs. Shaheen, Mr. Bennet, and Mr. Lautenberg) submitted the 
  following concurrent resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
      Recognizing women serving in the United States Armed Forces.

Whereas women have served with distinction in the United States Armed Forces 
        since the American Revolution and have made significant and lasting 
        contributions to the security of the United States;
Whereas in 2011, women comprise nearly 16 percent of the United States Armed 
        Forces and serve in positions of responsibility in the active and 
        reserve components of the Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, and Coast 
        Guard, as compared with less than 5 percent in 1976 when women were 
        first integrated into the service academies;
Whereas women serve at the highest levels in the Department of Defense and other 
        governmental organizations contributing to the defense of the United 
        States; and
Whereas the accomplishments of generations of women have contributed to the 
        history of the United States Armed Forces and to the strength of the 
        United States: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That Congress--
            (1) recognizes the importance of women to national defense 
        throughout the history of the United States; and
            (2) encourages the people of the United States to honor 
        women who have served and who continue to serve the United 
        States in the United States Armed Forces.
                                 <all>
```
#### Robert M. Ginsberg, Appellant, v Alvin H. Broome, Respondent.

[942 NYS2d 469]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Donna M. Mills, J.), entered October 24, 2011, which granted so much of defendant’s motion as sought to dismiss the second, third, fourth and fifth causes of action, and awarded costs to defendant pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 (c), unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The second cause of action lacks a theory of recovery. The third cause of action is expressly founded on the parties’ partnership agreement, which negates plaintiffs factual allegations and establishes a defense to his claims as a matter of law *(see e.g. Biondi v Beekman Hill House Apt. Corp.,*257 AD2d 76, *47781 [1999], *affd*94 NY2d 659 [2000]; *US Express Leasing, Inc. v Elite Tech. [NY], Inc.,*87 AD3d 494 [2011]). The fourth and fifth causes of action, which sound in defamation, are not pleaded with sufficient particularity *(see*CPLR 3016 [a]; *Mañas v VMS Assoc., LLC,*53 AD3d 451, 454-455 [2008]). Indeed, conceding the insufficiency, plaintiff seeks, for the first time on appeal, to recast these causes of action as claims for breach of fiduciary duty with malicious intendment. This argument is unavailing as well as unpreserved. The fourth cause of action alleges that defendant falsely reported that plaintiff engaged in malpractice. However, plaintiff acknowledged that the partnership had a duty to report potential malpractice, that the malpractice likely occurred on two of the three reported occasions, and that one instance of malpractice was correctly attributed to him. The fifth cause of action alleges that defendant disseminated false information about plaintiff in the legal community, harming plaintiff’s “new firm.” The reference to a “new” firm suggests that defendant was no longer plaintiff’s partner at the time, which undermines the claim that he breached any fiduciary duty to plaintiff.

We see no basis for disturbing the award of costs to defendant. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Moskowitz, ManzanetDaniels and Román, JJ. [Prior Case History: 2011 NY Slip Op 32818(U).]
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JACINTO JUAN CARHUAZ

RODRIGUEZ,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 07-74048

Agency No. A099-340-903

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted November 13, 2012** 

Before: CANBY, TROTT, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

Jacinto Juan Carhuaz Rodriguez, a native and citizen of Peru, petitions for

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal

from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum

FILED

NOV 26 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 07-74048

and withholding of removal. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We

review de novo questions of law and for substantial evidence factual findings. 

Husyev v. Mukasey, 528 F.3d 1172, 1177 (9th Cir. 2008). We dismiss in part and

deny in part the petition for review.

Carhuaz Rodriguez challenges the agency’s determination that he failed to

establish extraordinary circumstances excusing his untimely filed asylum

application on the basis of Dr. LoRé’s evidence and his own testimony. We lack

jurisdiction to review his contentions regarding the IJ’s analysis of Dr. LoRé’s

evidence because the agency’s finding was based on disputed facts regarding

Carhuaz Rodriguez’s mental condition, see 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(3); cf. Husyev, 528

F.3d at 1178-81 (exercising jurisdiction to consider one-year bar where facts were

undisputed), and because Carhuaz Rodriguez failed to raise his contentions

regarding confrontation and recall problems to the BIA, see Barron v. Ashcroft,

358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004) (no jurisdiction over claims not presented

below). Further, Carhuaz Rodriguez’s testimony does not otherwise compel the

conclusion that he established extraordinary circumstances excusing his late filing. 

See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.4(a)(5). Accordingly, we dismiss in part and deny in part as to

Carhuaz Rodriguez’s asylum claim.
3 07-74048

With respect to withholding of removal, the BIA denied relief in part

because Carhuaz Rodriguez failed to establish a likelihood of harm in the future. 

Substantial evidence supports this determination. See Molina-Estrada v. INS, 293

F.3d 1089, 1095-96 (9th Cir. 2002). Accordingly, Carhuaz Rodriguez’s

withholding of removal claim fails.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.
EXHIBIT 23.1








CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





WeiserMazars LLP (formerly Weiser LLP) hereby consents to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-158056, 333-60004 and 333-35450), of our report dated March 7, 2011 relating to our audit of the financial statements of PacificHealth Laboratories, Inc. included in the 2010 annual report on Form 10-K.  Our report relating to our audit of the financial statements contains an emphasis of a matter paragraph regarding substantial doubt as to the ability of the Company to continue as a going concern.








/s/ WeiserMazars LLP





New York, New York


March 7, 2011
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 140 (Monday, July 26, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 40079]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15816]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--ASTM International Standards

    Notice is hereby given that on May 27, 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 February 17, 2021 and May 24, 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 February 22, 2021. A notice was filed in 
the Federal Register on April 8, 2021 (86 FR 18327).

Suzanne Morris,
Chief, Premerger and Division Statistics, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 2021-15816 Filed 7-23-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-P
Certificate of Amendment of the

Restated

Certificate of Incorporation of

Vanguard Airlines, Inc.

Vanguard Airlines, Inc., a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, DOES HEREBY CERTIFY:

1.	The name of the corporation is Vanguard Airlines, Inc.

2.	The date on which the Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the corporation was filed with the Secretary of the State of Delaware is November 2, 1995.

3.	The Board of Directors of the corporation, acting in accordance with the provisions of Sections 141(f) and 242 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, adopted resolutions to amend Article IV, Section (a) to add to the end thereof the following:

	As of the effective time of this amendment, each five (5) issued and outstanding shares of the Corporation's Common Stock, par value $0.001 per share, shall be converted into, and shall thereafter represent for all purposes, one (1) issued and outstanding share of the same class of the Corporation's Common Stock, par value $0.001 per share, without any action on the part of the holder thereof.  No fractional shares shall be issued by reason of this amendment and stockholders shall receive cash in lieu of such fractional shares.

4.	Thereafter, pursuant to a resolution of the Board of Directors, this Certificate of Amendment was submitted to the stockholders of the corporation for their approval in accordance with the provisions of Sections 228 and 242 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, VANGUARD AIRLINES, INC. has caused this certificate to be executed, signed and acknowledged by Brian S. Gillman, its Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary, and is attested by William A. Garrett, III, its Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, as of the nineteenth day of May, 1999.

 

VANGUARD AIRLINES, INC.

 

 

 

Brian S. Gillman

Vice President - General Counsel and Secretary

 

ATTEST:

 

 

 

William A. Garrett, III

Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
# Official Journal L 60/2023

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 60 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6624 February 2023 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 60

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6624 February 2023

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | UN Regulation No 13-H – Uniform provisions concerning the approval of passenger cars with regard to braking [2023/401] | 1 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

UN Regulation No 13-H – Uniform provisions concerning the approval of passenger cars with regard to braking [2023/401]

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 142 (Wednesday, July 28, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 40618]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-16041]



[[Page 40618]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Indian Affairs

[212A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900253G]


Indian Gaming; Extension of Tribal-State Class III Gaming Compact 
(Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe of the Pyramid Reservation and the State of 
Nevada)

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice announces the extension of the Class III gaming 
compact between the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe of the Pyramid Lake 
Reservation and the State of Nevada.

DATES: The extension takes effect on July 28, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Paula L. Hart, Director, Office of 
Indian Gaming, Office of the Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs, 
Washington, DC 20240, (202) 219-4066.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: An extension to an existing tribal-state 
Class III gaming compact does not require approval by the Secretary if 
the extension does not modify any other terms of the compact. 25 CFR 
293.5. The Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe of the Pyramid Lake Reservation 
and the State of Nevada have reached an agreement to extend the 
expiration date of their existing Tribal-State Class III gaming compact 
to February 23, 2023. This publishes notice of the new expiration date 
of the compact.

Bryan Newland,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2021-16041 Filed 7-27-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4337-15-P
##### 



Certification of the
Chief Executive Officer
Pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Valley National
Gases Incorporated;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 registrant as of,
and for, the periods presented in this report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer 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 registrant and have:
    5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or
persons performing the equivalent function):
    /s/ William A. IndelicatoChief Executive Officer
 - 36 -