alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Secure Computing Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for
the period ending September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John E. McNulty, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as
adopted pursuant to § 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/ John E. McNulty                            
|John E. McNulty                                
|Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
|November 9, 2006
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ernest Jones, Appellant.

Because the defendant failed to object to the police officers’ testimony specifically on the ground that it impermissibly bolstered the identification testimony given by the complainants, that claim has not been preserved for our review *(see, People v Love,*57 NY2d 1023; *People v West,*56 NY2d 662). The defendant has similarly failed to preserve his argument with respect to the alibi charge, since he neither requested particular language to be charged in this record nor objected to the charge as given *(see, People v Hoke,*62 NY2d 1022; *People v Seabrooks,*120 AD2d 691). The sentence imposed does not warrant appellate modification *(see, People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80). Lazer, J. P., Thompson, Eiber and Spatt, JJ., concur.
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 the Interior

###### Bureau of Land Management 

          - [MT-929-1220-PA-002E] 

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Land Management, DOT. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

Underage drinking is a growing problem on the public lands. Such activity poses a significant health and safety hazard to both underage violators and other users of the public lands and can result in the destruction of natural resources and property. 

                        Therefore, the State Director is prohibiting the possession, or providing, of an intoxicating substance by, or to, a person under 21 years of age upon the public lands in Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota. This action will allow BLM law enforcement officers to restrict the supply and possession and/or consumption of alcoholic beverages                               ( print page 20484)                            by minors, on BLM-administered public lands and recreation areas, in a manner consistent with Montana Code Annotated (MCA) 45-5-624, MCA 16-6-304, and MCA 16-6-305; ND Century Codes 5-01-01, 5-01-08, and 5-01-09; and SD Code 35-1-1, 35-9-1, 35-9-1.1, and 35-9-2. An intoxicating substance is defined in MCA 45-2-101 (31)(a).                     

This supplementary rule is issued under the authority of 43 CFR 8365.1-6. 

## Penalties 

As prescribed under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, 43 USC, Section 1733(a), and the Taylor Grazing Act, the violation is punishable by fines and/or imprisonment under 43 CFR 8360.0-7, with fines up to $1000 and/or 12 months in jail, or $500 as authorized under the Taylor Grazing Act (43 USC 315a). 

# DATES:

To comply with the Administrative Procedures Act, if no significant opposition is received, this rule will go into effect May 17, 2000, and will remain in effect until rescinded or modified by the authorized officer. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Special Agent in Charge, Bureau of Land Management, Montana State Office, 5001 Southgate Drive, Billings, Montana 59101, (406) 896-5010. 

Dated: March 23, 2000. 

Larry E. Hamilton, 

State Director. 

[FR Doc. 00-9424 Filed 4-14-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310-DN-P
Order entered October 5, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-15-01179-CV

IN RE MICHAEL C. WADE, Relator

Original Proceeding from the 397th Judicial District Court

Grayson County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 046500

ORDER

Before Justice Lang-Miers, Evans and Whitehill

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the petition for writ of habeas 

corpus. We ORDER relator to bear the costs of this original proceeding.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS 

JUSTICE
Judge Advocate General

United States Coast Guard

Direct Commission Lawyer Selected Reserve

Program (DCL-SELRES)

Next application deadline: TBD (est. June 2024)

Job Description: Coast Guard Reserve Judge Advocates are commissioned reserve officers and licensed attorneys 

qualified to represent the Coast Guard and its members in a diverse range of legal practice areas. Qualified Reserve Judge 

Advocates are Always Ready to deploy to disaster sites to provide critical on-site legal support during Coast Guard 

contingency operations and augment active duty Coast Guard members.

Areas of Practice

Benefits

 Maritime & International Law

 Claims & Litigation

 Government Ethics

 Employment Law

 Enter service as a Lieutenant Junior Grade (O-2)

 Reservist income based on military pay scale

 Eligibility for TRICARE Reserve Select

Healthcare/Life Insurance

 Military Command Advice/Personnel Mgmt

 Fiscal Law/Procurement Law

 Real Property

 Member Advocacy & Legal Assistance

 VA Home Loans eligibility

 Military exchange & commissary privileges

 Post 9/11 GI Bill eligibility

Minimum Eligibility Requirements

 Licensed attorney

 Ages 21-40

 U.S. Citizenship

 Graduate of ABA-Accredited law school

 Eligible for a Secret Clearance

 Must pass a military entrance processing

station (MEPS) medical exam

 Financially responsible

Training

 Reserve Office Indoctrination Course (5 week in-person - Coast Guard Academy)

 Contingency Law Trainings

Potential Locations of Employment

 Boston, MA

 Portsmouth/Norfolk, VA

 Cleveland, OH

 Juneau, AK

 Honolulu, HI

 Miami, FL

 Alameda, CA

 Seattle, WA

 New Orleans, LA

 Washington, DC 

 Charleston, SC

Contact Us

Coast Guard Legal Policy & Program Development 

Accessions & Resource Program Manager

Office: 202-372-3822 

Email: CoastGuardDCL@uscg.mil

https://www.gocoastguard.com/reserve-careers/officer-careers/programs/direct-commission-lawyer-selectedreserve-dcl-selres

*Telework arrangements available at command discretion
#### HOROWITZ v. HAMBURG-AMERICAN PACKET CO.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department.

October 29, 1896.)

Action by Isabella Horowitz against the Hamburg-American Packet Company. Motion for leave to appeal to appellate division.

See 37 N. Y. Supp. 1146.

J. J. Frank, for the motion.

Mashbur & Cukor, opposed.

PER CURIAM.

We consider that the point in respect to which the justices of this term differed, viz. whether the question of permanent injuries should have been submitted to the jury in the absence of the evidence of medical experts, is of sufficient importance to justify the granting of the motion. Motion granted upon condition that the appellant files a stipula*1119tion that, for the purpose of such appeal, it will waive all objections to the judgment except those which raised that point.
# C_2021065EN.01001901.xml

| 25.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 65/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65/19

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.10151 - LINDE/SIPCHEM/JV)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 65/10)

1.

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| — | Linde GmbH (‘Linde’, Germany), |
| --- | --- |

—

Linde GmbH (‘Linde’, Germany),

| — | Sahara International Petrochemical Company (‘Sipchem’, Saudi Arabia), |
| --- | --- |

—

Sahara International Petrochemical Company (‘Sipchem’, Saudi Arabia),

| — | a newly created joint venture (the ‘JV’, Saudi Arabia). |
| --- | --- |

—

a newly created joint venture (the ‘JV’, Saudi Arabia).

Linde and Sipchem acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the JV.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares in a newly created company constituting a joint venture.

2.

| — | for Linde: Linde GmbH forms part of a multinational group of companies ultimately owned by Linde plc that mainly focus on gases and engineering services, |
| --- | --- |

—

for Linde: Linde GmbH forms part of a multinational group of companies ultimately owned by Linde plc that mainly focus on gases and engineering services,

| — | for Sipchem: Sipchem is the ultimate parent of a group of companies that is active in the production and marketing of basic and intermediate petrochemical products. |
| --- | --- |

—

for Sipchem: Sipchem is the ultimate parent of a group of companies that is active in the production and marketing of basic and intermediate petrochemical products.

| — | for the JV: the JV will be active in the onsite supply of industrial gases in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia |
| --- | --- |

—

for the JV: the JV will be active in the onsite supply of industrial gases in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

3.

Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

4.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.10151— Linde/Sipchem/JV

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax +32 22964301

Postal address:

| European Commission |
| --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

1

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.

2

---
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Michael Lawrence, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Counsel’s application to withdraw granted *(see, People v Crawford,*71 AD2d 38). (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Pine, J.—burglary, second degree.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Doerr, Boomer and Davis, JJ.
# C_2021458EN.01002101.xml

| 12.11.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 458/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.11.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 458/21

---

Report on the performance of the EU budget – Status at the end of 2020

(2021/C 458/13)

The European Court of Auditors will publish its Report on the performance of the EU budget – Status at the end of 2020, together with the institutions’ replies, on 15 November 2021.

The report can be consulted directly or downloaded at the European Court of Auditors’ website on 15 November 2021: https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/annualreport-Performance-2020/annualreport-Performance-2020_EN.pdf

The following link to an overview of this report and related documents will become active at the same time: https://www.eca.europa.eu/en/Pages/DocItem.aspx?did=58660

---
#### M. J. Peterson Company et al., Appellants, v State of New York, Respondent.

(Claim No. 64949.)

Present — Denman, J. P., Boomer, Green, Pine and Balio, JJ.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD

L]NITED STATES COAST GTJARD

Complainant

vs.

ROMELLO ROBINSON

Respondent

Docket Number 2023-005 I

Enforcement Activity No. 7629094

CONSENT ORDER

Issued: Februar r" 14.2023

Law J Honorable

Appearances:

LT Jennifer Simpson

USCG Sector Charleston

For the Coast Guard

Romello Robinson, Pro Se

For Respondcnt

Stueve
CO ENT ORDER APPR VING SE'IT LEMENT AGRE ENT

on or about February 9, 2023, rhe parties in this case submifted a Motion for Approval of

Settlement Agreement and Entry ofConsent Order to be approved as a settlement ofthe case

under 33 C.F.R. $ 20.502.

I have carefully reviewed the terms of the Settlement Agreement and find it is fair and

reasonable and in substantial compliance with the requirements of33 C.F.R. S 20.502.

ORDER

Upon consideration of the record, it is hereby ORDERED, the Seftlement Agreement is

APPROVED in full and incorporated herein by reference. This Consent Order shall constitute

full, final, and complete adjudication of this proceeding.

Done and dated February 14,2023, at

Alameda, California

-.;Z-ZtJ.->

Timothy G. Stueve

Administrative Law Judge

U.S. Coast Guard
----

----

Exhibit 21

| Subsidiaries of the Company                                  |
|--------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                         |   |   |   |   |
| Subsidiaries                                                 |   | Percentage Owned |   | Jurisdiction of Incorporation |
|                                                         |   |   |   |   |
| Sun National Bank                                            |   | 100% |   | United States |
|                                                         |   |   |   |   |
| Med-Vine, Inc. (1)                                           |   | 100% |   | Delaware |
|                                                         |   |   |   |   |
| Sun Capital Trust V                                          |   | 100% |   | Delaware |
|                                                         |   |   |   |   |
| Sun Capital Trust VI                                         |   | 100% |   | Delaware |
|                                                         |   |   |   |   |
| Sun Statutory Trust VII                                      |   | 100% |   | Connecticut |
|                                                         |   |   |   |   |
| Sun Capital Trust VII                                        |   | 100% |   | Delaware |
|                                                         |   |   |   |   |
| Sun Capital Trust VIII                                       |   | 100% |   | Delaware |
|                                                         |   |   |   |   |
| Sun Financial Services, L.L.C. (1)                           |   | 100% |   | New Jersey |
|                                                         |   |   |   |   |
| 2020 Properties, L.L.C. (1)                                  |   | 100% |   | New Jersey |
|                                                         |   |   |   |   |
| Sun Home Loans, Inc. (1)                                     |   | 100% |   | New Jersey |
|                                                         |   |   |   |   |
| (1)  Wholly-owned subsidiary of Sun National Bank. |

----

----
IIB 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 233 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 24, 2015 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and 

Urban Affairs 

AN ACT 

To allow reviews of certain families’ incomes every 3 years 

for purposes of determining eligibility for certain Federal 

assisted housing programs. 

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


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 233 RFS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Tenant Income 

3 Verification Relief Act of 2015’’. 

4 SEC. 2. REVIEWS OF FAMILY INCOMES. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—The second sentence of paragraph 

6 (1) of section 3(a) of the United States Housing Act of 

7 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437a(a)(1)) is amended by inserting be8 fore the period at the end the following: ‘‘; except that, 

9 in the case of any family with a fixed income, as defined 

10 by the Secretary, after the initial review of the family’s 

11 income, the public housing agency or owner shall not be 

12 required to conduct a review of the family’s income for 

13 any year for which such family certifies, in accordance 

14 with such requirements as the Secretary shall establish, 

15 which shall include policies to adjust for inflation-based 

16 income changes, that 90 percent or more of the income 

17 of the family consists of fixed income, and that the sources 

18 of such income have not changed since the previous year, 

19 except that the public housing agency or owner shall con20 duct a review of each such family’s income not less than 

21 once every 3 years’’. 

22 (b) HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER PROGRAM.—Sub23 paragraph (A) of section 8(o)(5) of the United States 

24 Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)(5)(A)) is 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

HR 233 RFS

1 amended by striking ‘‘not less than annually’’ and insert2 ing ‘‘as required by section 3(a)(1) of this Act’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives March 23, 

2015. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### GROOF, Respondent, v. BLISS, Appellant.

(City Court of New York, General Term.

October 30, 1896.)

Action by Frederick G. Groof, as general assignee, etc., of Henry W. Benedict and Robert A. Fowler against Clara E. Bliss.

Olin, Rives & Montgomery, for appellant.

A. R. Bunnell, for respondent.

FITZSIMONS, J.

This is an action brought to recover for goods sold and delivered. The defendant’s contention upon this appeal is that certain notes which she gave to the plaintiff assignor prior to the assignment to the plaintiffs for the benefit of said assignor’s creditors, and which were given to said assignors for their accommodation, should be considered as a payment of the claim in question. The trial justice refused to concur in defendant’s view, except as to one of the said notes, and hence this appeal. It appears that all of said notes except the one allowed by the trial justice as a proper-subject of counterclaim became due and were-paid by the defendant after the assignment. Under such circumstances, it was proper for the-trial justice to rule that said notes were not proper counterclaims herein. Defendant, as to such notes, occupied the same position as the other creditors of the plaintiff’s assignor. The notes, as before stated, were not due at the time of the making of the assignment, and therefore they constituted no claim upon the estate of the-assignor due when the assignment was made-(see Fera v. Wickham, 135 N. Y. 223, 31 N. E.. 1028), and cannot be presented in this action as a counterclaim. Finding no error herein, the judgment must be affirmed. All concur.
NO. 07-04-0428-CV

	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

	FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	AT AMARILLO

	PANEL B

	OCTOBER 25, 2004

	______________________________

	IN THE INTEREST OF C.H., C.H. AND C.H., CHILDREN

	_________________________________

	FROM THE 140TH DISTRICT COURT OF LUBBOCK COUNTY;

	NO. 2002-518,450; HONORABLE JIM BOB DARNELL, JUDGE

	_______________________________

Before JOHNSON, C.J., and QUINN and CAMPBELL, JJ.

	MEMORANDUM OPINION

	Appellant, Deanna McCann filed a pro se notice of appeal on August 17, 2004.  The clerk’s record was filed on September 24, 2004, but no reporter’s record has been received.1 The court reporter filed a request for extension of time to file the record and informed this court that as of October 15, 2004, appellant has not paid or made arrangements to pay for the record. 

	On September 17, 2004, appellant was directed by letter to certify to the clerk of this court, by September 27, 2004, in writing, whether Rules 34.5(10), 34.6(b)(1), and 35.3(a)(2), (b)(2) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure had been complied with; if so, the date of the compliance, and if not, a reasonable explanation for non-compliance. She was informed that failure to comply with the court’s directive might result in dismissal.  After appellant failed to respond, a second letter was sent on September 30, 2004, informing appellant that failure to comply by October 11, 2004, would result in dismissal of the appeal. 

	On October 12, 2004, this court received appellant’s response, but the response does not include the information appellant was directed to provide.  Because appellant has failed to provide proof that she has paid for the reporter’s record or made satisfactory arrangements for the payment of the record as directed by the court, we dismiss the appeal pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3(b) and 42.3(c).

								Per Curiam
#### All data considered provisional and subject to revision.

      Storage                    
csv

      Inflow                    
csv

      Total Release                    
csv

      Pool Elevation                    
csv

      Area                    
csv

      Delta Storage                    
csv

      Evaporation                    
csv

      Release Volume                    
csv

      Inflow Volume                    
csv

#### All data considered provisional and subject to revision.

      Storage                    
json

      Inflow                    
json

      Total Release                    
json

      Pool Elevation                    
json

      Area                    
json

      Delta Storage                    
json

      Evaporation                    
json

      Release Volume                    
json

      Inflow Volume                    
json
#### All data considered provisional and subject to revision.

      Storage                    
csv

      Evaporation                    
csv

      Inflow                    
csv

      Total Release                    
csv

      Pool Elevation                    
csv

      Area                    
csv

      Delta Storage                    
csv

      Release Volume                    
csv

      Inflow Volume                    
csv

#### All data considered provisional and subject to revision.

      Storage                    
json

      Evaporation                    
json

      Inflow                    
json

      Total Release                    
json

      Pool Elevation                    
json

      Area                    
json

      Delta Storage                    
json

      Release Volume                    
json

      Inflow Volume                    
json