alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Advises Congress by working with Congressional offices,

convening and testifying at hearings, and holding briefings on countries

and thematic issues.

Engages the Executive Branch by regularly meeting with

Executive Branch officials to share information, highlight situations of

concern, and discuss USCIRF’s policy recommendations.

Monitors Religious Freedom Conditions Abroad

through research, travel, and meetings with foreign officials and

international partners, representatives of independent human rights

groups and other non-governmental organizations (NGOs), religious

leaders, victims of persecution, and others.

Raises Public Awareness by holding public events, hosting

podcast episodes, releasing public statements, and publishing op-eds.

USCIRF also advocates for victims of FoRB violations and calls for the

release of prisoners through its Religious Prisoners of Conscience (RPOC)

Project, the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission’s Defending

Freedoms Project, and USCIRF's FoRB Victims List.

Ins

that assess foreign countries that violate religious freedom in a

systematic, ongoing, and/or egregious manner; highlight thematic issues

affecting religious freedom abroad; evaluate U.S. policy; and make

recommendations to the U.S. government.

732 NORTH CAPITOL ST, N.W. SUITE A714 WASHINGTON, DC 20401 | 202.523.3240 | WWW.USCIRF.GOV | MEDIA@USCIRF.GOV

USCIRF is an independent, bipartisan U.S.

federal government agency created by the

1998 International Religious Freedom Act

(IRFA), as amended.

USCIRF monitors the universal right to

freedom of religion or belief (FoRB)

abroad; makes policy recommendations to

the President, Secretary of State, and

Congress; and tracks the implementation

of these recommendations.

While USCIRF is independent from the

State Department, the

Ambassador-at-Large for International

Religious Freedom is a non-voting member.

USCIRF's nine Commissioners are

appointed by either the President or

Congressional leaders of each political

party, supported by a non-partisan

professional staff.

USCIRF’s analysis is based on

international standards. Article 18 of

the Universal Declaration of Human

Rights affirms that:

“Everyone has the right to freedom of

thought, conscience and religion; this

right includes freedom to change his

religion or belief, and freedom, either

alone or in community with others and

in public or private, to manifest his

religion or belief in teaching, practice,

worship and observance.”

WHAT DOES USCIRF DO?

Raises Public Awareness

Advises Congress

Engages the Executive Branch

Monitors Religious Freedom Conditions Abroad

Issues an Annual Report & Other Publications

UNITED STATES COMMISSION

ON INTERNATIONAL

RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

WHAT IS USCIRF?
Exhibit 32.1

PERIODIC REPORT CERTIFICATION

of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer

I, Dennis C. Pence, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Coldwater Creek Inc. (the Company), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

(1) the report of the Company on Form 10-K/A for the
fiscal year ended January 28, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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/ Dennis C. Pence                                               
|Dennis C. Pence                                                   
|Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (Principal
Executive Officer)
|June 20, 2006                                                     

I, Melvin Dick, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Coldwater Creek Inc. (the
Company), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

(1) the report of the Company on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended January 28, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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/ Melvin Dick                                     
|Melvin Dick                                         
|Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|(Principal Accounting Officer)                      
|June 20, 2006
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

DIVISION ONE

IN THE MATTER OF THE

PERSONAL RESTRAINT OF

JOHN ALLEN WHITAKER,

Petitioner.

PER CURIAM — John Whitaker was convicted in 2004 following a jury trial of

aggravated murderin the first degree and conspiracyto commit murderin the first degree

in Snohomish County Cause No. 02-1-02368-6. He was sentenced to life imprisonment

without the possibility of parole. This court affirmed Whitaker's convictions on appeal.

See No. 54834-4-I. Whitaker filed a personal restraint petition alleging, among other

things, that his right to a public trial was violated when sixjurors were individually

questioned in a closed courtroom during voir dire.

The State concedes that recent Washington Supreme Court authority settles the

following issues: (1) jury voir dire is an established proceeding to which the public trial

right applies, and (2) closing the courtroom during voir direwithout first conducting a

Bone-Club1 analysis is a structural error, requiring reversal ofa defendant's convictions.

See State v. Paumier, 176 Wn 2d 29. 35-37. 288 P.3d 1126 (2012): State v. Wise, 176

Wn.2d 1, 19-20, 288 P.3d 1113 (2012). The State further concedes that this case is

) No. 61980-2-1 r*o

COO

t~j :>^

) DIVISION ONE !Z^'-'

) UNPUBLISHED OPINION —4 3^

Tb> to f-n

) FILED: JUN 1 7 2013 9?

crv

CD —

1State v. Bone-Club. 128 Wn.2d 254, 906 P.2d 325 (1995).
No. 61980-2-1/2

analogous to In re Pers. Restraint of Morris, 176Wn.2d 157, 288 P.3d 1140(2012). In

Morris, the trial court privately questioned 14 jurors in chambers without considering the

Bone-Club factors. In re Morris, 176 Wn2d at 161-62. In the context of resolving Morris's

personal restraint petition, the Supreme Court held that appellate counsel's failure to raise

the court closure issue on appeal was both deficient and prejudicial because the error

would have been presumed prejudicial on direct review. In re Morris, 176 Wn.2d at 166-

68. The State concedes that as in Morris, Whitaker is entitled to a new trial because

appellate counsel did not raise the courtroom closure issue on appeal. In re Morris, 176

Wn.2dat168.

We accept the State's concession, reverse Whitaker's convictions, and remand for

a new trial.

£

WE CONCUR:

f

urn\c—

? k^L

A-4.&.J
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 Smith Barney Potomac Futures Fund L.P. (the ‘‘Partnership’’) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the ‘‘Report’’), I, Jerry Pascucci, President and Director of Citigroup Managed Futures LLC, 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 results of operations of the Partnership. |

/s/ Jerry Pascucci                        

Jerry PascucciCitigroup Managed Futures LLC President and Director     

Date: May 14, 2007

----
PRESS RELEASE Contact: Melissa Wojnaroski

March 1, 2024 (202) 618-4158

mwojnaroski@usccr.gov

Pennsylvania Advisory Committee to the U. S. Commission on Civil Rights Announces Study:

Civil Rights and the Rising Use of Artificial Intelligence in Education

** EVENT REGISTRATAION: https://shorturl.at/lBE17 ** 

The Pennsylvania Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights is conducting a 

study to examine the civil rights impact of the rising use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in 

Education. In this ongoing study, the Committee will consider how AI algorithms are developed, 

and the impact they can have on either reducing or exacerbating existing disparities (or creating new 

disparities) in the classroom based on federally protected classes. The Committee will also examine 

potential solutions and recommendations to remediate identified concerns.

The Committee will hear testimony through a series of public briefings, as follows:

Panel I: Monday March 25, 2024, from 11:00am-1:00pm ET

Panel II: Wednesday March 27, 2024, from 11:00am-1:00pm ET

Panel III: Friday March 29, 2024, from 11:00am-1:00pm ET

Panel IV: Thursday April 25, 2024, from 11:00am-1:00pm ET

Registration is available at: https://shorturl.at/lBE17. 

All meetings are free and open to the public. Members of the public will be invited to speak during 

an open-comment period near the end of each meeting. The Committee also invites written 

testimony from others who wish to contribute. All written testimony must be submitted to the 

Committee by Wednesday May 1, 2024, via email at mwojnaroski@usccr.gov.

Closed captions will be provided. Individuals requiring other accommodations should contact the 

regional program unit at (202) 618-4158 five business days prior to the meeting to make their 

request. Committee Steve Irwin said, "Pennsylvania is at the center as our country begins to 

harness the power of AI. Our Committee has chosen to focus on identifying the risks and rewards 

for students from Kindergarten through High School. At the same time, its benefits must be felt 

equitably and its dangers must not be at the expense of the most vulnerable."

The Committee will issue its findings and recommendations in a report to the Commission after all 

testimony has been received, anticipated Fall 2024.

#####
The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, established by the Civil Rights Act of 1957, is the only 

independent, bipartisan agency charged with advising the President and Congress on civil rights and 

reporting annually on federal civil rights enforcement. Our 51 state Advisory Committees offer a 

broad perspective on civil rights concerns at state and local levels. The Commission: in our 7th 

decade, a continuing legacy of influence in civil rights. For information about the Commission, 

please visit http://www.usccr.gov and follow us on Twitter and Facebook.
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
                             CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                                   PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In  connection  with  the  Annual  Report  of  Shoreside  Investments, Inc. (the
"Company")  on  Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2002 as filed with
the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Robert  M.  Karz,  Chief  Executive  Officer  and Chief Financial 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 the best of 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.



                                   /s/Robert  M.  Karz
                                   -------------------------
                                   Robert  M.  Karz
                                   Chief  Executive  Officer
                                   Chief  Financial  Officer
                                   April  3,  2003
**Exhibit      32**

**CERTIFICATION      OF PERIODIC REPORT**

|   | (1) | the                Annual Report on Form 10-KSB/A of the Company for the fiscal year                ended                June 30, 2007 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of                Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15                U.S.C                78m or 78o(d)); and |
|--------|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) | the                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                Company. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | /s/                Geoffrey Donaldson  |
|--------|----------------------------------------|
|   | Geoffrey                Donaldson      |
|   | Chief                Executive Officer |

|   | (1) | the                Annual Report on Form 10-KSB/A of the Company for the fiscal year                ended                June 30, 2007 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of                Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15                U.S.C                78m or 78o(d)); and |
|--------|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) | the                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                Company. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | /s/                Karen Nazzareno |
|--------|------------------------------------|
|   | Karen                Nazzareno     |
|   | Controller                         |

----
SUBMIT EVIDENCE

IN LIEU OF A HEARING

TIME LINE: Within 30 days of your receipt of our preliminary assessment letter

• You may submit written statements, photographs, receipts, diagrams or other

evidence relating to the case.

• You may submit any explanation of the incident or information to show the

incident was less severe, or evidence that the violation(s) did not occur.

• If you have repaired or replaced equipment or passed a subsequent inspection,

etc. please provide copies of receipts, your inspection report, or documents

and/or photographs of equipment showing that they are located on board your

vessel.

• You may wish to comment on the impact of the penalty amount on you or

your business. Some documentation of your finances will lend more weight to

this kind of comment.

• Sometimes penalty amounts are reduced. For example, if you spent money to

fix the violation, that might affect the final penalty amount. You should

provide convincing evidence showing how you corrected the violation or how

you updated company procedures / policy to prevent future occurrences, and

how much that cost. A letter or statement without supporting evidence is less

persuasive.

The above cannot be accomplished by telephone.

All correspondence can be sent by email for the quickest response. You can 

attach your documents as a .pdf file or .jpg file for photos. Be sure to 

include the Activity Number in the Subject line of the email. 

Send your Email Response to: 

 HQS-SMB-CGHO-Response@USCG.MIL

Send your mail evidence in lieu of a hearing to: 

 U.S. Coast Guard Hearing Office 

 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE. / STOP 7794

 Washington, DC 20593-7794 

If you fax your correspondence to (202) 372-8422 you must include a cover 

sheet containing the sender’s name, address and telephone number, the 

party’s name and address, the Activity Number, and the number of pages 

transmitted. Please do not send responses over ten pages by fax. If you 

have a response that is
over ten pages that is urgent to get to our office send the package by

overnight mail.

We will not accept photographs by fax, and whatever you submit should be

sent together so that they arrive at our office together. For example, if you

have photos to submit, along with other documents, do not fax any of it. Send it

all by mail. Similarly, if you have videotapes or other bulky evidence to submit,

along with other documents, all the material should be mailed together. The

Hearing Officer will consider all evidence, if it is received in such a condition

that it can be read, heard or viewed, and will advise you of the final decision

by letter.
EXHIBIT 31.2



CERTIFICATION



I, Edward J. Granaghan, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of FiberNet Telecom Group, Inc.;



2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;



3. Based on my knowledge, the condensed consolidated interim financial statements, and other financial information included in this
quarterly 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 quarterly 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 we 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 registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;



b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures
and presented in this quarterly 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 registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and



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 registered public accounting firm and the audit committee of the registrant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 registrant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 registrants internal control over financial reporting.



Date: November 10, 2005



|                                                 
|-------------------------------------------------
|                                                 
|/s/    EDWARD J.
GRANAGHAN                       
|Edward J. Granaghan                              
|Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|(Principal Financial Officer)
#### Stephen Sutphin *against*Hardenbergh and Tunison.

If there is an interlineation in a material part of an appeal bond, which is not noted at the foot thereof, the bond will be defective, and the appeal may he dismissed.

*Vroom*moved for a peremptory *mandamus,*to be directed to the Court of Common Pleas of the county of Somerset, to compel them to restore an appeal which had been dismissed on account of an alleged insufficiency of the appeal bond; and he read a state of the case agreed upon by the attorneys of the parties, by which it appeared that several objections to the bond were taken in the Court of Common Pleas. The only one necessary to be noticed is : that there was an interlineation in the bond of the words *“ and ten dollars,”*which interlineation was not, in any manner, stated to have been made previous to its execution, or noted on the bond. He contended that the Court of Common Pleas erred in dismissing the appeal on that ground; that the interlineation did not vitiate the bond; and that in the absence of all testimony, the presumption was, that the interlineation was made before the execution of the bond.

*J. S. Green,*contra.

Unless there be a regular appeal bond, the court below has no jurisdiction. The alteration in this bond is in a material part of it. Because if that part of the bond is struck out, the Court of Common Pleas-have. *343no jurisdiction. The presumption of law is, that the interlineation is made after the execution unless the contrary appears.

Ch. Justice.

The Court of Common Pleas did right in dismissing the appeal. The party appellee is entitled to have a bond perfect upon the face of it. If the presumption is that the alteration was made before the execution, yet it is only a presumption, and may be overcome by proof to the contrary. Whether the alteration was made before or after the execution, must be put to a jury to determine, and the bond may be found to be invalid. The appellee is not compelled to take a bond which may turn out to be bad. He is entitled to a good bond.

Motion refused.