alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                                  Certification

      Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.
1350), Stephen S. Schwartz, Chief Executive Officer of Asyst Technologies, Inc.
(the "Company"), and Robert J. Nikl, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
each hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:

      1. The Company's Quarterly Report for the period ended September 30, 2004,
to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the "Periodic Report")
fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and

      2. The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

Dated:  December 29, 2004

/s/ STEPHEN S. SCHWARTZ                              /S/ ROBERT J. NIKL
-------------------------                            ------------------------
Stephen S. Schwartz, Ph.D.                           Robert J. Nikl
Chief Executive Officer                              Chief Financial Officer

This certification is not deemed to be "filed" for purposes of section 18 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or otherwise subject to the liability of that
section. This certification is not deemed to be incorporated by reference into
any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
Walter N. RHODES, Jr., petitioner, v. Shane BAKER, Warden, et al.

No. 18-5310.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT
23.1














CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We
consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
333-147957 on Form S-8 of our report dated February 27, 2008 (which report
expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating
to the adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 158,
“Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement
Plans - an amendment of FASB Statements No. 87, 88, 106, and 132(R),” as of
December 31, 2006), relating to the financial statements and financial statement
schedules of MidAmerican Energy Holdings Company, appearing in this Annual
Report on Form 10-K of MidAmerican Energy Holdings Company for the year ended
December 31, 2007.





/s/       Deloitte
& Touche LLP





Des
Moines, Iowa


February
27, 2008
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
333-80365 on Form S-8 filed on June 10, 1999, Amendment No. 1 in Registration
No. 333-40956 on Form S-8 filed on July 7, 2000 and Registration Statement No.
333-56788 on Form S-8 filed on March 9, 2001 pertaining to the 1997 Stock Plan
and 1999 Employee Stock Purchase Plan of NextCard, Inc. of our report dated
January 23, 2001 with respect to the consolidated financial statements of
NextCard, Inc. and subsidiaries included in its Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2000.



ERNST & YOUNG LLP

San Francisco, California
March 29, 2001
KAN-DI-KI, LLC, dba Diagnostic Laboratories, petitioner, v. John Leslie SORENSEN, et al.

No. 18-11.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1626 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1626

      To amend the Clean Air Act to repeal the highway sanctions.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 29, 1999

  Mr. Baker introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                         Committee on Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      To amend the Clean Air Act to repeal the highway sanctions.

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

SECTION 1. REPEAL OF HIGHWAY SANCTIONS IN CLEAN AIR ACT.

    (a) In General.--Section 179 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7509) 
is amended as follows:
            (1) In subsection (a)--
                    (A) in the first sentence, by striking ``one of the 
                sanctions'' and all that follows and inserting the 
                following: ``the sanctions described in subsection (b) 
                shall apply until the Administrator determines that the 
                State has come into compliance.''; and
                    (B) by striking the second sentence.
            (2) In subsection (b)--
                    (A) by striking ``are as follows:'' and all that 
                follows through ``(2) Offsets.--In applying'' and 
                inserting ``are to apply'';
                    (B) by striking ``part D, the'' and inserting 
                ``part D such that the''; and
                    (C) by striking ``shall be'' and inserting ``is''.
    (b) Conforming Amendments.--(1) Section 110(m) of the Clean Air Act 
(42 U.S.C. 7410(m)) is amended in the first sentence by striking ``any 
of''.
    (2) Section 502 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7661a) is amended--
            (A) in subsection (d)(2)--
                    (i) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``any of''; 
                and
                    (ii) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``section 
                179(b)(2)'' and inserting ``section 179(b)''; and
            (B) in subsection (i)--
                    (i) in paragraph (1), by striking ``any of''; and
                    (ii) in paragraph (3), by striking ``section 
                179(b)(2)'' and inserting ``section 179(b)''.
                                 <all>
```
NUMBER 13-09-00542-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

AMANDA HULL, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

On Appeal from the 117th District Court

of Nueces County, Texas.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Garza

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Amanda Hull, attempts to appeal her conviction for possession of

cocaine. The trial court has certified that this “is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant

has NO right of appeal,” and “the defendant has waived the right of appeal.” See TEX. R.

APP. P. 25.2(a)(2).
2

On September 29, 2009, this Court notified appellant’s counsel of the trial court’s

certification and ordered counsel to: (1) review the record; (2) determine whether appellant

has a right to appeal; and (3) forward to this Court, by letter, counsel’s findings as to

whether appellant has a right to appeal, or, alternatively, advise this Court as to the

existence of any amended certification.

On October 26, 2009, counsel filed a letter brief with this Court. Counsel’s response

does not establish that the certification currently on file with this Court is incorrect or that

appellant otherwise has a right to appeal. 

The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provide that an appeal must be dismissed

if the trial court’s certification does not show that the defendant has the right of appeal.

TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); see TEX. R. APP. P. 37.1, 44.3, 44.4. Accordingly, this appeal is

DISMISSED. Any pending motions are denied as moot.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Memorandum Opinion delivered and

filed this 19th day of November, 2009.
In Re Clifford E. AVERY, petitioner.

No. 18-9035.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 20, 2019.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied, and petition for writ of habeas corpus dismissed. See Rule 39.8. As petitioner has repeatedly abused this Court's process, the Clerk is directed not to accept any further petitions in noncriminal matters from petitioner unless the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) is paid and petition submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1. See *Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals,*506 U.S. 1, 113 S.Ct. 397, 121 L.Ed.2d 305 (1992) (*per curiam* ).
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 118 Reported in House (RH)]

                                                  House Calendar No. 44
106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 118

                          [Report No. 106-110]

  To designate the Federal building located at 300 East 8th Street in 
     Austin, Texas, as the ``J.J. `Jake' Pickle Federal Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 6, 1999

 Mr. Doggett introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
             Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

                             April 27, 1999

       Committed to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To designate the Federal building located at 300 East 8th Street in 
     Austin, Texas, as the ``J.J. `Jake' Pickle Federal Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The Federal building located at 300 East 8th Street in Austin, 
Texas, shall be known and designated as the ``J.J. `Jake' Pickle 
Federal Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the Federal building referred to in 
section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``J.J. `Jake' Pickle 
Federal Building''.
                                     

                                                  House Calendar No. 44

106th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 118

                          [Report No. 106-110]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

  To designate the Federal building located at 300 East 8th Street in 
     Austin, Texas, as the ``J.J. `Jake' Pickle Federal Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             April 27, 1999

       Committed to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed
```
Tavares J. WRIGHT, petitioner, v. FLORIDA.

No. 18-8653.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 3, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Florida denied.
Tuad Damonn WASHINGTON, petitioner, v. Lorie DAVIS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

No. 18-7016.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2019.

Petition for rehearing denied.
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane lunani m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T J OSE ALF RE DO RODRI GU EZ - PE RE Z, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , Jr ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 09- 71071 A ge nc yN o. A 037- 803- 987 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

an O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d M ar c h 8, 2011 ** B efo re: F A R R IS , O ’ S C A N N L A IN , an dB Y B E E , C i rcu i tJu d g es. Jose A l fr edo R od ri gu ez -P er ez , a nat i ve and ci t i ze n o f M exi co, pet i t i on s pro s e f o rr e v ie w o f

th e B o ar do f

I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls ’ ( “B I A ” ) o r d e rd e n y in g h is m ot i on t o r e ope n. W e have j ur i s di c t i on unde r8 U . S . C . § 1252. W e r e vi e w f or 

# FI LED MA R 16 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS09- 71071 2 ab u s e o f d is c r e tio n th e d e n ia l o f am o tio n to r e o p e n , I

tu rr i b a rr i a v . I

NS , 321 F . 3d 8 8 9 , 8 9 4 ( 9 th C i r . 2 0 0 3 ) , an dwe d e n yth e p e t i t i o n f o rr e v i e w. T he B I A di d notabus e i t s di s c r e t i on byde ny i ng R odr i gue z - P e r e z ’ s m ot i on t o reopen as unt i m el y bec ause i tw as fi l ed ov er90 days af t erthe B IA ’ s f

i nal order, se e 8 C . F . R . § 1003. 2( c ) ( 2) , and be c aus e R odr i gue z - P e r e z f a i l e d t o e s t abl i s h the du e d ilig e n c e r e qu ir e df o re qu itab le to llin g , s e e I tu rr ib a rr ia , 321 F . 3d a t897. P E T I T I ON F OR RE V I E W DE NI E D.
Wendell Arden GRISSOM, petitioner, v. Mike CARPENTER, Interim Warden.

No. 18-8592.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.
Angela D. CLACK, petitioner, v. UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION.

No. 18-159.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Exhibit 31.2



CERTIFICATIONS



I, James A. Reskin, being the Chief Financial Officer, certify that:



1.

I have reviewed the annual report on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003 of Intra-Asia Entertainment Corporation;



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 Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4.

The Company'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 Company 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 Company, 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.

[Paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238 and 34-47986]



c.

Evaluated the effectiveness of the Company'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



d.

Disclosed in this report any change in the Company's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the Company's most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company's internal control over financial reporting; and



5.

The Company's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Company's auditors and the audit committee of the Company'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 Company'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 Company's internal control over financial reporting.



Date: July 26, 2004



/s/ James A. Reskin

James A. Reskin, Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1667 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1667

   To amend title 23, United States Code, relating to vehicle weight 
                              limitations.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 4, 1999

  Mr. Cook (for himself and Mr. Peterson of Minnesota) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation 
                           and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend title 23, United States Code, relating to vehicle weight 
                              limitations.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Safe and Efficient Transportation 
Act''.

SEC. 2. VEHICLE WEIGHT LIMITATIONS.

    Section 127 of title 23, United States Code, is amended by adding 
at the end the following:
    ``(h) Exception.--Notwithstanding subsection (a), a State may allow 
a combination of a truck tractor and no more than 1 trailer or 
semitrailer with a consecutive set of tandem and tridem axles that may 
carry a gross load of 34,000 pounds on the tandem axles and 51,000 
pounds on the tridem axles to use the Interstate System if the overall 
trailer length is at least 48 feet; except that such overall gross 
weight may not exceed 97,000 pounds for a vehicle combination of 6 or 
more axles (for a combination of a truck tractor and no more than 1 
trailer or semitrailer), including all enforcement tolerances.''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 10.5

  
    


  

  

  

  SUMMARY of OFFICER and DIRECTOR COMPENSATION

  

  

  

  

  The Employment Agreement in Exhibits 7 & 8 of this report is the only written contractual compensation
      arrangement the Company has with any of its Directors and Executive Officers.

  

  

  During 2019, the Company’s Chief Executive and Principal Financial Officer (the Company’s “Named Executive
      Officers”) are scheduled to receive the following compensation from the Company:

   

    

  	 Compensation Arrangement 	 2019 Scheduled Amount 
	 Base salary 	 $156,000 (CEO); $108,000 (PFO) 
	 401(k) matching contributions 	 6,720 (maximum) 
	 Section 125 plan matching contributions (1) 	 600 (maximum) 
	 Management bonus 	 will be determined at year-end 
	 Pet health benefits (1) 	 500 (maximum) 
	 Family medical benefits (1) 	 will depend on future events 
	 Travel expense reimbursement (2) 	 20,000 (CEO); 500 (PFO) 


  

  

  During 2019, the Company’s Directors are scheduled to receive the following compensation from the Company:

  

  

  	
          Compensation Arrangement

        	 	
          Ernst Hoyer

        	 	 	
          Barbara Payne

        	 	 	
          James Beeson

        	 	 	
          Paul Richins

        	 
	
          Base

        	 	
          $

        	
          25,000

        	 	 	
          $

        	
          25,000

        	 	 	
          $

        	
          25,000

        	 	 	
          $

        	
          25,000

        	 
	
          Executive Committee

        	 	 	
          4,000

        	 	 	 	
          -

        	 	 	 	
          -

        	 	 	 	
          -

        	 
	
          Audit Committee Chairman

        	 	 	
          3,000

        	 	 	 	
          -

        	 	 	 	
          -

        	 	 	 	
          -

        	 
	
          Travel Expense Reimbursement (2)

        	 	 	
          500

        	 	 	 	
          500

        	 	 	 	
          500

        	 	 	 	
          50

        	 


  

  

  (1)   CEO and PFO participate on the same basis as other eligible employees.

  (2)   Estimated 2019 travel expenses on behalf of UTMD business.  The Company reimburses its employees and directors for
      authorized business expenses.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1628 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1628

  To direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to establish a national 
    cemetery for veterans in the Miami, Florida, metropolitan area.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 29, 1999

Mr. Brown of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                 to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to establish a national 
    cemetery for veterans in the Miami, Florida, metropolitan area.

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

SECTION 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL CEMETERY.

    (a) In General.--The Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall establish, 
in accordance with chapter 24 of title 38, United States Code, a 
national cemetery in the Miami, Florida, metropolitan area to serve the 
needs of veterans and their families.
    (b) Report.--As soon as practicable after the date of the enactment 
of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report that sets 
forth a schedule for the establishment of the national cemetery under 
subsection (a) and an estimate of the costs associated with such 
establishment.
                                 <all>
```
Christine CHANG, petitioner, v. Robin ANDREWS.

No. 18-5010.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, First Appellate District denied.