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

EX-32.1

Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

I-Element Corporation, Inc. 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 annual report of I-Element Corporation on Form 10-KSB/A
for the period ending March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Ivan Zweig, Chief Executive
Officer of I-Element Corporation, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 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 INFe-Human
Resources, Inc.

Date: July 10, 2006

/s/ Ivan Zweig
-----------------
Ivan Zweig
Chief Executive Officer



/s/ Ivan Zweig
-----------------
Ivan Zweig
Chief Financial Officer
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 Justice

                    Notice is hereby given that an agreement between the Department of the Interior, National Park Service and the Washington Gas Light Company has been approved, subject to public comment, by the Department of Justice pursuant to Section 122(h) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. 9601*et seq.*                     The settlement provides for recovery of $285,000 in costs incurred by the Park Service in response to contamination on a portion of the National Capitol Parks-East, located beside the Anacostia River in Washington, DC.                

                    For a period of thirty (30) days from the date of this publication, comments relating to the proposed settlement will be received. Such comments should be addressed to Shawn P. Mulligan, National Park Service, 1050 Walnut Street, Suite 220, Boulder, Colorado 80302, (303) 415-9014, or via e-mail at                     *Shawn_Mulligan@nps.gov*                     and should refer to the NPS Washington Gas Light Site.                

A copy of the proposed settlement agreement may be obtained from, or reviewed at: National Capital Parks-East Headquarters, 1900 Anacostia Drive, SE., Washington, DC 20020, (202) 690-5185. In requesting a copy, please enclose a check in the amount of $2.75 (25 cents per page reproduction cost) payable to the U.S. Treasury.

Robert Brook, 

Assistant Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and Natural Resources Division.

[FR Doc. 05-16851 Filed 8-24-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-15-M
STATE of North Carolina v. Sonya Case HARRIS.

No. 25P06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 19, 2006.

Joseph Finarelli, Assistant Attorney General, Jeff Hunt, District Attorney, for State.

Barbara S. Blackman, Assistant Appellate Defender, for Sonya Case Harris.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 25th day of January 2006 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 19th day of December 2006."

Upon consideration of the cross petition filed on the 25th day of January 2006 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 19th day of December 2006."
Exhibit 32.1

TELETOUCH COMMUNICATIONS, INC.

OFFICERS
CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. 1350)

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of TELETOUCH COMMUNICATIONS, INC. (the Company) for the
quarter ended August 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Robert M. McMurrey, Chief Executive Officer, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, that, to
the best of his knowledge:

1. The Report is in full compliances 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 operation of the Company.



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Robert M. McMurrey 
|Robert M. McMurrey     
|Chief Executive Officer
|October 15, 2009
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

August 20, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-40134

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JORGE AGUILAR-SOLIS, also known

as Mario Ortiz Aguilar,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. B-02-CR-476-1

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

Before JONES, WIENER, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

 Jorge Aguilar-Solis appeals the sentence imposed following

his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United States

after deportation/removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. 

Aguilar-Solis contends that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(b) are unconstitutional. He argues that the prior

conviction that resulted in his increased sentence is an element

of a separate offense under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) that should have
No. 03-40134

-2-

been alleged in his indictment. Aguilar-Solis maintains that he

pleaded guilty to an indictment which charged only simple reentry

under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). He argues that his sentence exceeds

the maximum term of imprisonment and supervised release which may

be imposed for that offense. 

In Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235

(1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in

8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of

separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing

provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. 

Aguilar-Solis acknowledges that his arguments are foreclosed by

Almendarez-Torres, but asserts that the decision has been cast

into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). 

He seeks to preserve his arguments for further review. 

Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi,

530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984

(5th Cir. 2000). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres

“unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule

it.” Dabeit, 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and

citation omitted). The judgment of the district court is

AFFIRMED.

The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of

filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks

that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED. 

AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
IN RE L.A.A.

No. COA06-1683.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed June 19, 2007

Certification Date July 9, 2007.

Appeal from Henderson (05J110).

Case reported without published opinion. Vacated and remanded.
**Exhibit 31.2**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, Thomas J. Colatosti, certify that:

1.             Ihave reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of BIO-keyInternational, Inc. (the “company”);

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

3.             Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the company as of, and for,the periods presented in this report;

4.             Thecompany’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for thecompany and have:

(a)           Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to thecompany, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this report isbeing prepared;

(b)           Evaluated the effectiveness of thecompany’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report ourconclusions 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 changein the company’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred duringthe company’s most recent fiscal quarter (the company’s fourth fiscal quarterin the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the company’s internal control over financialreporting.

5.             Thecompany’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the company’sauditors and the audit committee of the company’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)           All significant deficiencies andmaterial weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the company’sability 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 thecompany’s internal control over financial reporting.
| Date: June 19, 2006 |   |   |   |   |
|--------------------------|--------|--------|--------|--------|
|                     |   |   |   |   |
| /s/ THOMAS J.  COLATOSTI |   |   |   |   |
| Thomas J.  Colatosti     |   |   |   |   |
| Chief Executive  Officer |   |   |   |   |

 

----
EXHIBIT 12.1


                    FrontierVision Operating Partners, L.P.
               Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
                             (Dollars in thousands)

<TABLE>

                                                                                       For the Period
                                                                                       From Inception
                                          For the Year Ended   For the Year Ended    (April 17, 1995) to
                                           December 31, 1997    December 31, 1996     December 31, 1996
                                               --------             --------                -----

<S>                                            <C>                  <C>                   <C>     
Net Loss ..........................            $(46,863)            $(23,801)             $(2,703)
Add (Deduct):
     Income Tax Provision (Benefit)                --                   --                    --
Less: Minority Interest
                                               --------             --------                -----
Pre Tax Income (Loss) .............             (46,863)             (23,801)              (2,703)
Add:  Fixed Charges
     Interest .....................              44,007               23,210                1,451
                                               --------             --------                -----
                                                 44,007               23,210                1,451
                                               --------             --------                -----
                                               $ (2,856)            $   (591)             $(1,252)
                                               ========             ========                =====
Fixed Charges .....................            $ 44,007             $ 23,210              $ 1,451
                                               ========             ========                =====

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed
     Charges ......................                 N/A                  N/A                  N/A

Deficiency of Earnings to Fixed
     Charges ......................            $ 46,863             $ 23,801             $  2,703

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3180 Considered and Passed Senate (CPS)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3180

 To temporarily extend the programs under the Higher Education Act of 
                                 1965.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 23, 2008

  Mr. Reid (for Mr. Kennedy) introduced the following bill; which was 
        read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To temporarily extend the programs under the Higher Education Act of 
                                 1965.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF HIGHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS.

    (a) Extension of Programs.--Section 2(a) of the Higher Education 
Extension Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-81; 20 U.S.C. 1001 note) is 
amended by striking ``June 30, 2008'' and inserting ``July 31, 2008''.
    (b) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section, or in the 
Higher Education Extension Act of 2005 as amended by this Act, shall be 
construed to limit or otherwise alter the authorizations of 
appropriations for, or the durations of, programs contained in the 
amendments made by the Higher Education Reconciliation Act of 2005 
(Public Law 109-171), by the College Cost Reduction and Access Act 
(Public Law 110-84), or by the Ensuring Continued Access to Student 
Loans Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-227) to the provisions of the Higher 
Education Act of 1965 and the Taxpayer-Teacher Protection Act of 2004.
                                 <all>
```
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3096 

To amend the National Cave and Karst Research Institute Act of 1998 

to authorize appropriations for the National Cave and Karst Research 

Institute. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 6, 2008 

Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself and Mr. DOMENICI) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To amend the National Cave and Karst Research Institute 

Act of 1998 to authorize appropriations for the National 

Cave and Karst Research Institute. 

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

3 SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR 

4 THE NATIONAL CAVE AND KARST RESEARCH 

5 INSTITUTE. 

6 The National Cave and Karst Research Institute Act 

7 of 1998 (16 U.S.C. 4310 note; Public Law 105–325) is 

8 amended by striking section 5 and inserting the following: 


erowe on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

•S 3096 IS

1 ‘‘SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

2 ‘‘There are authorized to be appropriated such sums 

3 as are necessary to carry out this Act.’’. 

Æ 


erowe on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
STATE v. GRAY

No. COA06-754

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Filed May 1, 2007

Certification Date May 21, 2007

Appeal from New Hanover (04CRS67069, 04CRS67070, 04CRS67071, 04CRS67072, 04CRS67073, 04CRS67076, 04CRS67077, 04CRS67082, 04CRS67083, 04CRS67084, 04CRS67097, 05CRS15025).

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3104 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3104

 To require that all individuals convicted of a felony under State law 
                         provide a DNA sample.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 10, 2008

  Mr. Vitter introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To require that all individuals convicted of a felony under State law 
                         provide a DNA sample.

    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 ``DNA Felony Collection Act of 2008''.

SEC. 2. DNA COLLECTION.

    (a) In General.--The Attorney General of the United States shall 
enter into an agreement with each State under which the State shall--
            (1) collect a DNA sample from each individual convicted of 
        a felony under the laws of the State; and
            (2) include the results of a DNA analysis of each DNA 
        sample collected under paragraph (1) in an index of DNA 
        analysis records maintained by the State or by the Federal 
        Government.
    (b) Definitions.--In this section--
            (1) the terms ``DNA analysis'' and ``DNA sample'' have the 
        meanings given those term in section 3(c) of the DNA Analysis 
        Backlog Elimination Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 14135a(c)); and
            (2) the term ``State'' means any State of the United 
        States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto 
        Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the 
        Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and any 
        possession of the United States.
                                 <all>
```
STATE v. BOSWELL.

No. COA05-1230.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed October 3, 2006

Certification Date October 23, 2006.

Appeal from Columbus (03CRS52079, 04CRS51797)

Case reported without published opinion. Dismissed.
# L_2013139EN.01000501.xml

| 25.5.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 139/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.5.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 139/5

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 481/2013

of 24 May 2013

adapting Implementing Regulation (EU) No 788/2012 as regards the number of samples to be taken and analysed by Croatia for the pesticide/product combinations

(Text with EEA relevance)

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty of Accession of Croatia and in particular Article 3(4) thereof,

Having regard to the Act of Accession of Croatia, and in particular Article 50 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Croatia is expected to accede to the Union on 1 July 2013. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Croatia is expected to accede to the Union on 1 July 2013.

| (2) | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 788/2012 of 31 August 2012 concerning a coordinated multiannual control programme of the Union for 2013, 2014 and 2015 to ensure compliance with maximum residue levels of pesticides and to assess the consumer exposure to pesticide residues in and on food of plant and animal origin (1) sets out in its Annex II the number of samples per Member State that has to be taken and analysed in accordance with Article 1 of that Regulation. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 788/2012 of 31 August 2012 concerning a coordinated multiannual control programme of the Union for 2013, 2014 and 2015 to ensure compliance with maximum residue levels of pesticides and to assess the consumer exposure to pesticide residues in and on food of plant and animal origin (1) sets out in its Annex II the number of samples per Member State that has to be taken and analysed in accordance with Article 1 of that Regulation.

| (3) | As data from only half a year would not be fully comparable with those of other Member States collected during the whole year 2013, Croatia should participate to the coordinated multiannual programmes of the Union as from January 2014. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

As data from only half a year would not be fully comparable with those of other Member States collected during the whole year 2013, Croatia should participate to the coordinated multiannual programmes of the Union as from January 2014.

| (4) | Implementing Regulation (EU) No 788/2012 should therefore be adapted accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

Implementing Regulation (EU) No 788/2012 should therefore be adapted accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

In point (5) of Annex II to Implementing Regulation (EU) No 788/2012, the following row is inserted after the row for Hungary:

| ‘HR | 12 (*)
  15 (**)’ |
| --- | --- |

‘HR

12 (*)

15 (**)’

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force subject to and on the date of the entry into force of the Treaty of Accession of Croatia.

It shall apply as from 1 January 2014.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 24 May 2013.

For the Commission

The President

José Manuel BARROSO

---

(1)  
  OJ L 235, 1.9.2012, p. 8.

1

---
STATE of North Carolina v. Mark Cornell ROGERS.

No. 369P03-3.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 29, 2006.

Mark C. Rogers, Pro Se.

Amy C. Kunstling, Assistant Attorney General, William David McFadyen, Jr., District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 16th day of May 2006 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 29th day of June 2006."