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

                                                                    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 on Form 10-Q of Ameriprise Certificate
Company (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2008, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
William F. Truscott, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company and Brian J.
McGrane, as Principal and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of 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 Company.


/s/ William F. Truscott
-------------------------------------
Name:  William F. Truscott
Title: Chief Executive Officer
Date:  May 7, 2008


/s/ Brian J. McGrane
-------------------------------------
Name:  Brian J. McGrane
Title: Chief Financial Officer
Date:  May 7, 2008
# L_2007218DE.01001501.xml

| 23.8.2007 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 218/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.8.2007

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 218/15

---

Berichtigung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 797/2007 der Kommission vom 5. Juli 2007 zur Erteilung von Ausfuhrlizenzen für Wein

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 176 vom 6. Juli 2007
  )

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 176 vom 6. Juli 2007

Seite 16, Artikel 1 Absatz 2:

anstatt:

„(2)   Bis 4. Juli 2007 wird die Erteilung der ab 6. Juli 2007 beantragten Lizenzen und ab 16. September 2007 die Beantragung von Lizenzen für die Ausfuhr von Erzeugnissen des Weinsektors gemäß Absatz 1 für die Zonen 1) Afrika, 3) Osteuropa und 4) Westeuropa ausgesetzt.“

muss es heißen:

„(2)   Bis 16. September 2007 wird die Erteilung der ab 4. Juli 2007 beantragten Lizenzen und ab 6. Juli 2007 die Beantragung von Lizenzen für die Ausfuhr von Erzeugnissen des Weinsektors gemäß Absatz 1 für die Zonen 1) Afrika, 3) Osteuropa und 4) Westeuropa ausgesetzt.“

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND> 
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from 
Jostens, Inc. condensed consolidated financial statements as of and for the 
period ended September 30, 1996, and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         JUN-30-1996     
<PERIOD-START>                            JUL-01-1996         
<PERIOD-END>                              SEP-30-1996     
<CASH>                                              0 
<SECURITIES>                                      859 
<RECEIVABLES>                                 115,280 
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (6,129)
<INVENTORY>                                    94,093  
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              245,138       
<PP&E>                                        190,176      
<DEPRECIATION>                              (124,210)   
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                378,318       
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         241,490    
<BONDS>                                         3,864  
<COMMON>                                       12,887 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0 
<PREFERRED>                                         0 
<OTHER-SE>                                    103,988       
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  378,318         
<SALES>                                       105,399          
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              105,399          
<CGS>                                          60,847          
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  60,847          
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               51,155       
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  221     
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              1,917       
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (8,520)       
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (3,493)      
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (5,027)      
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0  
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0      
<CHANGES>                                           0  
<NET-INCOME>                                  (5,027) 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.13) 
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.13) 
        


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 210 (Tuesday, November 1, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 65910]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-21666]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Human Genome Research Institute; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of a meeting of 
the Board of Scientific Counselors, National Human Genome Research 
Institute.
    The meeting will be open to the public as indicated below, with 
attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend 
and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or 
other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person 
listed below in advance of the meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in section 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended 
for the review, discussion, and evaluation of individual intramural 
programs and projects conducted by the National Human Genome Research 
Institute, including consideration of personnel qualifications and 
performance, and the competence of individual investigators, the 
disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of 
personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Board of Scientific Counselors, National 
Human Genome Research Institute.
    Date: November 6-8, 2005.
    Open: November 6, 2005, 6:30 p.m. to 8 p.m.
    Agenda: To discuss matters of program relevance.
    Place: Eisenhower Inn and Conference Center, 2634 Emmittsburg 
Road, Gettysburg, PA 17325.
    Closed: November 6, 2005, 8 p.m. to Adjournment on November 8, 
2005.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate personnel qualifications and 
performance, and competence of individual investigators.
    Place: Eisenhower Inn and Conference Center, 2634 Emmittsburg 
Road, Gettysburg, PA 17325.
    Contact Person: Claire Kelso, Intramural Program Specialist, 
Division of Intramural Research, Office of the Director, National 
Human Genome Research Institute, 50 South Drive, Building 50, Room 
5222, Bethesda, MD 20892-8002, (301) 435-5802.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 93.172, Human 
Genome Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: October 20, 2005.
Anthony M. Coelho, Jr.,
Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 05-21666 Filed 10-31-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS,  that each person whose  signature  appears
below constitutes and appoints Steven G. Mihaylo and Kurt R. Kneip,  jointly and
severally, his attorneys-in-fact,  each with the power of substitution,  for him
in any and all  capacities,  to sign any amendments to this Report on Form 10-K,
and to file the same,  with exhibits  thereto and other  documents in connection
therewith,  with the Securities and Exchange  Commission,  hereby  ratifying and
confirming  all  that  each  of said  attorneys-in-fact,  or his  substitute  or
substitutes, may do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

     Pursuant to the  requirements of the Securities  Exchange Act of 1934, this
Report  has  been  signed  below  by the  following  persons  on  behalf  of the
Registrant in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

         Signature                        Title                        Date
         ---------                        -----                        ----

/s/ Steven G.  Mihaylo             Chairman and Chief             March 15, 2000
-------------------------          Executive Officer
Steven G.  Mihaylo

/s/ Kurt R.  Kneip                 Vice President and             March 15, 2000
-------------------------          Chief Financial Officer
Kurt R.  Kneip

/s/ J.  Robert Anderson            Director                       March 15, 2000
-------------------------
J.  Robert Anderson

/s/ Jerry W.  Chapman              Director                       March 15, 2000
-------------------------
Jerry W.  Chapman

/s/ Gary D.  Edens                 Director                       March 15, 2000
-------------------------
Gary D.  Edens

/s/ Maurice H.  Esperseth          Director                       March 15, 2000
-------------------------
Maurice H.  Esperseth

/s/ C.  Roland Haden               Director                       March 15, 2000
-------------------------
C.  Roland Haden
**
**Exhibit 31**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, Joshua R. Peterson,certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of San Juan Basin Royalty Trust,for which BBVA USA acts as Trustee; 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omitto 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 materialrespects the financial condition, Distributable Income and changes in trust corpus of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and I have: 

 
 a)
Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to bedesigned under my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared; 

 
 b)
Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financialreporting to be designed under my supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes; 

 
 c)
Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport my 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 registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting; and 

5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors: 

 
 a)
All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial 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 persons who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting. 

Date: March 16, 2020 

 
 
/s/ Joshua R. Peterson
 By: Joshua R. Peterson  Head of Trust Real Assets & Mineral Resources and Senior Vice President  BBVA USA**
#### KENNETH P. MARTIN, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent.

No. 11356

March 28, 1980

608 P.2d 502

*William Dunseath,*Public Defender, Washoe County, for Appellant.

*Richard H. Bryan,*Attorney General, Carson City; and *Calvin R. X. Dunlap,*District Attorney, and *Edwin T. Basl,*Deputy District Attorney, Washoe County, for Respondent.

*325OPINION

*Per Curiam:*

Kenneth P. Martin was charged with robbery. Following an arraignment and a preliminary examination, he was declared incompetent to stand trial, pursuant to NRS 178.415. The proceedings were suspended and Martin was placed in the Lake’s Crossing Center for the Mentally Disordered.

A few months later, the administrator of the center notified the district judge that Martin was no longer incompetent. A sanity commission was impaneled pursuant to NRS 178.455. The three-member commission concluded that he was competent to stand trial. Martin was arraigned a second time and a trial date was set, without objection from him or his counsel. Martin was remanded to the county jail. His motion to return to Lake’s Crossing was denied because no allegations or evidence were proffered that raised any doubt concerning his competency at that time to stand trial.

On the first day of trial, Martin requested a full hearing on his competency. He contends that the district judge erred by denying his request. We disagree.

In the absence of reasonable doubt regarding an accused’s competence, the district judge need not invoke the statutory procedure to determine competency. Bishop v. State, 94 Nev. 410, 581 P.2d 4 (1978); *see*NRS 178.400-178.425. A bare allegation of incompetence is not sufficient to raise a reasonable doubt as to competence. Warden v. Graham, 93 Nev. 277, 564 P.2d 186 (1977); Langley v. State, 84 Nev. 295, 439 P.2d 986 (1968).

A survey of the record discloses no evidence or indication that Martin was unable to assist his counsel or to understand the nature of the charges and proceedings against him. *See*Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (1960); *cf.*Williams v. Warden, 91 Nev. 16, 530 P.2d 761 (1975) (psychiatric evaluation raised serious doubt as to accused’s competency); Pate v. Robinson, 383 U.S. 375 (1966) (four witnesses testified that accused was insane). Consequently, the district judge did not *326err by denying Martin’s request for a full hearing. Kelly v. State, 93 Nev. 154, 561 P.2d 449 (1977).

Martin’s argument that the district judge committed error by not commencing trial within 60 days after the sanity commission report, as required by NRS 178.460(1), also lacks merit. His counsel expressly agreed to the trial date and Martin did not demand an earlier trial nor did he show that he was prejudiced by the delay. In these circumstances, the right to trial within the statutory 60-day period was waived. *Cf.*Broadhead v. Sheriff, 87 Nev. 219, 484 P.2d 1092 (1971) (discussing waiver under NRS 178.556); Maiorca v. Sheriff, 87 Nev. 63, 482 P.2d 312 (1971) (no objection to delay until after 60-day period); *see also*Sondergaard v. Sheriff, 91 Nev. 93, 531 P.2d 474 (1975).

Affirmed.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5488 

To require each authorized public chartering agency to publish on the Internet 

the financial expenditures of each charter school that is authorized or 

approved by such agency and receives Department of Education funding. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 9, 2010 

Mr. BACA introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Education and Labor 

A BILL 

To require each authorized public chartering agency to publish on the Internet the financial expenditures of each 

charter school that is authorized or approved by such 

agency and receives Department of Education funding. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Charter School Trans5 parency and Accountability Act’’. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5488 IH

1 SEC. 2. PUBLICATION OF CHARTER SCHOOL FINANCIAL EX2 PENDITURES. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 30 days after the 

4 end of each school year, each authorized public chartering 

5 agency shall publish on the Internet, in a form and man6 ner to be specified by the Secretary of Education, a de7 tailed breakdown of the financial expenditures with re8 spect to such school year of each charter school authorized 

9 or approved by such agency that received, directly or indi10 rectly, funds made available by the Secretary during such 

11 school year. 

12 (b) NONCOMPLIANCE.—If an agency does not comply 

13 with subsection (a) with respect to each charter school au14 thorized or approved by the agency, the Secretary shall 

15 cease to make Federal funds available to any charter 

16 school authorized or approved by the agency until the 

17 agency complies with such subsection. 

18 (c) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this section, the 

19 terms ‘‘authorized public chartering agency’’ and ‘‘charter 

20 school’’ have the meanings given such terms in section 

21 5210 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 

22 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7221i). 

23 (d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—This section shall apply to 

24 school years that begin at least 60 days after the date 

25 of the enactment of this section. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
#### Sunita Rani KAUR; Surjit Singh, Petitioners, v. Alberto GONZALES,* Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 03-73135.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted Feb. 9, 2005.

Decided March 29, 2005.

Jagdip Singh Sekhon, Esq., Sekhon *&*Sekhon, PLC, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioners.

Regional Counsel, Western Region Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, Arthur L. Rabin, Esq., Margaret Perry, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: WALLACE, RAWLINSON, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

*

 Alberto Gonzales is substituted for his predecessor, John Ashcroft, as Attorney General of the United States, pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 43(c)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Sunita Rani Kaur and Surjit Singh petition for review of the Board’s summary affirmance of the immigration judge’s order denying Kaur’s application for asylum, withholding of deportation, relief under the Convention Against Torture and voluntary departure. We dismiss in part and deny in part their petition.

We lack jurisdiction to consider Petitioners’ claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, because Petitioners did not present this issue to the Board and exhaust their administrative remedies. *See Ontiveros-Lopez v. INS,*213 F.3d 1121, 1124 (9th Cir.2000); *Rashtabadi v. INS,*23 F.3d 1562, 1567 (9th Cir.1994).

We disagree with Petitioners’ argument that the Board abused its discretion when it denied their motion to file an untimely brief. Petitioners were afforded a “reasonable opportunity to offer an explanation of any perceived inconsistencies” in the record that formed the basis for the immigration judge’s decision, *Campos-Sanchez v. INS,*164 F.3d 448, 450 (9th Cir.1999), and their counsel had a fair opportunity to file a brief. *Cf. Baires v. INS,*856 F.2d 89, 93 (9th Cir.1988). Furthermore, counsel’s failure to file a brief cannot be attributed to any fault on the part of the Board. *Cf. Singh v. Ashcroft,*362 F.3d 1164, 1166-67 (9th Cir.2004). That the Board did not summarily dismiss the Petitioners’ appeal, but rather affirmed the immigration judge’s decision on the merits, further supports our conclusion that there was no abuse of discretion.

*146In addition, we conclude that the immigration judge’s determination that Kaur was not credible is supported by substantial inconsistencies in her testimony which go to the heart of her claim. *See Chebchoub v. INS,*257 F.3d 1038, 1043 (9th Cir.2001). Although Petitioners also submitted testimony of Singh, Tripia Devi and four affidavits, we conclude this corroborating evidence would not *“compel*a reasonable finder of fact to reach a contrary result.” *Wang v. INS,*352 F.3d 1250, 1257 (9th Cir.2003) (citations omitted) (emphasis in original).

Petition DENIED in part and DISMISSED in part.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

N.A., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, 

PUGET SOUND HEALTHCARE SYSTEM, 

SEATTLE VA MEDICAL CENTER, Seattle, WA, 

Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 23-0894

Issued: November 27, 2023

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

On June 15, 2023 appellant filed an appeal from a November 25, 2022 nonmerit decision 

and purported June 14, 2023 merit decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs 

(OWCP). The Clerk of the Appellate Boards assigned the appeal Docket No. 23-0894.

The Board, having duly considered the matter, notes that the Board has jurisdiction to 

review final adverse decisions of OWCP issued under the Federal Employees’ Compensation 

Act.1 This jurisdiction encompasses any final decision issued by OWCP within 180 days of the 

date appellant filed his appeal.2 The decision dated June 14, 2023 was a Board decision assigned 

Docket No. 23-0220, which affirmed June 28 and November 25, 2022 OWCP merit and 

nonmerit decisions, respectively. As such, the case record as transmitted to the Board does not 

contain a final adverse decision of OWCP issued within 180 days from the date of docketing of 

the current appeal over which the Board may properly exercise jurisdiction. As there is no final 

1

5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.; 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3(a).

2

20 C.F.R. § 501.3(e) provides in pertinent part: “Any notice of appeal must be filed within 180 days from the 

date of issuance of a decision of the OWCP.”
2

adverse decision issued by OWCP over which the Board may properly exercise jurisdiction, the 

Board concludes that the appeal docketed as No. 23-0894 must be dismissed.3 Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 23-0894 is dismissed

for lack of jurisdiction.

Issued: November 27, 2023

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

3 To the extent that appellant’s appeal constitutes a timely petition for reconsideration of the Board’s June 14, 

2023 decision, the petition for reconsideration will proceed separately under Docket No. 23-0220.
# L_2012074DE.01001102.xml

| 14.3.2012 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 74/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.3.2012

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 74/11

---

Berichtigung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1974/2006 der Kommission vom 15. Dezember 2006 mit Durchführungsbestimmungen zur Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1698/2005 des Rates über die Förderung der Entwicklung des ländlichen Raums durch den Europäischen Landwirtschaftsfonds für die Entwicklung des ländlichen Raums (ELER)

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 368 vom 23. Dezember 2006
  )

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 368 vom 23. Dezember 2006

Auf Seite 33, Artikel 53 Absatz 2 Buchstabe e:

anstatt:

„feste Investitionskosten“

muss es heißen:

„Anlageinvestitionskosten“.

---