alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer  Pursuant to  18 U.S.C. Section 1350  as Adopted Pursuant to  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Christopher R. Gardner, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of Vitesse Semiconductor Corporation on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2009 fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-K/A fairly presents in all material respects the
financial condition and results of operations of Vitesse Semiconductor Corporation.

January 28, 2010By:

/s/ CHRISTOPHER R. GARDNER Christopher R. Gardner Chief Executive Officer


I,
Richard C. Yonker, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of Vitesse
Semiconductor Corporation on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-K/A fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Vitesse
Semiconductor Corporation.

January 28, 2010By:

/s/ RICHARD C. YONKER Richard C. Yonker Chief Financial Officer


A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Vitesse Semiconductor Corporation and will be retained by Vitesse Semiconductor
Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---



QuickLinks
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 23.1


The Board of Directors
SBS Technologies, Inc.:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the following registration
statements of SBS Technologies, Inc. of our report dated August 13, 2002, except
for Note 7, which is as of September 20, 2002, relating to the consolidated
balance sheets of SBS Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries as of June 30, 2002,
and 2001, and the related consolidated statements of operations, changes in
stockholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three year
period ended June 30, 2002, which report appears in the June 30, 2002, annual
report on Form 10-K of SBS Technologies, Inc.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
              Registration
    Form      Statement No.    Description
    ----      -------------    -----------
<S>           <C>              <C>
    S-8       333-23053        SBS Technologies, Inc. 1996 Employee
                               Stock Purchase Plan and the SBS
                               Technologies, Inc. 1997 Employee
                               Incentive Stock Option Plan

    S-8       333-98558        SBS Technologies, Inc. 1992 Employee
                               Incentive Stock Option Plan;  SBS
                               Technologies, Inc. 1993 Incentive
                               Stock Option Plan; SBS Technologies,
                               Inc. 1993 Director And Officer Stock
                               Option Plan; SBS Technologies, Inc.
                               1995 Incentive Stock Option Plan;
                               SBS Technologies, Inc. 1996 Incentive
                               Stock Option Plan

    S-8       333-68945        SBS Technologies, Inc. 1998 Long-Term
                               Equity Incentive Plan

    S-8       333-69260        SBS Technologies, Inc. 2000 Long-Term
                               Equity Incentive Plan

    S-3       333-20129        SBS Technologies, Inc. Common Stock

    S-3       333-36948        SBS Technologies, Inc. Common Stock
</TABLE>

                                    KPMG LLP

Albuquerque, New Mexico
September 25, 2002
EXHIBIT 32.1

GENAERA CORPORATION

CERTIFICATION OF

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

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 Genaera Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John L. Armstrong, Jr., President and Chief Executive 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:

(1) The Report fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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/    JOHN L. ARMSTRONG,
JR.        
|John L. Armstrong, Jr.               
|President and Chief Executive Officer

March 14, 2007
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 249 (Thursday, December 28, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 67124]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-31445]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. PR96-4-000]


Consumers Power Company; Notice of Application for Approval of 
Rates and Charges for Transportation Services

December 21, 1995.
    Take notice that on December 1, 1995 consumers Power Company 
(Consumers) tendered for filing an application for approval of revised 
rates and charges for interruptible transportation services rendered 
pursuant to Section 284.224 of the Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission's Regulations.
    Consumers states that the application was made pursuant to 
Sec. 284.123(b)(2)(1) of the Commission's Regulations and proposes a 
maximum interruptible transportation rate of $.1265 per Dth.
    Consumers states that a copy of the filing was served upon 
Consumers' state regulatory commission.
    Any person desiring to be heard or protest said filing should file 
a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission, 888 first Street, N.E., Washington D.C. 20426, in 
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 384.214). All such petitions or 
protests should be filed on or before January 8, 1996. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a petition 
to intervene. Copies of the Consumers Power Company filing in this 
matter are on file with the Commission and are available for public 
inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-31445 Filed 12-27-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000             SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1999             OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000             SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         257,081                  89,941
<SECURITIES>                                   442,475                 110,245
<RECEIVABLES>                                  123,297                  72,580
<ALLOWANCES>                                    10,125                   3,500
<INVENTORY>                                     43,715                  26,931
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               877,142                 334,515
<PP&E>                                         216,509                 134,465
<DEPRECIATION>                                  74,635                  52,616
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,901,066                 543,069
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           70,571                  39,052
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                         1,801                   1,709
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,103,601                 500,672
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,901,066                 543,069
<SALES>                                        441,694                 281,669
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               441,694                 281,669
<CGS>                                          150,803                 104,815
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  380,892                 202,215
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              18,548                     125
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 81,678                  90,443
<INCOME-TAX>                                    53,789                  29,292
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             27,889                  61,151
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                    27,889                  61,151
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.16                    0.37
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.15                    0.34


</TABLE>
### Proposed Provision: E2.15. Apply OASDI 12.4 percent payroll tax rate on earnings above $300,000 starting in 2025, and tax all earnings once the current-law taxable maximum exceeds $300,000. Provide benefit credit for earnings above the current-law taxable maximum that are subject to the payroll tax, using a secondary PIA formula. This secondary PIA formula involves: (1) an "AIME+" derived from annual earnings from each year after 2024 that were in excess of that year's current-law taxable maximum; and (2) a formula factor of 3 percent on this newly computed "AIME+".
EXHIBIT 11.1

COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE

SOUTHEASTERN BANK FINANCIAL CORPORATION

AND SUBSIDIARIES



|                                                                           |  |                         |            |      |   |           |  |   |          
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------- | ---------- | ---- | - | --------- |  | - | ---------
|                                                                           |  | Year ended December 31,
|                                                                           |  | 2006                    |            | 2005 |   | 2004     
|Net income                                                                 |  | $                       | 11,159,672 |      | $ | 9,954,209 |  | $ | 8,704,276
|Basic and diluted net income per share:                                    |  |                         |            |      |   |           |  |   |          
|Weighted average number of common shares outstanding                       |  |                         | 5,324,558  |      |   | 5,257,904 |  |   | 5,247,901
|Basic net income per share                                                 |  | $                       | 2.10       |      | $ | 1.89      |  | $ | 1.66     
|Weighted average number of common and common equivalent shares Outstanding |  |                         | 5,371,656  |      |   | 5,350,384 |  |   | 5,323,924
|Diluted net income per share                                               |  | $                       | 2.08       |      | $ | 1.86      |  | $ | 1.63     



162
Order entered August 12, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-01285-CV

ARUBA PETROLEUM, INC., Appellant

V.

LISA PARR, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CC-11-01650-E

ORDER

Because the reporter’s record has been filed, we DENY appellant’s July 29, 2015 motion 

to abate appeal and remand as well as appellee’s requested relief in its August 4, 2015 response 

to appellant’s motion that we (1) order the parties to alternative dispute resolution; (2) order 

appellant to modify security; (3) submit the appeal without the reporter’s record. 

/s/ CRAIG STODDART 

JUSTICE
Year Cost Rate

Income 

Rate

Annual 

Balance

2005 11.13 12.72 1.59 320

2006 11.00 12.81 1.81 337

2007 10.95 12.86 1.91 356

2008 10.99 12.94 1.96 372

2009 11.12 12.97 1.85 386

2010 11.25 13.04 1.79 399

2011 11.42 13.19 1.77 411

2012 11.67 13.27 1.60 420

2013 11.93 13.34 1.41 428

2014 12.21 13.38 1.17 434

2015 12.49 13.41 0.93 438

2016 12.78 13.43 0.65 439

2017 13.09 13.45 0.36 439

2018 13.40 13.46 0.07 437

2019 13.71 13.48 -0.23 434

2020 14.03 13.49 -0.53 429

2021 14.34 13.51 -0.83 422

2022 14.65 13.52 -1.13 414

2023 14.95 13.53 -1.42 404

2024 15.25 13.54 -1.70 394

2025 15.54 13.56 -1.99 382

2026 15.83 13.57 -2.27 369

2027 16.10 13.58 -2.52 354

2028 16.33 13.58 -2.75 340

2029 16.55 13.59 -2.96 324

2030 16.74 13.59 -3.15 308

2031 16.92 13.59 -3.33 291

2032 17.08 13.59 -3.48 274

2033 17.20 13.59 -3.61 256

2034 17.30 13.59 -3.70 238

2035 17.37 13.59 -3.79 220

2036 17.43 13.58 -3.85 201

2037 17.48 13.58 -3.90 182

2038 17.50 13.57 -3.93 162

2039 17.51 13.56 -3.95 143

2040 17.52 13.56 -3.96 123

2041 17.52 13.55 -3.97 102

2042 17.53 13.55 -3.98 81

2043 17.53 13.55 -3.98 60

2044 17.54 13.55 -3.99 38

2045 17.55 13.55 -3.99 16

2046 17.56 13.56 -4.00 ----

2047 17.58 13.56 -4.02 ----

2048 17.60 13.56 -4.03 ----

2049 17.62 13.57 -4.05 ----

2050 17.64 13.57 -4.07 ----

2051 17.68 13.57 -4.11 ----

2052 17.71 13.57 -4.14 ----

2053 17.75 13.58 -4.18 ----

2054 17.80 13.58 -4.22 ----

2055 17.84 13.58 -4.26 ----

2056 17.89 13.59 -4.31 ----

2057 17.95 13.59 -4.36 ----

2058 18.00 13.59 -4.41 ----

2059 18.05 13.59 -4.46 ----

2060 18.10 13.60 -4.51 ----

2061 18.16 13.60 -4.56 ----

2062 18.22 13.60 -4.62 ----

2063 18.28 13.60 -4.68 ----

2064 18.34 13.60 -4.74 ----

2065 18.40 13.61 -4.79 ----

2066 18.46 13.61 -4.85 ----

2067 18.52 13.61 -4.91 ----

2068 18.57 13.62 -4.96 ----

2069 18.63 13.62 -5.01 ----

2070 18.67 13.62 -5.06 ----

2071 18.72 13.62 -5.10 ----

2072 18.77 13.62 -5.15 ----

2073 18.81 13.62 -5.19 ----

2074 18.85 13.63 -5.23 ----

2075 18.90 13.63 -5.27 ----

2076 18.94 13.63 -5.31 ----

2077 18.99 13.64 -5.35 ----

2078 19.03 13.64 -5.39 ----

2079 19.08 13.64 -5.43 ----

2080 19.12 13.65 -5.48 ----

Summarized Rates: OASDI

2005 Cost Rate Income Rate

Actuarial 

Balance

-2079 15.79% 14.20% -1.60% 0.33%

Office of the Chief Actuary, Social Security

Estimates based on Intermediate Assumptions of the 2005 Trustees Report January 4, 2006

Detailed Single Year Tables

Category of Change: Taxation of Benefits

Change in 

Actuarial Balance

Proposed Provision: Tax Social Security benefits in a manner similar to private pension income 

beginning in 2006. Phase out the lower-income thresholds during 2006-2015

Expressed as a percentage of taxable payroll Trust Fund 

Ratio 

1-1-year
Document

Exhibit 10.6
LIMEADE, INC.
2019 OMNIBUS INCENTIVE PLAN
Notice of Restricted Stock Unit Grant

Limeade, Inc., a Washington corporation (the “Company”), has awarded to you (“Grantee”) restricted stock units (“RSUs”) covering the number of shares of Common Stock (“Shares”) set forth below (the “RSU Grant”) under its 2019 Omnibus Incentive Plan (as may be amended from time to time, the “Plan”).


						
	Grantee Name:	
	Employee ID:	
	Grant ID:	
	Date of Grant:	
	Number of RSUs:	
	State/Country at Grant:	
	Vesting Commencement Date:	
	Vesting Schedule:	




Capitalized terms used but not defined in this Notice of RSU Grant (this “Notice”) or the attached RSU Terms and Conditions (including any appendices and exhibits attached thereto) will have the same meanings specified in the Plan. This Notice and the RSU Terms and Conditions are collectively referred to as the “Grant Agreement” applicable to the RSUs.


By accepting (whether electronically or otherwise) the RSU Grant, Grantee acknowledges and agrees to the following:


1.The RSU Grant is governed by the terms and conditions of this Grant Agreement and the Plan. In the event of a conflict between the terms of the Plan and this Grant Agreement, the terms of the Plan will prevail.


2.  Grantee has received a copy of the Plan, this Grant Agreement, the Plan prospectus (if required under Applicable Law), and the Trading Policy, and represents that he or she has read these documents and is familiar with their terms. Grantee further agrees to accept as binding, conclusive, and final all decisions and interpretations of the Committee and the Plan Administrator regarding any questions relating to the RSU Grant and the Plan.


3.  Vesting of the RSUs is subject to Grantee’s Continuous Service Status as an Employee, Director, or Consultant, which is for an unspecified duration and may be terminated at any time, with or without Cause, and nothing in this Grant Agreement or the Plan changes the nature of that relationship.


4. The Company is not providing any tax, legal, or financial advice, nor is the Company making any recommendations regarding participation in the Plan. Grantee should consult with his or her own personal tax, legal, and financial advisors regarding participation in the Plan before taking any action related to the Plan.


5. Grantee consents to electronic delivery and participation as set forth in the Plan and this Grant Agreement.


6. If Grantee does not accept or decline this RSU Grant within 90 days of the Date of Grant or by such other date that may be communicated to Grantee by the Company, the Company will accept this RSU Grant on Grantee’s behalf and Grantee will be deemed to have accepted the terms and conditions of the RSUs set forth in the Plan and this Grant Agreement. If Grantee wishes to decline this RSU Grant, Grantee should promptly notify Limeade at finance@limeade.com. If Grantee declines this RSU Grant, the RSUs will be cancelled and no benefits from the RSUs nor any compensation or benefits in lieu of the RSUs will be provided to Grantee.


						
	Limeade, Inc	Grantee
	By:	Signature
	Title:	


1
### Proposed Provision: B1.3. Progressive price indexing (40th percentile) of PIA factors beginning with individuals newly eligible for OASDI benefits in 2030: Create a new bend point at the 40th percentile of the AIME distribution of newly retired workers. Maintain current-law benefits for earners at the 40th percentile and below. Reduce the 32 and 15 percent factors above the 40th percentile such that the initial benefit for a worker with AIME equal to the taxable maximum grows by inflation rather than the growth in the SSA average wage index.

back
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 21 - 0581 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. CATHERINE MARIE RYMAL,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including March 30, 2022, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

February 22 2022

02/22/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0581
Skip to main content

# Social Security

Search
Menu
Español
Sign in

## The 2017 OASDI Trustees Report

Office of the Chief Actuary

Reading the Report

Table of ContentsList of TablesList of FiguresIndex

The 2017 OASDI Trustees Report, officially called       "*The 2017 Annual Report of the Board of Trustees of the Federal      Old-Age and Survivors Insurance and Federal Disability Insurance Trust Funds*,"      presents the current and projected financial status of the trust funds.      The report is available in PDF, a       printer-friendly format.

Requests for a printed copy of the 2017 Trustees Report may be submitted       by filling out our request form.

####     Related information 

Supplemental Single-Year Tables

**Documentation of Key Assumptions**
            -  	 Demographic assumptions  used in the projections that determine the actuarial status of the trust funds 	 
            -        Ultimate economic assumptions  used in the projections that determine the actuarial status of the trust funds	     

 See model documentation for a description of all assumptions and methods used in the projections. 

**Model Documentation**-       Description of the methods used in the  long      range projections  that determine the actuarial status of the trust funds
Description of the methods used in the       
short range projections
 of      trust fund operations

**Related reports**- Summary of the latest report       for the Social Security and Medicare programs (also available in       printer-friendly  PDF )
Trustees Report on the       
financial      status of the Medicare program

**Special reports on OASI or DI Trust Fund assets dropping below 20 percent of annual cost within 10 years:**- Letter to the President of the Senate
- Letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives

Footer menu
#### M. F. TEETER v. J. B. LINKER.

(Filed 4 December, 1929.)

Appeal by plaintiff from *MacBae, Special Judge,*at March Special Term, 1929, of CabaeRus.

Civil action tried upon the following issues:

“1. In what amount, if anything, is the defendant indebted to the plaintiff? A. (by court) : $6,200, subject to credit on notes and interest according to terms of notes and subject to amount allowed for counterclaim as of date of summons.

“2. In what amount, if anything, is the plaintiff indebted to the defendant because of his counterclaim? A. $3,000.”

From a judgment on the verdict in favor of the plaintiff for $3,365.75 with interest from 18 March, 1929, the plaintiff appeals, assigning errors.

*Harlsell & Harlsell for plaintiff.*

*H. 8. Williams, Palmer & Blaclcwelder and Armfield, Sherrin & Bamhardt for defendant.*

Pee Cukiam.

The record contains a number of exceptions which were the subject of earnest debate before us, and while some of them are not altogether free from difficulty, a careful perusal of the entire case leaves us with the impression that substantial justice had been accorded the parties, and that the result of the trial ought not to be disturbed.

The verdict and judgment will be upheld.

No error.