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





The following certifications that accompany the Form 10-K/A to which they relate, are not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and are not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of Dot Hill Systems Corp. under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-K/A), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing


Certification of Chief Executive Officer


Pursuant to the requirement set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. §1350), Dana W. Kammersgard, Chief Executive Officer of Dot Hill Systems Corporation (the “Company”) hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that:


(i) the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of the Company for the annual period ended December 31, 2014 (the “Report”) to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and


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





/s/ DANA W. KAMMERSGARD


Dana W. Kammersgard


Chief Executive Officer


Date: March 13, 2015


Certification of Chief Financial Officer


Pursuant to the requirement set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. §1350), Hanif I. Jamal, Chief Financial Officer of Dot Hill Systems Corporation (the “Company”) hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that:


(i) the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of the Company for the annual period ended December 31, 2014 (the “Report”) to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and


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





/s/ HANIF I. JAMAL


Hanif I. Jamal


Chief Financial Officer


Date: March 13, 2015
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 Annual Report of
CenterPoint Energy Resources Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2009 (the “Report”), as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, David M. McClanahan,
Chief Executive Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my
knowledge, 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/
      David M. McClanahanDavid
      M. McClanahanPresident
      and Chief Executive OfficerMarch 11,
      2010
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 129 (Wednesday, July 3, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 34743-34744]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-16955]


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


FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 96-25; RM-8752]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Forest Acres, SC

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Commission, at the request of Kuhel Communications, allots 
Channel 232A at Forest Acres, South Carolina, as the community's first 
local aural transmission service. See 61 FR 9411, March 8, 1996. 
Channel 232A can be allotted to Forest Acres in compliance with the 
Commission's minimum distance separation requirements without the 
imposition of a site restriction. The coordinates for Channel 232A at 
Forest Acres are North Latitude 34-01-09 and West Longitude 80-59-24. 
With this action, this proceeding is terminated.

DATES: Effective August 12 1996. The window period for filing 
applications will open on August 12, 1996 and close on September 12, 
1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sharon P. McDonald, Mass Media Bureau, 
(202) 418-2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Report and Order, MM Docket No. 96-25, adopted June 21, 1996, and 
released June 28, 1996. The full text of this Commission decision is 
available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in 
the FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, NW., Washington, 
DC. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the 
Commission's copy contractors, International Transcription Service, 
Inc., (202) 857-3800, 2100 M Street, NW., Suite 140, Washington, DC 
20037.

[[Page 34744]]

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio broadcasting.

    Part 73 of title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended 
as follows:

PART 73--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: Sections 303, 48 Stat., as amended, 1082; 47 U.S.C. 
154, as amended.


Sec. 73.202  [Amended]

    2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under South 
Carolina, is amended by adding Forest Acres, Channel 232A.

Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media 
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 96-16955 Filed 7-2-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-F
EXHIBIT 21.1
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


                      BEI TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

                            SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY

                               Jurisdiction                Doing Business As
Name of Subsidiary           of Incorporation                (If Different)
<S>                                <C>                           <C>

BEI Sensors & Systems              Delaware             BEI Sensors & Systems 
Company, Inc.                                           Company, Inc. 

BEI International, Inc.            Delaware                

BEI Export Sales Company, Inc.     U.S. Virgin Islands

BEI Properties, Inc.               Arkansas        

SiTek, Inc., a BEI Company         Delaware        

Defense Systems Company, Inc.      Delaware             BEI Defense Systems 
                                                        Company

BEI Sensors, S.A.S.                France          

BEI Tactical Defense Systems, Inc. Delaware                        

Micro Polymer Systems, Inc.        Delaware                

BEI Ideacod, S.A.S.                France                  

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT

4

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1948-6 Filed 11/08/23 Page 1 of 2
From: David Morgan, Publisher

To: editor@cochisecountyrecord.com

Subject: [EXTERNAL] BackPage Trial - Exh 171, complete

Date: Friday, October 27, 2023 4:09:46 PM

The court-admitted exhibit, complete with letter from Don Moon, referred to by attorney Paul

Cambria during the first defense closing arguments this morning in USA v Lacey et al, and

that caught the government (and the judge?) off-guard, is here:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24089164-exhibit-171-ncmec-letter-don-moonletter

-- 

-------

David M Morgan, Publisher

Capitol Times Interview - Q&A (15min video)

member of IRE - Investigative Reporters & Editors

SJP (Arizona) 2023 Awardee - Order of the Silver Key Society

25-plus years of notable journalism

Twitter @dmmCCR

U.S. Cell/Text 520-236-4051 Mexico 52-633-112-6458

use Signal and/or WhatsApp for encrypted voice, text, file transfers

Sign up for FREE local News Alerts (14,465 people get it, do you?)

the COCHISE COUNTY RECORD - Serious Local News

based next to the historic Cochise County courthouse at Bisbee, ARIZONA

More than 15,200 folks discuss the local news on FaceBook at Cochise County Courts, Crime, Justice,

Jail Reports & Politics

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1948-6 Filed 11/08/23 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3849 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3849

      To amend the Clean Air Act and the Superfund Amendments and 
Reauthorization Act of 1986 to clarify the listing of a unique chemical 
                               substance.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 18, 1996

   Mr. Burr (for himself, Mr. Wicker, Mrs. Smith of Washington, Mr. 
McIntosh, Mr. DeLay, Mr. Oxley, Mr. Bachus, Mr. Flanagan, Mr. Schaefer, 
Mr. Borski, Mr. Calvert, Mr. Stenholm, Mr. Sensenbrenner, Mr. Ehrlich, 
 Mr. Pastor, Mr. Graham, Mr. Frost, Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas, Mr. Hall 
   of Texas, Mr. Lucas of Oklahoma, Mr. Nethercutt, and Mr. Solomon) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
   Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Transportation and 
   Infrastructure, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 
  Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall 
           within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      To amend the Clean Air Act and the Superfund Amendments and 
Reauthorization Act of 1986 to clarify the listing of a unique chemical 
                               substance.

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

SECTION 1. DELETION FROM CLEAN AIR ACT AMENDMENTS LISTING.

    Section 112(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7412) is amended 
by adding at the end of footnote 2 thereof the following: ``The glycol 
ether category does not include ethylene glycol monobutyl ether (CAS 
#111-76-2) as used or emitted by metal or composite can 
manufacturing.''

SEC. 2. DELETION FROM SARA TITLE III LISTING.

    Section 313(d)(3) of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization 
Act of 1986 (42 U.S.C. 11023) is amended by adding at the end thereof 
the following: ``The Administrator shall delete from the lists 
implemented pursuant to subsection (c) and section 302(a)(2), any 
substance that has been deleted or removed in any manner from the list 
of pollutants under section 112(b) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 
7412(b)) unless the Administrator demonstrates based on convincing 
evidence that relevant storage, use or release of such a substance 
continues to pose a significant threat to human health, or the 
environment as a result of its reactivity, volatility, dispersability, 
combustibility, flammability, or acute human health effects.''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant as of the dates and for the
periods expressed in the Report.
  By:
    
    /s/ Philip Cook
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Thomas F. DardenPhilip Cook
Senior Vice President  Chief Financial Officer
    
    
    
    Thomas F. Darden 
President and Chief Executive Officer
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

TOMMY HALL,

Plaintiff, Case Number 09-10933

Honorable David M. Lawson

v. Magistrate Judge Mark A. Randon

RAWAL, CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES, 

INC., and PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, INC.,

Defendants.

___________________________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORTS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS, GRANTING DEFENDANT PRISON HEALTH SERVICES

AND DEFENDANT CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES’S MOTIONS FOR

SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DISMISSING CLAIMS AGAINST DEFENDANTS

PRISON HEALTH SERVICES AND CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES ONLY

Presently before the Court are two reports issued on July 31, 2012 by Magistrate Judge Mark

A. Randon pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) recommending that this Court grant defendants Prison

Health Services and Correctional Medical Services’s motions for summary judgment. Although the

magistrate judge’s reports explicitly stated that the parties to this action may object to and seek

review of the recommendation within fourteen days of service of the report, no objections have been

filed thus far. The parties’ failure to file objections to the reports and recommendations waives any

further right to appeal. Smith v. Detroit Fed’n of Teachers Local 231, 829 F.2d 1370, 1373 (6th Cir.

1987). Likewise, the failure to object to the magistrate judge’s reports releases the Court from its

duty to independently review the matter. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). However, the

Court agrees with the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the magistrate judge’s reports and recommendations [dkt.

#157, 158] are ADOPTED.

2:09-cv-10933-DML-MAR Doc # 160 Filed 08/24/12 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 2383
-2-

It is further ORDERED that defendant Prison Health Service’s motion for summary

judgment [dkt. #125] is GRANTED.

It is further ORDERED that defendant Correctional Medical Services’s motion for summary

judgment [dkt. #134] is GRANTED.

It is further ORDERED that the plaintiff’s claims are DISMISSED with respect to

defendants Prison Health Services and Correctional Medical Services only.

s/David M. Lawson 

DAVID M. LAWSON

United States District Judge

Dated: August 24, 2012

PROOF OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served

upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first

class U.S. mail on August 24, 2012.

s/Deborah R. Tofil 

DEBORAH R. TOFIL

2:09-cv-10933-DML-MAR Doc # 160 Filed 08/24/12 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 2384
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: UNICO Retail, LLC and Ricardo Valentini v. Edry B & K -11, GP, a 

Texas general partnership, and Walter E. Salek, individually

Appellate case number: 01-21-00642-CV

Trial court case number: 2021-33085

Trial court: 55th District Court of Harris County

This case is set for submission with oral argument on September 14, 2022.

In motions for extension of time to file a reply brief filed in May and June 2022, the 

appellants informed the Court that the parties have tentatively reached a settlement and needed 

additional time to finalize the agreement. 

On August 11, 2022, counsel for the appellants informed the Clerk that settlement is 

impending and a formal motion to dismiss the appeal would be filed with the Court at a later 

time. 

The Court requests an update from the parties. The parties are ordered to file an update 

as to the status of the case or a joint motion to withdraw this appeal from the September 14, 2022 

submission docket no later than Friday, August 26, 2022. 

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: ______/s/ Peter Kelly______

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: ___August 17, 2022____
#### Rodney REEVES, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.

No. 69783.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Sept. 17, 1996.

Deborah B. Wafer, District Defender, St. Louis, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General, Joanne E. Joiner, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before DOWD, P.J., and REINHARD and GARY M. GAERTNER, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals from the motion court’s denial, without an evidentiary hearing, of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief. We affirm. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous, and an extended opinion would have no prec-edential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

The Honorable Gordon J. Quist, Senior District Judge for the U.S. ***

District Court for Western Michigan, sitting by designation.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

GERARDO GRADILLAS,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

 v.

MARTIN BITER, Acting Warden,

 Respondent - Appellee.

No. 09-56233

D.C. No. 2:09-cv-02238-JVS-CT

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

James V. Selna, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted October 12, 2012** 

Pasadena, California

Before: KLEINFELD and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges, and QUIST, Senior

District Judge.*** 

FILED

OCT 16 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
Gerardo Gradillas appeals from the district court’s decision denying his

petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Reviewing de novo, we affirm.

 Gradillas argues that the trial court erred by not instructing the jury sua

sponte on transferred self defense and that his trial counsel provided ineffective

assistance by failing to request a jury instruction on transferred self defense. On

direct review, the California Court of Appeal determined that the “jury was

properly instructed,” “counsel raised the self-defense issue in closing argument,”

and there was “no reasonable probability the result would have been more

favorable to appellant had additional instructions been given or arguments raised.” 

The California Supreme Court denied Gradillas’s petition for review. 

Gradillas petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (as

amended by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996). The

district court properly determined that the California Court of Appeal “did not

commit constitutional error in concluding that [Gradillas] received a fair trial in

spite of the lack of a transferred self-defense instruction” and that Gradillas could

not establish deficient performance and prejudice under Strickland. Gradillas has

failed to show that the state court’s decision was “contrary to” or an “unreasonable

application” of clearly established Supreme Court precedent or that it was “based

on an unreasonable determination of the facts.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d).

AFFIRMED.
# SEMORAN FINANCIAL
CORPORATION(A Development Stage Company)

# Exhibit 32        
Section 1350 Certifications

CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The
undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Semoran Financial
Corporation, (the Company), each certify that, to his or her knowledge on the
date of this certification:

| | 1. | The quarterly report of the Company for the period ended June 30, 2007 as filed
          with the Securities and Exchange Commission on this date (the
          Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date:  August 29, 2007

By:   /s/ Lloyd J. Weber
         Lloyd J. Weber         Chief Executive Officer,
and         Principal Executive Officer

Date:  August 29, 2007

By:   /s/ Donald J. Bugea, Jr.
         Donald J. Bugea, Jr.        
Chief Financial Officer, and         Principal Financial and Accounting Officer
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 21 (Thursday, January 31, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 5827]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-1747]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army


Availability for Non-Exclusive, Exclusive, or Partially Exclusive 
Licensing of U.S. Patent Concerning Remote Mosaic Imaging System Having 
High-Resolution, Wide Field-of-View and Low Bandwidth

AGENCY: Department of the Army, DoD.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with 37 CFR 404.6 and 404.7, announcement is 
made of the availability for licensing of the invention set forth in 
U.S. Patent No. 6,704,460 entitled ``Remote mosaic imaging system 
having high-resolution, wide field-of-view and low bandwidth,'' issued 
on March 9, 2004. The United States Government, as represented by the 
Secretary of the Army, has rights in this invention.

ADDRESSES: Commander, U.S. Army Research Development and Engineering 
Command, ATTN: AMSRD-AMR-AS-PT-TR, Bldg. 5400, Redstone Arsenal, AL 
35898-5000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Russ Alexander, Office of Research 
& Technology Applications, (256) 876-8743.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The present invention uses image frame 
synchronization and multiplexing to reduce the bandwidth needed to 
transmit the plurality of images to a remote location. The use of 
readily available and inexpensive commercial imaging sensors 
significantly decreases the cost while increasing the capabilities.

Brenda S. Bowen,
Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. E8-1747 Filed 1-30-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710-08-P
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, September 22, 2015. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, September 22, 2015 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A16D0015. DRUID HILLS CIVIC ASSOCIATION, INC. v. ROBERT H. BUCKLER et al.

. Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of this order. The Clerk of Superior Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record transmitted to the Court of Appeals.
LC NUMBERS: 12CV6018
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

ALAN A. MAY, Conservator 

of the estate of CAROLYN HEGGS,

Plaintiff, 

v. Case No. 08-15263

Hon. Lawrence P. Zatkoff

JP MORGAN CHASE & CO., 

Defendant.

 /

JUDGMENT

IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that pursuant to this Court’s order dated September

8, 2010, Plaintiff’s action is DISMISSED.

Dated at Port Huron, Michigan, this 8th day of September, 2010.

DAVID J. WEAVER

CLERK OF THE COURT

BY: S/Marie E. Verlinde 

APPROVED:

s/Lawrence P. Zatkoff 

LAWRENCE P. ZATKOFF

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE