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

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

In
connection with the amended quarterly report of Republic Resources, Inc. (the
Company), on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2003, (the
Report), I,  Robert A. Maczewski, Principal Accounting Officer
of the Company, certify, based on my knowledge,
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 requirement of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange
Act  of 1934; and
|-- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|2) |  | the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material  respects, the
Companys financial position and results of operations.
|-- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | By: /s/ Robert A. Maczewski
 Robert A. MaczewskiPrincipal Accounting Officer
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: January
8, 2004

---
**EXHIBIT 10.38****THIRDAMENDMENT TO CONSTRUCTION LOAN AGREEMENT**This Third Amendment to Construction Loan Agreement is dated as of the 15th day ofNovember, 2007, and is by and between **RED TRAIL ENERGY, LLC,** a North Dakota limitedliability company (“BORROWER”), and **FIRST NATIONAL BANKOF OMAHA**(“BANK”), a national banking association established atOmaha, Nebraska.WHEREAS, the BANK, and BORROWER executed a written Construction Loan Agreement dated as of December16, 2005 (“AGREEMENT”).Now,Therefore, in consideration of the AGREEMENT, and, their  mutual promises made herein, BANKand BORROWER agree as follows: 1. Terms which are typed herein as all capitalized words and are not defined hereinshall have same meanings as when described in the AGREEMENT.  2. Effective immediately, Section 6.23 of the AGREEMENT is amended to read:    6.2.3 The BORROWER shall determine, at each fiscal year end followingCOMPLETION DATE, the amount of its EXCESS CASH FLOW for said fiscalyear, and at the time of delivery of the audited financial statements required by6.1.1 of this AGREEMENT, pay to BANK, the lesser of (i) twenty percent (20%)of such sum, or (ii) $4,000,000.00, to be applied to the outstanding principalamount of VARIABLE RATE NOTE, and after VARIABLE RATE NOTE isrepaid, to LONG TERM REVOLVING NOTE to reduce the principal balance, ifany, and after LONG REVOLVING NOTE is repaid, BORROWER’spayment to BANK of EXCESS CASH FLOW shall no longer be required. Such annualpayment shall not release BORROWER from making any payment of principal orinterest otherwise required by this AGREEMENT. No payment of EXCESS CASH FLOWshall be the cause of a payment to BANK for interest rate breakage fees orotherwise result in any prepayment fee.  3. BORROWER certifies by its execution hereof that the representations andwarranties set forth in Section 5 of the AGREEMENT are true as of this date, and that noEVENT OF DEFAULT under the AGREEMENT, and no event winch, with the giving of noticeor passage of time or both, would become such an EVENT OF DEFAULT, has occurred as ofthis date.  4. Except as amended hereby the parties ratify and confirm asbinding upon them allof the terms of the AGREEMENT.*(remainder of page left intentionally blank)*
Page 1 of 2

 
     IN WITNESS whereof the parties set their hands as of the date first written above.               **First National Bankof Omaha**   **Red Trail Energy,LLC**               By: Chris Reiner Chris Reiner   By:
Exhibit 15.1

                          Independent Auditors' Report

     The Board of Directors
     Payless Cashways, Inc.:

     We have  reviewed  the  accompanying  condensed  balance  sheets of Payless
     Cashways,  Inc.  as of August 26,  2000 and August 28, 1999 and the related
     condensed  statements  of  operations  and cash flows for the  thirteen and
     thirty-nine week periods then ended. These condensed  financial  statements
     are the responsibility of the Company's management.

     We conducted our reviews in accordance  with  standards  established by the
     American  Institute of Certified  Public  Accountants.  A review of interim
     financial   information   consists   principally  of  applying   analytical
     procedures to financial  data and making  inquiries of persons  responsible
     for financial and accounting  matters.  It is  substantially  less in scope
     than an audit  conducted in accordance  with  generally  accepted  auditing
     standards, the objective of which is the expression of an opinion regarding
     the financial statements taken as a whole.  Accordingly,  we do not express
     such an opinion.

     Based on our reviews,  we are not aware of any material  modifications that
     should be made to the accompanying  condensed financial statements for them
     to be in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles.

     We have previously  audited, in accordance with generally accepted auditing
     standards,  the balance sheet of Payless Cashways,  Inc. as of November 27,
     1999 and the related  statements of operations,  shareholders'  equity, and
     cash flows for the fiscal year then ended (not  presented  herein);  and in
     our report dated January 14, 2000, we expressed an  unqualified  opinion on
     those financial  statements.  In our opinion,  the information set forth in
     the accompanying  condensed balance sheet as of November 27, 1999 is fairly
     presented,  in all material respects, in relation to the balance sheet from
     which it has been derived.

                          [GRAPHIC OMITTED] [GRAPHIC OMITTED]

     Kansas City, Missouri
     September 8, 2000
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
Pursuant to Item 601(c)(2)(i) of Regulations S-K, the Registrant
hereby disclaims Exhibit 27.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                           31853
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    20717
<ALLOWANCES>                                       403
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 68158
<PP&E>                                           59560
<DEPRECIATION>                                   38109
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  104786
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            51040
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                          1013
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                       51528
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    104786
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                130727
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   122214 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 531
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   7982
<INCOME-TAX>                                      3520
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               4462
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      4462
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .44
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32

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


         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Penn-Pacific  Corp., on Form
10-QSB for the period  ending  March 31, 2004 as filed with the  Securities  and
Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "REPORT"),  the  undersigned,  Rose
Fischer,  Chief  Executive  Officer  and  Principal  Accounting  Officer  of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.
906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  that to the best of my  knowledge  and
belief:

         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 result of  operations of the
Company.


Date: May 10, 2005


/s/ Rose Fischer
Rose Fischer
President
(Principal Executive & Accounting Officer)


A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
has been  provided  to the  Company  and will be  retained  by the  Company  and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
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 (the Report) of Acceptance Insurance Companies Inc. (the Company) for the nine months ended September 30, 2003, I, John E. Martin, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby
certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to 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; 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 E. MartinJohn E. MartinTitle: President and Chief Executive OfficerAcceptance Insurance Companies Inc.




Date: November 11, 2003



34
VIRGINIA:

In the Supreme Court of Virginia held at the Supreme Court Building in the City of 

Richmond on Friday the 18th day of October, 2002.

James Michael McDaniel, Appellant, 

 against Record No. 020114 

 Court of Appeals No. 1055-01-3 

Commonwealth of Virginia, Appellee. 

 Upon an appeal from a judgment rendered by the Court 

of Appeals of Virginia on the 20th day of December, 2001. 

 Upon consideration of the record, briefs, and argument of 

counsel, the Court is of opinion that there is no error in the 

judgment appealed from. 

 McDaniel argues that the trial court erred in finding that the 

handgun found in his possession while he also possessed cocaine 

fits the definition of a “firearm” pursuant to Code § 18.2-308.4. 

McDaniel maintains that the handgun in question is a rare 7.62 

millimeter Model 52 Czechoslovakian handgun manufactured during the 

World War I era. He further contends that there is no ammunition 

readily available for the weapon, which renders it so obsolete that 

it can be no longer classified as a firearm. 

At trial, the arresting police officer testified that the 

weapon was “a 9 millimeter,” and the officer testified that he 

used a 9 millimeter blank to test it. 
 In Armstrong v. Commonwealth, 263 Va. 573, 584, 562 S.E.2d 

139, 145 (2002), we held that in order to be convicted of being a 

felon in possession of a firearm, “the evidence need show only that 

a person subject to the provisions of that statute possessed an 

instrument which was designed, made, and intended to expel a 

projectile by means of an explosion.” The Commonwealth need not 

show that the “instrument was ‘operable,’ ‘capable’ of being fired, 

or had the ‘actual capacity to do serous harm.’ ” Id. We cannot 

say that the trial court’s judgment was plainly wrong or without 

evidence to support McDaniel’s convictions under Code § 18.2-308.4. 

 In his brief, McDaniel also argues that the trial court erred 

because he lacked the knowledge of the nature and character of the 

weapon, and consequently, lacked the necessary mens rea to be 

convicted of possession of a firearm pursuant to Code § 18.2-308.4. 

At oral argument, McDaniel conceded that his assignment of error 

did not encompass this argument. We will not consider it. Rule 

5:17. 

 Accordingly, the judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed. 

The appellant shall pay to the appellee thirty dollars damages. 

This order shall be certified to the Court of Appeals of Virginia 

and to the Circuit Court of the City of Lynchburg and shall be 

published in the Virginia Reports. 

 A Copy, 

 Teste: 
 David B. Beach, 

 Clerk
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 6242 

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to clarify that limitations 

on the scope of judicial review of certain removal proceedings apply 

only in the case of discretionary determinations, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 9, 2021 

Ms. TLAIB (for herself, Mr. GRIJALVA, and Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to clarify 

that limitations on the scope of judicial review of certain 

removal proceedings apply only in the case of discretionary determinations, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Family Unity Act of 

5 2021’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6242 IH

1 SEC. 2. NARROWING OF LIMITATIONS ON THE SCOPE OF 

2 JUDICIAL REVIEW OF CERTAIN REMOVAL AC3 TIONS. 

4 Section 242(g) of the Immigration and Nationality 

5 Act (8 U.S.C. 1252(g)) is amended by striking ‘‘or claim 

6 by or on behalf of any alien arising from the decision or 

7 action’’ and inserting ‘‘or claim by or on behalf of any 

8 alien challenging the discretionary decision or action’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 32.1

                      Statement of Chief Executive Officer
         Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code


         Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code, the
undersigned, Kenneth A. Swanstrom, the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive
Officer of Penn Engineering & Manufacturing Corp. (the "Company"), hereby
certifies that to his knowledge:

1.   The Company's Form 10-Q Quarterly Report for the period ended September 30,
     2003 (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 Company.


Dated:  November 14, 2003

                                                  /s/ Kenneth A. Swanstrom
                                                  -----------------------------
                                                  Kenneth A. Swanstrom
                                                  Chairman of the Board and
                                                  Chief Executive Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided by the Company and will be retained
by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
#### WALLACE v. PELICAN INDUSTRIAL LIFE INS. CO.*

No. 4175.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Second Circuit, Second Division.

Dec. 9, 1931.

Chas. M. Roberson, of Shreveport, for appellant.

Chandler & Chandler, of Shreveport, for ap-pellee.

*

 Rehearing denied January 14, 1932.

DREW, J.

Plaintiff instituted this suit to recover the sum of $1,200, alleged to be due him by defendant for salary as medical examiner for the defendant company for the years 1923 to 1930, inclusive. He alleged that he was employed by defendant company through its board of directors on January 1, 1923, and , each year thereafter, including the year 1930, .at a salary of $150 per year, and that no part of said salary has been paid. He prayed for judgment accordingly, with legal interest on the sum of $150 from December 31, 1923, and on the sum of $150 a year thereafter until paid.

Defendant filed a prayer for oyer of the contract sued upon, which was answered by an amended petition setting out that the only written evidence of the contract was the minutes of the meeting of the board of directors of the defendant company for each of said years, 1923 to 1930, inclusive, and that said minutes were in the possession of the defendant company.

The petition was filed May 4, 1931; prayer for oyer filed May 15, 1931; and the answer to the prayer for oyer by a supplemental petition filed May 29, 1931. On June 10, 1931, preliminary default was entered, and on June 13, 1931, the preliminary default was confirmed and judgment read and signed. There was no further appearance by defendant after filing the prayer for oyer until June 16, 1931, three days after the default was confirmed and judgment rendered, read, and signed, at which time defendant filed an answer denying the demands of plaintiff. Four days later, on June 20, 1931, defendant prayed for and was granted orders of appeal to this court.

Counsel for appellant did not argue the case in this court and in his brief does not attempt. to explain why the answer was not filed until three days after judgment was rendered by default. There is no testimony in the record, neither is there a statement of facts, and it is not shown that any attempt was made to have a statement of facts placed in the record. The judgment of the lower court reads, in part, as follows:

“In this case by reason of a default having been entered and not set aside, but confirmed on due and legal proof in Open Court, and the law and the evidence being in favor thereof. * * ** ”*

We therefore presume that sufficient proof of plaintiff’s demand was made in the lower court, and, without any written testimony or statement of fact, there is nothing for this court to review.

It is therefore ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the judgment of the lower court be affirmed, with costs.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>      5
<MULTIPLIER>   1
       
<S>                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                     3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                 DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                    JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                      MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                217,375
<SECURITIES>                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                          84,634
<ALLOWANCES>                                0
<INVENTORY>                            52,460
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                      366,871
<PP&E>                              4,645,978
<DEPRECIATION>                      4,589,427
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                        477,780
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                 748,009
<BONDS>                                     0
<COMMON>                              159,720
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       0
<PREFERRED>                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                          (429,949)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>          477,780
<SALES>                               207,555
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                      211,716
<CGS>                                 175,330
<TOTAL-COSTS>                         175,330
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                       87,529
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      6,894
<INCOME-PRETAX>                      (55,300)
<INCOME-TAX>                                0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                  (55,300)
<DISCONTINUED>                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             0
<CHANGES>                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                         (55,300)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                           (.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                           (.04)
        

</TABLE>
104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 660

AN ACT

To amend the Fair Housing Act to modify the exemption

from certain familial status discrimination prohibitions

granted to housing for older persons.

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 ‘‘Housing for Older Per5 sons Act of 1995’’.

6 SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF HOUSING FOR OLDER PERSONS.

7 Subparagraph (C) of section 807(b)(2) of the Fair

8 Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 3607(b)(2)) is amended to read

9 as follows:
2

HR 660 EH

1 ‘‘(C) that meets the following requirements:

2 ‘‘(i) The housing is in a facility or commu3 nity intended and operated for the occupancy of

4 at least 80 percent of the occupied units by at

5 least one person 55 years of age or older.

6 ‘‘(ii) The housing facility or community

7 publishes and adheres to policies and proce8 dures that demonstrate the intent required

9 under clause (i), whether or not such policies

10 and procedures are set forth in the governing

11 documents of such facility or community.

12 ‘‘(iii) The housing facility or community

13 complies with rules made by the Secretary for

14 the verification of occupancy. Such rules shall

15 allow for that verification by reliable surveys

16 and affidavits and shall include examples of the

17 types of policies and procedures relevant to a

18 determination of compliance with the require19 ment of clause (ii). Such surveys and affidavits

20 shall be admissible in administrative and judi21 cial proceedings for the purposes of such ver22 ification.’’.
3

HR 660 EH

1 SEC. 3. GOOD FAITH ATTEMPT AT COMPLIANCE DEFENSE

2 AGAINST CIVIL MONEY DAMAGES.

3 Section 807(b) of the Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C.

4 3607(b)) is amended by adding at the end the following:

5 ‘‘(5) GOOD FAITH RELIANCE.—(A) A person shall

6 not be held personally liable for monetary damages for a

7 violation of this title if such person reasonably relied, in

8 good faith, on the application of the exemption under this

9 subsection relating to housing for older persons.

10 ‘‘(B) For the purposes of this paragraph, a person

11 engaged in the business of residential real estate trans12 actions may show good faith reliance on the application

13 of the exemption by showing that—

14 ‘‘(i) such person has no actual knowledge that

15 the facility or community is not, or will not, be eligi16 ble for such exemption; and

17 ‘‘(ii) the facility or community has certified to

18 such person, in writing and on oath or affirmation,

19 that the facility or community complies with the re20 quirements for such exemption.’’.

Passed the House of Representatives April 6, 1995.

Attest:

Clerk.
104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 660

AN ACT

To amend the Fair Housing Act to modify the expersons. tion prohibitions granted to housing for older emption from certain familial status discrimina-