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 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Western Pennsylvania Adventure Capital Fund, LLC on Form 10-Q for the period ended
March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, G. Richard Patton, President, Chief Executive Officer of Western Pennsylvania Adventure Capital Fund, LLC certify to the best of
my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (S) 1350, as adopted pursuant to (S) 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Western Pennsylvania Adventure Capital Fund,
LLC.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                               
|-----------------------------------------------
|/s/ G. Richard Patton                          
|G. Richard Patton                              
|President, Chief Executive Officer and Director
|May 4, 2009                                    

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Western Pennsylvania
Adventure Capital Fund, LLC and will retained by Western Pennsylvania Adventure Capital Fund, LLC and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Nicola Aloe, Appellant, v Barbara J. Lehmann et al., Respondents.

[745 NYS2d 710]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Huttner, J.), dated September 5, 2001, which, upon a jury verdict in favor of the defendants and against him on the issue of liability, in effect, dismissed the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiffs contention, the evidence before the jury was legally sufficient to support its verdict in the defendants’ favor *(see Cohen v Hallmark Cards,*45 NY2d 493). The verdict was further supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence (see *Sideris v Town of Huntington,*240 AD2d 652; *Conforti v Gaeta,*190 AD2d 772, 773; *Nicastro v Park,*113 AD2d 129, 134). Ritter, J.P., Feuerstein, Adams and Rivera, JJ., concur.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Harbour Capital Corporation

v. Case No. 08-cv-506-PB

Allied Capital Corporation

O R D E R

The Amended Memorandum and Order attached hereto shall be

substituted for the Memorandum and Order dated July 21, 2009

(Doc. No. 17) to correct a misstatement on page 21.

SO ORDERED.

/s/Paul Barbadoro

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

July 22, 2009

cc: William E. Christie, Esq.

Steven M. Gordon, Esq.

James F. Ogorchock, Esq.

John Mark Turner, Esq.

Case 1:08-cv-00506-PB Document 18 Filed 07/22/09 Page 1 of 1
#### CARAKER v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Florida.

January Term 1954.

Dismissed without opinion.
|What's New · 
   What's Next · 
   Site Map · 
   A-Z Index ·
   Careers ·
   RSS ·
   All Videos ·
   Current FAQs |  | Search  Advanced Search | 
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------- | 

Aboutthe Fed
    News& Events
    MonetaryPolicy
    BankingInformation& Regulation
    PaymentSystems
    EconomicResearch& Data
    Consumer Information
    CommunityDevelopment
    ReportingForms
    Publications


skip to content 
 Home Economic Research & Data Statistical Releases and Historical Data
 DDP Print
   Industrial Production and Capacity Utilization - G.17 Current Release
  Release Dates
  Monthly Supplement
  Annual Revision
  Historical Data
  About
  Announcements
 Monthly Supplement  (125 KB PDF)
(ASCII)  Annual Revision Notice
  The attached tables contain detail on industrial production, capacity, and utilization that are not contained in the G.17 release.  Historical data for these series are available on the Board's website. G.17 Release Supplement Tables:  Tables 1A-1E: Industrial Production: Industry Subtotals, Individual Series, and Market GroupsTable 1A: NAICS 211-314Table 1B: NAICS 315-326Table 1C: NAICS 327-333Table 1D: NAICS 334-339, 1133, 5111, and Stage-of-process GroupsTable 1E: Market GroupsTable 2: Capacity Utilization:  Manufacturing, Mining, and UtilitiesTable 3: Industrial Capacity:  Manufacturing, Mining, and Utilities   Return to top
   Home Economic research and data
 Accessibility Contact Us Disclaimer  Linking Policy FOIA
 PDF Reader
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Senior District Judge Richard P. Matsch

Civil Action No. 02-cv-00311-RPM

CLIMAX MOLYBDENUM COMPANY,

Plaintiff,

v.

MOLYCHEM, LLC,

Defendant.

PROCEDURAL ORDER

Upon review of Climax Molybdenum Company’s Motion to Set Pretrial Deadlines

and Molychem’s response, it is

ORDERED as follows:

1. Trial briefs as ordered on June 1, 2007 shall be filed simultaneously on

August 24, 2007.

2. Counsel shall exchange objections to exhibits on or before August 3, 2007.

These objections will not be filed with the court. Disputes on objections will be heard at

trial. Demonstrative exhibits shall be exchanged by September 10, 2007.

3. Deposition designations will be exchanged August 31, 2007. Counter

designations shall be exchanged on September 7, 2007. Climax designations will be

highlighted in yellow and Molychem’s designations will be highlighted in blue.

Objections will be written in the margin in red ink. The marked transcripts of

depositions will be submitted to the Court on the first day of trial, September 24, 2007.

Case 1:02-cv-00311-RPM Document 232 Filed 07/27/07 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

The transcripts of video depositions will be marked and submitted in the same manner.

The Court does not intend to view the videos unless there are compelling reasons with

respect to a particular witness. Accordingly videotapes need not be edited.

4. Molychem’s First Motion in Limine is moot.

Dated: July 27th, 2007

BY THE COURT:

s/ Richard P. Matsch

____________________________

Richard P. Matsch, Senior District Judge

Case 1:02-cv-00311-RPM Document 232 Filed 07/27/07 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions   under delegated authority  Applications and reports:Boston |New York |Philadelphia |Cleveland |Richmond |AtlantaChicago |St. Louis |Minneapolis |Kansas City |Dallas |San FranciscoDistrict: 3Federal Reserve Bank of: PhiladelphiaFilings received during the week ending December 31, 2016FilerFiling TypeFiling ProposalEnd of Comment PeriodLAFAYETTE AMBASSADOR BANK                                                                                               * BranchLafayette Ambassador Bank, Bethlehem, PA to establish a full service branch facility to be loactaed at 1928 Hamilton Street, Allentown, PA.Newspaper: Not availableFederal Register: Not applicable
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Communications Commission

          - 47 CFR Part 20
          - [PS Docket No. 07-114; DA 08-2129]

# AGENCY:

Federal Communications Commission.

# ACTION:

Proposed rule; correction.

# SUMMARY:

                        The Federal Communications Commission sought comment on proposals in certain                         *ex parte*                         filings submitted by the Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials, International (APCO), the National Emergency Number Association (NENA), AT&T, Sprint Nextel Corporation, and Verizon Wireless regarding location accuracy requirements for wireless licensees subject to the Commission's rules that specify standards for wireless Enhanced 911 (E911) Phase II location accuracy and reliability. The proposed rule stated that “Comments are due October 6, 2008 by 12 p.m. Reply Comments are due October 14, 2008 by 12 p.m.” Only Reply Comments are due by 12 p.m. Comments are due on October 6, 2008.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Thomas J. Beers, Chief, Policy Division, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, at (202) 418-0952.

## Correction

                        In the                         **Federal Register**                         of September 25, 2008, in FR Doc. E8-22645, on page 55473, in the first column, correct the                         **DATES**                         caption to read:                    

# DATES:

Comments are due October 6, 2008. Reply Comments are due October 14, 2008 by 12 p.m.

Thomas J. Beers,

Division Chief, Policy, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau.

[FR Doc. E8-22932 Filed 9-26-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions   under delegated authority  Applications and reports:Boston |New York |Philadelphia |Cleveland |Richmond |AtlantaChicago |St. Louis |Minneapolis |Kansas City |Dallas |San FranciscoDistrict: 5Federal Reserve Bank of: RichmondFilings received during the week ending October 17, 2009FilerFiling TypeFiling ProposalEnd of Comment PeriodCAPGEN CAPITAL GROUP LLC                                                                                                * 3A3CapGen Capital Group LLC, and CapGen Capital Group LP, both of New York, New York, to increase their investment in The BANKshares, Inc., Winter Park, Florida, and its subsidiary, BankFIRST, Winter Park, Florida, by 14.4% to a total of 36.2%.Newspaper: 10/26/2009Federal Register: 10/26/2009
18

A.13. Characteristics of Bank Loans to Farmers -- Small and Mid-sized Farm Lenders, by Risk Rating, Percent except as notedLoan characteristic All Minimal Low Moderate Acceptable Special Not rated Volume of loans (thousands of dollars) 426,712 92,977 94,849 162,514 18,395 6,454 n.aNumber of loans 10,474 1,297 1,899 4,540 951 63 n.aWeighted average maturity (months)1 33.11 69.68 22.32 24.03 22.31 8.83 n.a

Weighted average repricing interval (months)2 12.42 2.23 n.a. 14.15 2.34 1.00 2.00 

Weighted average risk rating3 4.00 5.00 n.a. n.a. 28.01 3.18 14.14 

Weighted average interest rate4 6.45 6.04 6.73 6.46 6.39 6.46 n.a

 Standard error5 .06 .49 .23 .11 .18 .71 .31 

 Interquartile range6 75th percentile 7.50 6.98 6.96 6.33 7.31 5.86 5.68  25th percentile 5.13 5.83 6.00 6.17 6.33 6.09 6.98  Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 6.43 n.a. n.a. 7.16 6.67 7.56 7.18  Other livestock 6.84 n.a. n.a. 6.86 6.41 5.88 6.75  Other current operating expenses7 6.29 8.45 n.a. 6.47 6.78 6.39 7.56 

 Farm machinery and equipment 7.28 n.a. n.a. 6.89 6.09 5.91 7.12  Farm real estate 6.96 n.a. n.a. 9.01 7.02 6.56 7.50  Other8 5.58 6.33 n.a. 6.36 42.27 58.16 31.99 

Share of total loan volume Features of loan Floating rates 25.84 94.45 n.a. 21.08 54.82 55.59 49.78  Under commitment 52.80 94.45 n.a. 25.36 8.91 2.00 24.18  Callable 8.20 n.a. n.a. 7.59 3.99 n.a. 2.78  Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 3.28 n.a. n.a. 8.71 5.79 5.19 2.82  Other livestock 13.51 n.a. n.a. 7.70 59.68 58.18 41.99  Other current operating expenses7 67.03 6.23 n.a. 56.17 7.06 11.58 4.11 

 Farm machinery and equipment 4.15 n.a. n.a. 16.74 8.63 21.63 .68  Farm real estate 5.22 n.a. n.a. .96 9.92 1.41 26.22  Other8 6.82 93.77 n.a. 9.73 14.53 18.21 18.37 

 Type of collateral Farm real estate 20.44 95.87 n.a. 24.02 79.05 70.78 88.66  Other 76.81 4.13 n.a. 71.82 n.a. n.a. n.a Note. Most small and mid-sized farm lenders that reported loans to farmers had less than $25 million in farm loans. For explanation of footnotes, see table A.8. n.a. Not available.
B.5. Net Charge-offs of Real Estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial Banks
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
                                                                                                          
                                Estimated volume               Share of outstanding real estate farm loans
                             (millions of dollars)                              (percent)
                      ____________________________________     ___________________________________________

Year                  Total     Q1      Q2     Q3      Q4      Total      Q1        Q2        Q3       Q4
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
                                                                                                          
1997......    |          16      -1      0      3       14      .064     -.003     -.001     .010     .054
1998......    |           6      -1      3      0        5      .022     -.004      .009     .000     .016
1999......    |          15       0      3      5        7      .051     -.001      .011     .015     .022
2000......    |          12     -12      3      8       14      .037     -.037      .009     .022     .040
2001......    |          42      10      9      5       17      .123      .030      .027     .014     .049
2002......    |          35       8      6      5       16      .097      .022      .017     .014     .041
2003......    |          32       4      6      8       14      .082      .010      .015     .021     .034
2004......    |          18       1      5      2       10      .044      .003      .012     .005     .021
2005......    |          17       2     11      4        0      .039      .005      .024     .009     .000
2006......    |          20       2      6      1       12      .042      .003      .012     .002     .023
2007......    |           8      -3      0      5        6      .015     -.006      .000     .009     .011
2008......    |        n.a.       5      8     12     n.a.      n.a.      .008      .013     .020     n.a.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
   Note. Components might not sum to totals because of rounding. Quarterly data are as of end of quarter.
   n.a. Not available.

25
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Karen L. Bartlett

v. Civil No. 08-cv-358-JL

Mutual Pharmaceutical Company, Inc.

ORDER

Re: Document No. 292, Motion to Exclude Evidence of

Plaintiff’s Untimely Medical Records

Ruling: Granted in part but denied in part. Based on the

filings and today’s telephone conference, the motion is granted to

the extent that a sanction will be granted, but not the sanction

requested by the defendant. The plaintiff failed to comply with

the discovery deadline, and the violation was neither substantially

justified nor harmless. The plaintiff is ordered, under Rule

37(c)(1)(A), to pay Mutual’s reasonable expenses, to include

paralegal fees but no more than two hours of attorneys’ fees, 

caused by Bartlett’s failure. Should the parties be unable to

agree on the amount as proposed and substantiated by Mutual, 

Mutual shall seek relief from this court to make that

determination. Should the court’s involvement be required, the

court will determine (a) the amount of the payment, and (b) whether

plaintiff’s counsel shall be required to personally make the

payment. 

/s/ Joseph N. Laplante

Joseph N. Laplante

U.S. District Judge

Date: August 11, 2010

cc: Bryan Ballew, Esq.

Keith M. Jensen, Esq.

Patrick J. O’Neal, Esq.

Christine M. Craig, Esq.

Eric Roberson, Esq.

Timothy P. Beaupre, Esq.

Jeffrey D. Geoppinger, Esq.

Joseph P. Thomas, Esq.

Paul J. Cosgrove, Esq.

Linda E. Maichl, Esq.

Stephen J. Judge, Esq.

Pierre A. Chabot, Esq.

Case 1:08-cv-00358-JL Document 331 Filed 08/11/10 Page 1 of 1
H. Res. 901 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

July 29, 2008. 

Whereas Tim Tebow was born on August 14, 1987, to Bob 

and Pam Tebow; 

Whereas Tim Tebow’s mother and father have instilled in 

him the importance of giving and serving others; 

Whereas Tim Tebow has exhibited exemplary character, kindness, and compassion rooted in his deep and abiding faith 

in God; 

Whereas Tim Tebow has displayed a willingness to help those 

less fortunate through his missionary work in the Philippines; 

Whereas Tim Tebow has been an inspiration off the football 

field by regularly visiting orphanages in the Philippines 

and hospitals in the United States; 

Whereas Tim Tebow has maintained a 3.77 grade point average at the University of Florida; 

Whereas Tim Tebow became only the fourth sophomore in 

the history of the University of Florida to earn first-team 

Academic All-American honors; 

Whereas Tim Tebow played an integral role in the University 

of Florida’s National Collegiate Athletic Association’s 

(NCAA) national championship football team in 2006; 
2 

•HRES 901 EH 

Whereas Tim Tebow threw for 29 touchdowns and ran for 22 

touchdowns in the 2007 season; 

Whereas Tim Tebow became the first player in major college 

football history to run for at least 20 touchdowns and 

pass for at least 20 touchdowns in the same season; 

Whereas Tim Tebow’s total of 51 touchdowns was a Southeastern Conference record; 

Whereas Tim Tebow’s 22 rushing touchdowns was also a new 

conference record as well as a national collegiate record 

for quarterbacks; 

Whereas Tim Tebow completed more than 68 percent of his 

passing attempts for a total of 3,132 yards this season; 

Whereas Tim Tebow guided Florida to a 9–3 record as they 

led the Southeastern Conference in scoring and total 

yardage; and 

Whereas on December 8, 2007, Tim Tebow became the first 

and only sophomore ever to win the Heisman Trophy, 

college football’s most coveted and prestigious award: 

Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

(1) commends Tim Tebow for his academic and 

athletic accomplishments; 

(2) recognizes Tim Tebow’s character and compassion toward his fellow human beings; 

(3) congratulates Tim Tebow for his historic winning of the 2007 Heisman Trophy; and 

(4) directs the Clerk of the House of Representatives to transmit a copy of this resolution to University 
3 

•HRES 901 EH 

of Florida President J. Bernard Machen and Head 

Football Coach Urban Meyer for appropriate display. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

USA

v. Criminal No. 09-cr-3-02-JL

Jayson Galeano

O R D E R

Defendant Jayson Galeano’s pro se Motion for Transfer to a New Hampshire Facility,

Document #33, is denied without prejudice as procedurally improper. "A district court enjoys

wide latitude in managing its docket and can require represented parties to present motions

through counsel.” United States v. Tracy, 989 F.2d 1279, 1286 (1st Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 513

U.S. 1031 (1994). The court will accept no further pro se filings by the defendant other than

those involving his relationship with counsel. Plaintiff's counsel is directed to file, under his

signature and all that entails under Rule 11, all future filings with the court. This denial is

without prejudice, and Attorney Dennehy may request similar relief on the defendant's behalf if

he believes, consistent with his obligations under Rule 11 and as an officer of the court, that the

applicable law supports it.

SO ORDERED.

June 25, 2009

Joseph N. Laplante

United States District Judge

cc: James Dennehy, Esq.

Jayson Galeano, pro se

U. S. Marshal

U. S. Probation

Case 1:09-cr-00003-JL Document 35 Filed 06/25/09 Page 1 of 1
*Release Date: December 31, 2006*

*Other formats:*
ASCII (4 KB)
PDF (3 KB)
CSV (1 KB)

----

```
C.5. Average Variable Interest Rates on Farm Loans
Percent
```

| Quarter | Other operating loans1 | Intermediate non-real-estate loans | Long-term real estate loans |
|---------|------------------------|------------------------------------|-----------------------------|
||
| 6.6     | 6.5                    | 6.2                                |
| 6.8     | 6.8                    | 6.4                                |
| 7.1     | 7.1                    | 6.7                                |
| 7.4     | 7.3                    | 6.9                                |
| 7.7     | 7.7                    | 7.2                                |
| 8.1     | 8.0                    | 7.6                                |
| 8.3     | 8.3                    | 7.8                                |
| 8.7     | 8.7                    | 8.2                                |
| 8.9     | 8.8                    | 8.3                                |
||
| 7.3     | 6.8                    | 6.4                                |
| 7.3     | 7.1                    | 6.6                                |
| 7.5     | 7.3                    | 6.8                                |
| 7.7     | 7.5                    | 7.0                                |
| 8.1     | 7.9                    | 7.3                                |
| 8.4     | 8.2                    | 7.6                                |
| 8.6     | 8.4                    | 7.9                                |
| 9.0     | 8.8                    | 8.2                                |
| 9.1     | 8.9                    | 8.4                                |
||
| 6.2     | 6.6                    | 6.8                                |
| 6.7     | 7.0                    | 6.9                                |
| 7.1     | 7.3                    | 7.3                                |
| 7.4     | 7.7                    | 7.5                                |
| 7.9     | 8.0                    | 7.8                                |
| 8.8     | 8.8                    | 8.5                                |
| 8.9     | 9.0                    | 8.6                                |
| 9.1     | 9.1                    | 8.7                                |
| 9.3     | 9.3                    | 8.8                                |
```
1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses
and the care and feeding of livestock (including poultry). Return to table
   * State falls only partly within the indicated Reserve District.
   n.a. Not available.
   Source. Federal Reserve Bank quarterly surveys of agricultural credit conditions at
commercial banks.
```

*Other formats:*
ASCII (4 KB)
PDF (3 KB)
CSV (1 KB)

Statistical releases

----

HomeEconomic research and dataAccessibilityContact Us
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions   under delegated authority  Applications and reports:Boston |New York |Philadelphia |Cleveland |Richmond |AtlantaChicago |St. Louis |Minneapolis |Kansas City |Dallas |San FranciscoDistrict: 8Federal Reserve Bank of: St. LouisFilings received during the week ending September 1, 2012FilerFiling TypeFiling ProposalEnd of Comment PeriodNONE