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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Memorial Production Partners LP (the Partnership), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, John A. Weinzierl,
Chief Executive Officer of Memorial Production Partners GP LLC, the general partner of Memorial Production Partners LP and Andrew J. Cozby, Chief Financial Officer of Memorial Production Partners GP LLC, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to their knowledge:



| | (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
Partnership.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: March 30, 2012



/s/ John A. WeinzierlJohn A. WeinzierlChief Executive OfficerMemorial Production Partners GP LLC(as general partner of Memorial Production Partners LP)






Date: March 30, 2012



/s/ Andrew J. CozbyAndrew J. CozbyChief Financial OfficerMemorial Production Partners GP LLC(as general partner of Memorial Production Partners LP)


The foregoing certifications are being furnished as an exhibit to the Report
pursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) and, accordingly, are not being filed as
part of the Report for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and are not incorporated by reference into any filing of the Partnership, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general
incorporation language in such filing.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 76 (Tuesday, May 9, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Page S6368]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                                PROGRAM

  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, for the information of all Senators, the 
Senate will resume consideration of the product liability bill at 9:30 
a.m. At 9:45 a.m., there will be at least two stacked rollcall votes 
on, or in relation to, amendments to the substitute amendment.

                   ORDER FOR LENGTH OF TIME OF VOTES

  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the first 
vote of the 9:45 a.m. voting sequence be 15 minutes in length, with the 
remaining votes in the sequence limited to 10 minutes each.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________
```
Exhibit 14


                                 CODE OF ETHICS


      In my role as President and Chief Financial Officer of Aries Ventures Inc.
(the "Company"), I certify to you that I adhere to and advocate the following
principles and responsibilities governing my business and ethical conduct:

To the best of my knowledge and ability:

1. I act with honesty and integrity, avoiding actual or apparent conflicts of
interest in personal and business relationships.

2. I provide constituents with information that is accurate, complete,
objective, relevant, timely and understandable, which I understand the Company
files with, or submits to, the Securities and Exchange Commission and in other
public communications made by the Company.

3. I comply with rules and regulations of federal, state, and local governments
and other appropriate private and public regulatory agencies.

4. I act with good faith, responsibly, with due care, competence and diligence
without misrepresenting material facts or allowing my independent judgment to be
subordinated.

5. I respect the confidentiality of information acquired in the course of my
work except for disclosure when authorized or otherwise legally obligated to
disclose. Confidential information acquired in the course of my work is not used
for personal advantage.

6. I share knowledge and maintain skills important and relevant to my
constituents needs.

7. I proactively promote ethical behavior as a responsible party among peers in
my work environment.

8. I achieve responsible use of and control over all assets and resources
employed or entrusted to me.

9. I am accountable for adherence to this code of ethics.



Date:  May 12, 2004                        /s/ ROBERT N. WEINGARTEN
                                          ---------------------------
                                           Robert N. Weingarten
                                           President and Chief Financial Officer
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03
- 14
- 00452
- CR

Antonio Perez Lopez, Appellant

v. The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE 390TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, NO. D
- 1
- DC
- 13
- 904067, THE HONORABL E JULIE H. KOCUREK, JUDGE PRESI DING

O R D E R F O R C L E R K T O P R O V I D E A P P E L L A T E R E C O R D TO A P P E L L A N T

PER CURIAM

Appellant’s court

- appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a brief concluding that the instant appeal is frivolous and without merit. See Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967). Appellant’s counsel has certified to the Court that he provided copies of the motion and brief to appellant, advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record a nd file a pro se response, and supplied appellant with a form motion for pro

se access to the appellate record. See Kelly v. State , 436 S.W.3d 313, 319

- 20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). Appellant has timely filed the motion requesting access to the appellate re cord with this
Court. Appellant’s pro se motion is granted. We hereby direct the clerk of the trial
court to provide a copy of the reporter’s record and clerk’s record to appellant, and to provide2

written verification to this Court of the date and manne r in which the appellate record was provided, on or before April 27, 2015

. See id. at 321.

It is ordered on April 17, 2015

.

Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Goodwin and Field Do Not Publish
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 on Form 10-K of Sierra Income Corporation, (the “Company”) for the annual period ended December 31, 2018 , as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Seth Taube and Richard T. Allorto Jr., Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, respectively, of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:





|    |                                                                                                                      
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|(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 consolidated financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.

Dated: April 1, 2019By/s/ Seth TaubeSeth TaubeChief Executive Officer





April 1, 2019By/s/ Richard T. Allorto Jr.Richard T. Allorto Jr.Chief Financial Officer
News United States Air Force
 OSI Headquarters welcomes CMSAF BassPublished March 17, 2021
                        
                        By Wayne Amann
                        
                        
                        Office of Special Investigations Public Affairs
                **QUANTICO, Va. (AFNS) --**
                **Chief Master Sgt. of the Air Force** **JoAnne S. Bass** received an indoctrination to the **Office of Special Investigations** during a guided tour of its headquarters March 12.The orientation fortified the impression the 28-year Air Force veteran has maintained to this day.
“When it comes to professional counterintelligence and criminal investigations, OSI is leading the charge,” Bass said. “The dedication and skill our agents bring to the fight is incredible. I very much appreciated the education.”
Bass was immersed with briefings covering OSI’s criminal investigations, fraud, counterintelligence, cyber, special projects and anti-terrorism specialty team missions.
Those mission sets show how OSI advances Air Force priorities endorsed by the Acting Secretary of the Air Force**John P. Roth**, **Air Force Chief of Staff** **Gen. Charles Q. Brown, Jr.** and Bass.“OSI plays an integral role in restoring our readiness. What this command does for us ensures the Air Force is always ready to go,” Bass emphasized. “The amount and type of work they do allows us to be successful around the world.”
Bass underscored why all Airmen should understand how important OSI is to their Air Force.
“If there’s one theme I want every Airman to know, it’s that Air Force OSI plays a huge role in helping keep all of us safe on many fronts,” she said. “They keep us honest with all their criminal dealings, their role of investigating sexual assaults and in the area of fraud, they save money.”
As the 19th chief master sergeant of the Air Force, and the first woman in history to serve as the highest ranking noncommissioned officer of a U.S. military service branch, Bass noted the legacy of the OSI Hall of Heroes which honors 16 fallen heroes.
“Touring the OSI Hall of Heroes was a memorable and moving experience,” she said.
In addition to OSI leadership briefing the work of its more than 290 units protecting the Department of the Air Force from threats, her visit also included a tour of the OSI Enlisted Heritage Hall, and an hour-long call that was shared with the command’s more than 3,500 team members worldwide.
During the virtual all-call, Bass shared her vision for the Air Force and fielded a variety of questions from her global audience.
Prior to her departure, Bass said, “I thank the men and women of OSI for what they do every day, to take care of who and what means so much to our Air Force and the nation. I appreciate it and look forward to working with the agency on a regular basis.”AFWN 



USAF 



AF 



Air Force 



CMSAF 



JoAnne S. Bass 



Office of Special Investigations 



OSI 



indoctrination 



visit 



tour 



OSI HQ 



OSI Hall of Heroes 



Distinguished Visitor 



DV 



One Air Force
#### J. F. Smith & Bro. v. Wesley Woods.

(No. 134, Tex. L. J., vol. 1, p. 221.)

Appeal from Brazoria County.

Opinion by

White, J.

§ 680. *Crediting a note in order to bring it within the jurisdiction of a justice; application of credits and payments.*Woods executed his note to Smith & Bro. for $221.18, gold, on the 20th of December, 1873. On the 6th of July, 1876, Smith & Bro. credited the note by $21.18, in order to reduce the amount to $200, a sum within the jurisdiction of a justice’s court. At the time they entered this credit, the note had been running upon interest above two years and nine months, and the interest alone amounted to some $70 or more.

Now it is an elementary rule that a payment upon a note, in the absence of proof of an intention to make a different application of it, must first be applied to the extinguishment of the interest. [Hampton v. Dean, 4 Tex. 460.] If the credit indorsed was thus applied, then the credit in this case would not extinguish the interest, • much less reduce the principal of the note. The justice held it to be an extinguishment of so much of the principal as reduced it within his jurisdiction, and gave judgment for plaintiffs accordingly. Defendant gave notice of appeal after his motion for new trial was overruled, but from some cause not appearing of record, his appeal *373was not perfected. Subsequently he sued out an injunction to restrain the collection of the judgment because void for want of jurisdiction in the justice’s court.

February 9, 1878.

§ 681. *Practice in county court on injunction to restrain a justice’s judgment.*This injunction came on for hearing in the county court, and upon a charge of the court submitting to the jury solely the question of jurisdiction of the justice, and a finding by them upon that issue alone, judgment was rendered declaring the judgment of the justice null, void and of no effect, and giving the plaintiff his costs. This was error — the court should have heard the case upon its merits. The law is that, where a judgment is void, *“*the defendant was entitled to have it so declared, and the proceedings under it enjoined. But the court having obtained cognizance of the case for one purpose, would retain it for the further purpose of doing full and complete justice between the parties, and would give judgment for the plaintiff upon the cause of action on which the judgment of the justice was rendered, if, upon the merits, the plaintiff was entitled to judgment. Such is the settled practice.” [Edrington v. Allsbrooks, 21 Tex. 186; Willis v. Gordon, 22 Tex. 241; Witt v. Miller, 25 Tex. Sup. 384; Bourk v. Vanderlip, 22 Tex. 221.]

Reversed and remanded.
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2963 

To remove a limitation on a prohibition relating to permits for discharges 

incidental to normal operation of vessels. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 20, 2014 

Mrs. BOXER (for herself, Mr. BEGICH, Mr. NELSON, Mr. WHITEHOUSE, Ms. 

CANTWELL, Mrs. MURRAY, Mr. REED, Mr. MARKEY, Ms. WARREN, Mr. 

CARDIN, Mr. BOOKER, and Mr. MERKLEY) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 

Public Works 

A BILL 

To remove a limitation on a prohibition relating to permits 

for discharges incidental to normal operation of vessels. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DISCHARGES INCIDENTAL TO THE NORMAL OP4 ERATION OF CERTAIN VESSELS. 

5 Section 2(a) of Public Law 110–299 (33 U.S.C. 1342 

6 note) is amended by striking ‘‘during the period beginning 

7 on the date of the enactment of this Act and ending on 

8 December 18, 2014,’’. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
1 ... T h i s pr oce edi n g a r i s es ou t of Cau s e N o. 2009- CR

- 6566, s t y l ed S t a t e o f T ex a s v. Ja so n M i ea rs , pe nd i ng i n t he 3 7 9 t h Jud i ci al D i st ri ct C o urt , B exar C o unt y , T exas, t he H o no rable Ro n R angel presi d i ng. i i i i i i



### MEM ORA ND UM OP INION No . 0 4- 10 -0 04 52 -C R IN RE Jason MIEARS Or i gi n al M an d am u s P ro ce ed i n g 1 PER C URI AM Sitt ing: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

Phy lis J . Speedlin, J ustice Steven C. Hilbig, Just ice Deliver ed and F iled: J une 23, 2010 PETI TI ONS FOR WRI T OF MANDAMUS AND WR I T OF PROHI BI TI ON DEN I ED On June 7, 20 10 , r e la tor

Jaso n M ie a rs fi le d ( 1) thi rt y -n ine pe tit ion s for wr it o f m a nd a mus , (2) one petition for writ of pr ohibition, and (3) an e merg ency motion to s tay al l t ri al court proce eding s. The cour

t has consider ed re lator’s pe titions and mot i o n an d i s of the opinion that relator is not entitled to the relief soug ht. Acc ording ly , the petit ions and emerg ency motion to s tay

are DENI ED. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 52.8(a). PER C URI AM DO NO T PU B L I SH
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. A. AVRAM APTER.

Jan. 14, 1980.

Petition for certification denied.
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION

November 7, 2008 Revision

Cause number: 01-13-00931-CR

Style: Melissa Dromgoole

v. The State of Texas

Date motion filed*: March 24, 2014

Type of motion: Motion regarding reporter’s record

Party filing motion: Reporter (Terri L. Johnstone)

Document to be filed:

Is appeal accelerated? No

If motion to extend time:

Original due date:

Number of previous extensions granted: Current Due date: 

Date Requested:

Ordered that motion is:

 Granted

If document is to be filed, document due:

 The Court will not grant additional motions to extend time, absent extraordinary circumstances

 Denied

 Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot)

 Other: _____________________________________ 

Court reporter Terri Johnstone filed a document on March 24, 2014, which the Court will construe as a

motion. In her motion, Terri Johnstone states that she mistakenly included in her portion of the reporter’s

record a document titled “Management of Vasovagal Syncope” as defense exhibit 8. This document was

never offered or admitted into evidence, and, therefore, Terri Johnstone states it should not be part of the

record. We grant the motion and order Terri Johnstone to file a revised Volume 11 of the reporter’s 

record, excluding the document titled “Management of Vasovagal Syncope,” labeled as defense exhibit 8

and currently contained in Volume 11 of the reporter’s record, which was filed on March 21, 2014. This 

order does not affect the briefing deadlines set in this case.

Judge's signature: /s/ Laura C. Higley

 

Panel consists of ____________________________________________

Date: April 7 2014
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 180 (Friday, September 17, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57013-57014]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-23218]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER10-2514-000]


Alta Wind III, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based 
Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

September 10, 2010.
    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of 
Alta Wind III, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with 
an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a 
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future 
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the 
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a 
copy of that document on the Applicant.

[[Page 57014]]

    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with 
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of 
liability, is September 30, 2010.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet 
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an 
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the 
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the 
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in 
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in 
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link 
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification 
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with 
any FERC Online service, please e-mail <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#21676473626e4f4d484f44725451514e535561474453420f464e57"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="aaeceff8e9e5c4c6c3c4cff9dfdadac5d8deeacccfd8c984cdc5dc">[email protected]</span></a> or 
call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-23218 Filed 9-16-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
[No. 23891-8-II.

Division Two.

May 26, 2000.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Mario Perez-Villa, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Pierce County, No. 98-1-02657-1, Frederick B. Hayes, J., entered September 15, 1998. *Affirmed in part*and *remanded*by unpublished opinion per Houghton, J., concurred in by Seinfeld and Bridgewater, JJ.